Jump to content

2022 Senate Elections


Ghost of LL

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

Calling them temporary challenges is wishcasting at best, being deceptive at worst. The man has pronounced aphasia 5 months out. He also could have other issues with cognition that they’re hiding. 
 

 


 

 

Keep in mind the senate currently has people like tommy tubberville and may have Herschel Walker as well. Those 2 aren’t our best and brightest. If we as a country have to rely on them for anything, we would be fucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

Calling them temporary challenges is wishcasting at best, being deceptive at worst. The man has pronounced aphasia 5 months out. He also could have other issues with cognition that they’re hiding. 

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

And it shouldn’t matter if the other choice is Doctor Fucking Oz. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t understand how making people think the result is a forgone  conclusion doesn’t suppress both sides more or less equally. If there’s data that it affects the losing side more, I guess I’d chalk it up to people wanting to be part of a winner and not be part of a loser. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Js1 said:

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Still a better outcome than Oz.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Laughable to maximize it, you piece of shit. 
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2022/10/13/fetterman-closed-captioning-stroke-aphasia/

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MeerkatBong said:

The obvious question if you are a handler and/or strategist— why not substitute an able-minded Democrat and make the stroke concerns, whether valid or scare tactics, moot?

Sure would be nice to have Conner Lamb out there. Instead both the senate seat he ran for and the house seat he vacated to run are little better than coin flips for the Dems. 

I still think Shapiro pulls Fetterman across the finish line. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

If we had more politicians that couldn't talk, but were perfectly capable of processing information through reading, we'd probably have a lot less grandstanding and a much healthier political system.

Instead, you're stanning for another TV star.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

$50 says you googled aphasia but don't really know what it looks/sounds like in real life.  Fetterman doesn't have any of the symptoms of it.  The correlation between speech issues and cognitive decay is nowhere near what most people think it is when they think of strokes.  Just through helping my wife study and get multiple degrees, I have forgotten more speech pathology than you'll ever know.  His issue isn't aphasia, we can talk about what it actually is if you like, but probably better you get it straight from a trained SLP-CCC.  Or Brian Kilmeade, wherever you get your speech therapy talking points.  

Most reasonable people would say he's having some speech challenges (again, I'd encourage you to just get straight science data on this), but there appears to be no cognitive issue.  Plenty of stroke victims speak with the conjugation, eloquence, and verbal prowess of a college debate champion but their brain is fucking fried.  The opposite is true as well.  But what makes this Fetterman issue so insane to some of us is the people espousing his cerebral decline are, in the same breath, looking at Donald Trump, Herschel Walker, MTG, et. al. and thinking, "Now that's what a goddamn Orator is supposed to sound like...where do I send me $100?"  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actual reputable pollster

Kelly over 50 and +6

Fetterman +6 and almost at 50 (voters think he’s healthy enough to serve by a 48-35 margin but that was the whole sample, it narrowed a bit post-debate but they didn’t post the numbers)

Warnock almost at 50 and at outright win

CCM tied in a notoriously hard to poll state 

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

image.png.76dbeb65998884b4c64b776a581043c8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

image.png.76dbeb65998884b4c64b776a581043c8.png

It’s the same issue as every forecast - really poor quality right wing polls are flooding the averages. Trafalgar, Inside Advantage, Wick, Coefficient.

These orgs seem to have unlimited money to poll weekly it seems. It’s fishy 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

 

I think this is probably most correct.  With the mass polarization we have experienced, 95% of people had their minds made up months or years ago.  The 5% (I think it's probably really less than that) left are the only ones that might be persuadable, but I'd bet they are more likely to NOT vote than to pick a side at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Democrats were half smart, they'd simply be encouraging tepid/older Republicans to just not be enthused about the shit-tastic slate before them, and just sit this one out and feel warm that their fellow 'conservatives' will help carry the day.  In so many of these races, you need less than 100,000 people to just say, "Meh, fuck it...it looks like rain...I'm sure Oz has this in the bag." 

You're not winning anybody over to your side this week, you're just portraying their candidate as not worth the expensive gas...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

image.png.76dbeb65998884b4c64b776a581043c8.png

I think Nate "fudges the numbers" a bit too much and that hurts his forecasts rather than just adding to the pile. 

That said, it's clear the GOP has flooded the zone with a bunch of trash polls and that affects everyone's forecasts.

We'll get a few more late that will "correct" the numbers if that's the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

I see now that I wasn’t paying enough attention to that graph and it’s a % of likelihood to control the senate, not a guess at the senate split. 
 

it only says as much explicitly in the title, has the Y labeled as %, and has the current values listed as x in 100 and not x of 100. So I can hardly blame the graph. 

Edited by Pato del Muerto
I blame this festering case of the mondays
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I think Nate "fudges the numbers" a bit too much and that hurts his forecasts rather than just adding to the pile. 

That said, it's clear the GOP has flooded the zone with a bunch of trash polls and that affects everyone's forecasts.

We'll get a few more late that will "correct" the numbers if that's the case. 

They aren’t flooding the media with polls to affect 538. They are doing so to create the narrative that there is an issue with voting to be able to provide even more cover for dangerous and restrictive voting laws before 2024. For them, the goal was to always win the House in 2022. Senate would be icing on the cake. But either way, it is ultimately to steal the 2024 election. Which is why they care far more about Arizona and New Mexico’s state elections. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Also 538 doesn't treat every poll equally. They discount polls that they think are partisan or poor by reviewing how those polls have performed in the past. And since some states are hard to poll to begin with (e.g., Nevada) that makes 538 also have uncertainty with those states.

yea and no

Trafalgar has an A rating bc of 2020 but their 2018 midterm performance was bad

 

Just now, Dr. Teeth said:

They aren’t flooding the media with polls to affect 538. They are doing so to create the narrative that there is an issue with voting to be able to provide even more cover for dangerous and restrictive voting laws before 2024. For them, the goal was to always win the House in 2022. Senate would be icing on the cake. But either way, it is ultimately to steal the 2024 election. Which is why they care far more about Arizona and New Mexico’s state elections. 

Yep. Flood the zone with bad polling showing them leading = FRAUD if they don’t win 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another point about 538 is that Nate Silver is a big poker player and his analysis of politics can somewhat be related. If you have 4 cards to a open ended straight in hold em, your odds are about 20% of hitting the straight. 1 in 5. You won't hit the straight most of the time but far from impossible.

In 2016, 538 had Trump at a final percent of 29% to win. There were 0 polls that showed Trump winning WI, MI or PA so the chance of Trump winning appeared to be very low but not impossible.

Unless you see 538 showing a >80% result, a race can go either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silver is essentially the Bill Simmons of politics. Built a good company off a liberal fanbase and has come under a lot of fire for having some issues with how they react to criticism from people outside and inside that fanbase. They view every slight extremely negatively and have gone a little bit to the right after having to defend themselves so much. Like a lot of white dudes in their line of work, they were probably a little liberal but mostly for work and have some problems with underlying issues on race and culture. Both, but especially Silver, have let it affect his overall viewpoint on what they cover. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr. Teeth said:

Silver is essentially the Bill Simmons of politics. Built a good company off a liberal fanbase and has come under a lot of fire for having some issues with how they react to criticism from people outside and inside that fanbase. They view every slight extremely negatively and have gone a little bit to the right after having to defend themselves so much. Like a lot of white dudes in their line of work, they were probably a little liberal but mostly for work and have some problems with underlying issues on race and culture. Both, but especially Silver, have let it affect his overall viewpoint on what they cover. 

They also let go some of their better analysts. And Nate really showed his whole ass during COVID

Edited by Js1
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

spacer.png

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2022 at 11:20 PM, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Person Man Woman Camera TV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

We live in a country where there are at least 2 possible scenarios where Walker wins by around 20% margin of the popular vote.

 

giphy.webp?cid=ecf05e47yoziimcfg2zdxyj8m

First off, I could look at that GIF for hours. That is Scarlett at her absolute zenith.

And second, didn't 538 do rather poorly with 2020 projections?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of their scenarios are based on likely voters voting as in past elections. This is basically saying that Dems are likely going to stay home again. The fact that Rs are polling at an advantage in excitement to vote despite Dobbs, student loan relief, good SC pick, climate change initiatives, etc. is pretty bad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

This is an interesting article.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/31/opinion/focus-group-georgia-suburban-voters.html

My takeaway, 75% of our fellow Americans are complete fucking morons.

This was one of the most frustrating things I’ve read lately. “Swing” voters are morons. Candidate X stands for all of my favorite positions, which is why I’m going to vote for Y!

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...