The Swamp

Yeah I'm pretty sure that in a random sample, as the total population gets larger, the sample size should get smaller to an extent. They should report out error margins and confidence intervals though.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:21 am If the sample is truly random and representative, 823 is more than enough. I question whether the first part is accurate, especially given that smart people don't just answer their phone.

right -- without knowing the breakdown of landline/cell in a poll with such a small sample, it's hard to know how random it is

it also should be taken in context with the other small sample size Wisconsin presidential polls because right now it looks like the outlier: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po ... wisconsin/

(there very well could have been/is a sentiment shift in the post-impeachment acquittal weeks. but that sizable? gonna need some more data I think)

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 12:18 pmit also should be taken in context with the other small sample size Wisconsin presidential polls because right now it looks like the outlier: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po ... wisconsin/

Yes. No single poll is that significant, unless it's one of those polls by maybe Pew that involves 15,000 responses.

I think Florida might be more in play than Wisconsin this time around. Its taking a while for the white Wisconsinites to fully internalize their racial hostility towards all those black folks and foreigners in Milwaukee.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 12:34 pm

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 12:18 pmit also should be taken in context with the other small sample size Wisconsin presidential polls because right now it looks like the outlier: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/po ... wisconsin/

Yes. No single poll is that significant, unless it's one of those polls by maybe Pew that involves 15,000 responses.

I think Florida might be more in play than Wisconsin this time around. Its taking a while for the white Wisconsinites to fully internalize their racial hostility towards all those black folks and foreigners in Milwaukee.

I keep hearing that if Bernie is the nominee, Florida is lost (Latinos don't like socialists). You guys buy that? Florida is weird to begin with.

I think it's more that Cubanos don't like socialism. Coincidentally, I just finished a battle with a former friend of Cubano descent, who is a blindly-loyal Republican.

It stems from their horrific experiences their family had under Castro's regime. They were viciously oppressed, and they equate (justifiably) Communism with Socialism. Too many people forget, though, it's the Authoritarianism that made Communism so shitty, not necessarily the Socialism aspect of it. That's why Sweden, a democratic socialism state, doesn't suck while basically all the Iron Curtain, authoritarian socialist states, did.

But there are a lot Cubanos in Florida, must be over a million.

Yes. I think we're agreeing on the same thing.

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:03 pm I think it's more that Cubanos don't like socialism. Coincidentally, I just finished a battle with a former friend of Cubano descent, who is a blindly-loyal Republican.

It stems from their horrific experiences their family had under Castro's regime. They were viciously oppressed, and they equate (justifiably) Communism with Socialism. Too many people forget, though, it's the Authoritarianism that made Communism so shitty, not necessarily the Socialism aspect of it. That's why Sweden, a democratic socialism state, doesn't suck while basically all the Iron Curtain, authoritarian socialist states, did.

Yeah, I was going to say something similar. The older Cubano folks are going to be hostile to Communism, but not necessarily the type of socialism people are talking about these days. (I remember being shocked by how hostilely my grandmother reacted when I said something about communism. This was in the 1980s. I guess she really didn't appreciate Tito putting her in prison to get her to give up by grandfather's location.)

However, isn't Sanders on record with some pro-Castro (or at least anti-anti-Castro) statements? If so, is that going to make a difference? Would people likely to be upset by that have otherwise been willing to vote Dem?

Isn't socialism just basically taxing people in exchange for public services? Like, how are Bernie's policies any more socialist than any other candidates? Hell, how is universal healthcare any different than universal police, fire, military or school services?

Jerloma wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:11 pm Isn't socialism just basically taxing people in exchange for public services? Like, how are Bernie's policies any more socialist than any other candidates? Hell, how is universal healthcare any different than universal police, fire, military or school services?

Because black and poor people would disproportionally benefit.

Jerloma wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:11 pmIsn't socialism just basically taxing people in exchange for public services? Like, how are Bernie's policies any more socialist than any other candidates? Hell, how is universal healthcare any different than universal police, fire, military or school services?

Specifically, how cool is that some people get universal military care AND get to keep their own guns?!?

Jerloma wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 1:11 pm Isn't socialism just basically taxing people in exchange for public services? Like, how are Bernie's policies any more socialist than any other candidates? Hell, how is universal healthcare any different than universal police, fire, military or school services?

The funny thing is, that "socialism" is something way more intrusive than taxing people for public services. Like when the British government actually owned and operated railroads, steel mills, coal mines, etc.

Universal health care is not socialism. Nor is single-payer health care. Even single-payer, the most "socialist" approach to health care on the table, is probably less socialist than police, fire, military, or public schools. In those instances, the government actually employs the service providers and provides the service, where in single payer the government simply pays independent private parties to do it.

The reason why single payer healthcare (there are other options for universal healthcare) is different from those other things is that we've had those other things on a socialist basis forever. But for healthcare, an elaborate, extensive hybrid public-private system has evolved that encompasses and employs millions of people. So switching from that system to a national single-payer system, especially one that outlaws the private insurance that 150 million people use, would be a massive disruption and shifting of costs from the private to the public sector. As far as I'm aware, no country has made such a switch. (Taiwan did adopt single payer more recently, but I don't think they had the extensive private-insurance network that we have here.)

Gotcha. Thanks. That's probably why M4A would be done in 10 year increments.

Jerloma wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:23 pmThat's probably why M4A would be done in 10 year increments.

Why do you want to murder sick people?

You're never gonna win this battle trying to define/redefine Socialism. As some of you are implying, the way to win the coming fight with the Nationalist jingoistic bullshit is just put up the two means of solving problems without labels.

Bernie's answer the other night about Democratic Socialism and talking about Denmark are losers in the general election. Never going to win that fight.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:59 pm You're never gonna win this battle trying to define/redefine Socialism. As some of you are implying, the way to win the coming fight with the Nationalist jingoistic bullshit is just put up the two means of solving problems without labels.

Bernie's answer the other night about Democratic Socialism and talking about Denmark are losers in the general election. Never going to win that fight.

The way to win this fight is to argue that you are in so many words a 'wartime President' that Trump is an existential threat to the US and that you recognise many, many, Republicans need an alternative to Trump but are not voting for left wing policies, any Democrat that campaigned on a policy of being a caretaker President who is there to return the country to some form of democratic normality.

'Make America Proud Again'

It should have been Warren but she went off the rails.

degenerasian wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:15 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:59 pm You're never gonna win this battle trying to define/redefine Socialism. As some of you are implying, the way to win the coming fight with the Nationalist jingoistic bullshit is just put up the two means of solving problems without labels.

Bernie's answer the other night about Democratic Socialism and talking about Denmark are losers in the general election. Never going to win that fight.

The way to win this fight is to argue that you are in so many words a 'wartime President' that Trump is an existential threat to the US and that you recognise many, many, Republicans need an alternative to Trump but are not voting for left wing policies, any Democrat that campaigned on a policy of being a caretaker President who is there to return the country to some form of democratic normality.

'Make America Proud Again'

It should have been Warren but she went off the rails.

Don’t let the pervasive presence of “anti-Trump Republicans” in the media fool you: There are not many, many Republicans looking for an alternative to Trump. His approval rating with Republican voters is sky-high.

Joe K wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:19 pm

degenerasian wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:15 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:59 pm You're never gonna win this battle trying to define/redefine Socialism. As some of you are implying, the way to win the coming fight with the Nationalist jingoistic bullshit is just put up the two means of solving problems without labels.

Bernie's answer the other night about Democratic Socialism and talking about Denmark are losers in the general election. Never going to win that fight.

The way to win this fight is to argue that you are in so many words a 'wartime President' that Trump is an existential threat to the US and that you recognise many, many, Republicans need an alternative to Trump but are not voting for left wing policies, any Democrat that campaigned on a policy of being a caretaker President who is there to return the country to some form of democratic normality.

'Make America Proud Again'

It should have been Warren but she went off the rails.

Don’t let the pervasive presence of “anti-Trump Republicans” in the media fool you: There are not many, many Republicans looking for an alternative to Trump. His approval rating with Republican voters is sky-high.

1. You dont need that many, election decided on a razor thin edge.
2. Trump's approval rating is sky high because the Democrats have been disastrous lately. These Reoublicans are going to turn where?

Approval isn't a binary party question. They weren't huge on the Dems in 2017.

Yeah, zero correlation between anything democrats do and T's support % among republicans. The needle will never move.

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 4:54 pm Yeah, zero correlation between anything democrats do and T's support % among republicans. The needle will never move.

With that attitude it's not!!! :D

[url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... htmlRussia Loves Bernie[/url]

Nice to see Sanders' response to being briefed by Intelligence Officials that there's evidence of Russians trying to get him the nomination:

“I don’t care, frankly, who Putin wants to be president,” Sanders said in a statement to The Washington Post. “My message to Putin is clear: Stay out of American elections, and as president I will make sure that you do.

Compare and contrast...

This feels like a real JoeK watershed moment:

Chaos is a ladder.

It’s a soul companion.

tennbengal wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:22 pm This feels like a real JoeK watershed moment:

Don’t think I’ve ever doubted that Russia does particular this type of stuff, as my skepticism was about the broader conspiracy theories that ultimately came up empty. I do think, however, that the significance of Russian social media meddling is pretty overstated. They’re definitely not the only country that does this in US politics — at a minimum, I’d assume China, Israel and Saudi Arabia do the same shit, with different preferred candidates. (Also, if you’re outraged by Russian Twitter bots, Google “ZunZuneo” for some perspective on what the US does in this area.) It’s also a drop in the bucket to the deluge of ads and information we get the good old fashion legal way, from big money PACs and from Mike Bloomberg.

That being said, this story will 100% be floated by anti-Sanders circles to push for a brokered convention. Surely, it’s only Russian meddling that makes Sanders’ message appealing to millions of people. And we can’t let Russia win!

From February 6th:

FBI chief Chris Wray warns of ongoing Russian disinformation campaign

"They identify an issue that they know that the American people feel passionately about on both sides and then they take both sides and spin them up so they pit us against each other,” Wray said. “And then they combine that with an effort to weaken our confidence in our elections and our democratic institutions, which has been a pernicious and asymmetric way of engaging in ... information warfare.”

My prediction, there will be no brokered convention, Bernie will sweep to victory. No other candidate will win more than 2 states.

Looks like it’s not just Russian oligarchs that are paying for Twitter bots:

degenerasian wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:19 am My prediction, there will be no brokered convention, Bernie will sweep to victory. No other candidate will win more than 2 states.

With the caveat that anything can happen.... Realclearpolitics this morning has Biden leading in both Carolinas and Florida and those are certainly plausible. If Democratic pundits (and voters) continue to dismiss Bloomberg's NDA issue as a "poor debate performance" (Robert Gibbs on MSNBC immediately after debate. He has not been alone in that analysis) rather than a troubling morality issue, then his money will buy a few states.

You could end up being right but at this moment it looks like Bloomberg (money) and Sanders (lead and money) will be going to the Convention. Bloomberg's only real hope is to force a brokered convention and I assume he will want at least that chance for his $1B+

It’s raining in Las Vegas today. Presumably favors Bernie.

Joe K wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 11:21 am Looks like it’s not just Russian oligarchs that are paying for Twitter bots:

Jeeezzzussss. It's like Sinclair Broadcast Group bought those.

KLOBMENTUM.



ETA:

YGBFSM.

🤣🤣

I wonder if that sort of result, with voters ignoring leadership's interests in favor of their own, creates the exact momentum Sanders needs to finally drop out.

mister d wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:37 pm I wonder if that sort of result, with voters ignoring leadership's interests in favor of their own, creates the exact momentum Sanders needs to finally drop out.

His constant cratering to first place despite combined totals of the ultra moderate Bidklobigieg is definitely concerning.

This is cool:

Got my first door knock from a campaign volunteer today. He was a Sanders guy and very much looked the part: young guy, thick beard, wearing a shirt for the St. Louis FC USL team. Bernie Bro if I’ve ever seen one.

Joe K wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:47 pm Got my first door knock from a campaign volunteer today. He was a Sanders guy and very much looked the part: young guy, thick beard, wearing a shirt for the St. Louis FC USL team. Bernie Bro if I’ve ever seen one.

But did he have a think Russian accent and bring up his uncle Vladimir?

Johnnie wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:53 pm

Joe K wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:47 pm Got my first door knock from a campaign volunteer today. He was a Sanders guy and very much looked the part: young guy, thick beard, wearing a shirt for the St. Louis FC USL team. Bernie Bro if I’ve ever seen one.

But did he have a think Russian accent and bring up his uncle Vladimir?

No accent but come to think of it, he may’ve been going for the Rasputin look with his beard.