Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
It also doesn't help Trump that him shouting about it from the roof is putting a spotlight on the entire shit at the USPS whereas a GOP President who knows not to say the quiet part out loud might have gotten it done with less attention.
It's still not a guarantee it can be stopped but it's not helping him.
Edited by 3of4 on Aug 15th 2020 at 11:22:48 AM
"You can reply to this Message!"The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that California’s 10-round magazine capacity limit is unconstitutional. [1]
The law had previously been struck down after an NRA-led lawsuit, but California was granted a stay on the ruling until this verdict. It’s unknown what’s going to happen now in California and in other states with similar bans.
Worth noting that the judge who led the majority in the ruling was a Trump appointee as well.
They should have sent a poet.
Honestly, it seems like a band-aid for the real problem, which is private gun ownership as a whole. Yes, I'm aware of the argument that high-capacity magazines allow shooters to kill more people, but any number of deaths is too much.
Unless there are states planning to close polling places and making mail-in ballots mandatory, it's pretty clear they intend to just go in-person and vote. This isn't as much of an own-goal as some people making it out to be.
i'm tired, my friendNot everywhere do Republicans vote mainly in-person. Non-in-person voting is important for them in Florida, to the point that the Republican Party there Quote Mined a Trump Tweet to make it look like he endorses absentee voting.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanThey clearly dont want those undecided and democrats to risk their life to go vote. Not caring about the fact that their base is in the riskiest demographic.
![]()
![]()
A lot of polling place HAVE been closed, primarily in urban low income areas. Some cities will only have like 2 and in primarily white areas, some states had primaries had 6 hour waits to vote.
Thats not even getting into the other voter intimidation they have and will get up to this election.
Edited by Memers on Aug 15th 2020 at 3:10:46 AM
The right hates the USPS because the USPS is a sterling example of government services done well. It delivers the mail on time, anywhere in the country, six days a week, and has done so for centuries. It stands as a living refutation of the right's core ideal that the government is axiomatically worse than the private sector at anything and everything.
So, of course, the right sabotages it. Even before Trump started ripping out mail sorting machines in the last few weeks, you may have heard that the post office is hemorrhaging money to the tune of billions. While this is technically true, it's only because of a law passed by Republicans in 2006 that requires the post office to fund their employee pension obligations — in their entirety — for the next 75 years. No one else does that. Not in the private sector, not in the public sector. Because it's absolutely insane. Only the post office has to do that, and only so the GOP can say that they're losing billions a year. Seriously, the post office is legally required to have pensions paid off for future employees that aren't even born yet. Not future employees that haven't been hired yet. Future employees that haven't been born.
This is just the most obvious example of a standard GOP strategy of ruining government services and then using that example of why government services are terrible. It ultimately stems from the right-wing belief that government itself is fundamentally illegitimate. The right-wing view of government is that it takes from the deserving (the rich and powerful) and gives to the undeserving (everyone else). That's why they want to destroy every function of government except the few that benefit them directly (the police that keep poor from stealing their wealth, the military that keeps other countries from invading and destroying their power).
Edited by NativeJovian on Aug 15th 2020 at 6:49:38 AM
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.OK, I've been on a trip in a place with really poor internet, so my apologies if this has been brought up before.
Helmut Norpoth, who predicted Trump's 2016 win, maintains that Trump still has a 90% chance of winning. However, his analysis was made in early March, shortly before the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent economic recession became a worldwide concern. Neither of those events would have been a major concern for Americans in March 2020, when this prediction was made, but they became so just a few days later.
While I have no issue with the Norpoth's model per se, there are a few things that must be pointed out. The 2020 prediction was released just days before the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent economic recession, and therefore makes no reference to these events. But the pandemic and the recession have dramatically altered America's view of Trump. Norpoth does mention that Trump trails Biden in the polls (at the time, Biden was the presumptive nominee), but points out that in early Spring, polls are "barely better than a coin flip" to determine winners in November. However, it is now August, and Trump's poll numbers have remained consistently behind Biden's. It's reflected in the odds other forecasters give too. Compare the odds Clinton was given in 2016 to those Biden is given in 2020:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/#plus
Notice that Clinton's support goes through extreme dips of unpopularity, including one right before the election due to the Comey papers. Biden's support, on the other hand, is largely stable. As far as election polls go, Biden's lead has only widened since March:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Again, compare to 2016, where Clinton often found herself neck-and-neck with Trump, and never had as big a lead as Biden does:
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/
All of this only became apparent AFTER Norpoth posted his prediction, so he can hardly be faulted for inaccuracy. And this isn't to say Trump can't win, either. But this election has several factors in play that the last one did not. Norpoth's model has only been wrong two previous times— 1960 and 2000. Could 2020 be the third?
Edited by ElSquibbonator on Aug 15th 2020 at 7:03:02 AM
I simply cannot buy any model that gives Trump a 90% chance of winning, he only had 30% when going against Clinton. How the hell would he have such great odds? I know incumbent advantage is a thing but come on.
Trump needs support beyond his base to reliably win
and he's completely failed to expand it. It beggars belief that he'd have such great odds.
That sounds questionable as hell.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Aug 15th 2020 at 4:13:57 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang![]()
...why would you even bring that up? "Here's a model that shows Trump winning, it's from five months ago and doesn't take into account the defining event of the campaign that started four months ago". So it's hopelessly out of date. What value does it still have?
No, they all predicted a trump win.
At 30% odds.
Just because it happened at 30% odds doesn't mean they were wrong, it means that we got the thing that literaly had 1 in 3 chances of happening.
Fuck, why are people this bad at statistics. 30% isn't "not going to happen" its "Going to happen 1 in every 3 possible outcomes", its not that much worse then a coin flip.
Edited by Imca on Aug 15th 2020 at 4:35:34 AM
![]()
I confess it bugs me when people try to dismiss polls as wrong because of this reason. Having a substantial criticism of methodology like sample size or questions asked is one thing, but a lot of the time it's just based on something nebulous like a "feeling" or wanting validation for some other belief they have.
It's not like anyone is saying Trump couldn't win but that is not the same thing as saying he isn't favored to.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Aug 15th 2020 at 7:37:55 AM
@Imca For what it's worth, understanding statistics is something the human brain is actually really awful at in general.
Leviticus 19:34I looked Norpoth up, just to check out what he was saying. He technically got 2016 both wrong and right, as he predicted Trump would also win the popular vote by a good margin. I'm also questioning this statement:
Has he seen Trump's tweets lately?
It's not impossible that Trump wins a second term. But at this point, I think it's likelier due to COVID/USPS problems than Trump somehow being more popular than he was in 2016.
Edited by nova92 on Aug 15th 2020 at 5:07:17 AM
Yeah I have a lot of problems with the model, the claim that every other model predicted a certain win for Hillary is a strait up lie, it doesn’t seem to explain its methodology, it looks like it’s been heavily retrofitted to past elections (with makes it bad, because it’s going to be focused on very specific scenarios) and what little explanation I can make out about how it works indicates that it’s another bonkers single factor model that ignores tons of factors and just hyper focuses a very specific one factor.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThe more I look into it, the more I think he's been retroactively moving the goalposts to claim a win.
This is what he claimed in 2008 (for the record, he predicted Obama-McCain to be 49.9-50.1), which also meant that he could say he predicted Gore/Bush. But Trump won, he said he'd accurately predicted Trump's win, even though Trump lost the popular vote.

What exactly is the Right's thing with USPS about, exactly? Just a desire to privatize literally everything, or does it go further than that?
As others have said privatization is definitely a major part of it, but an equally important component is the desire to steal the election. They know that the polls are great for Biden thus making mail voting as unreliable as possible benefits their interests.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang