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
![]()
Well yes I assumed the remainder of the percentage was covered in the 'showing up early voting'. Which are the long 7 hour lines an all that.
That's whats worrying. The Trump voters will be showing up the day of where its likely to be going quicker vs now where there are the huge lines.
Edited by Memers on Oct 25th 2020 at 7:52:01 AM
There's no evidence lines will be shorter on Election Day. To the contrary, it's also possible that as early voting is spread out over multiple days vs. just one for Nov. 3, lines are longer then, on average.
Will that actually be the case? I don't know and no one else does either. But treating every bit of news as definitively bad for Biden is unhelpful.
Edited by nova92 on Oct 25th 2020 at 8:30:00 AM
Edited by tclittle on Oct 25th 2020 at 11:54:05 AM
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."Psychologically speaking, statistics have nothing to do with it. I mean, I know my own fear of Trump being reelected is roughly analogous to my fear of flying, which is bad enough that I haven't taken a plane in over five years. Even a less than one percent chance of something going wrong is too much, emotionally speaking, because there is simply no survival option if it happens. (And in my case "survival option" means psychologically/existentially speaking - I can't imagine how much worse it is for people who literally fear for their lives under a Trump presidency).
I'm personally speaking as someone with a diagnosed anxiety disorder, but I don't think most humans in general operate particularly differently. Our brains aren't suited at all to risk analysis, or statistical analysis in general.
Edit: In other words, if 2016 had played out the same way except with accurate polling, I suspect the only difference this year would be that people wouldn't be literally triggered by apparent good news. There'd still be a lot of distrust of the polls and whatnot, simply because by definition they can't provide a guarantee when people badly need one.
Edited by nrjxll on Oct 25th 2020 at 1:21:58 PM
No, I mean that sometimes people come along and start going on about how the polls were X wrong for Hillary so what if they're X wrong this time. Answer: Biden still has a large margin of victory in most swing states.
Then there's all the idiots you see crawling around on the internet that insist that because Trafalgar polls got the right outcome last time due to an egregious house effect, they must know something everyone else doesn't so if they show Trump up it must be true... even though they just have a massive bias.
And so many methodology problems and crosstab weirdness (like one suggesting that 25% of Democrat voters are going for Trump in PA, and some 30% of Black voters) that they deleted after Nate Silver noted it on Twitter that I wouldn't be surprised if they're just faking results instead.
Oh go fuck yourself, there's only one side that's likely to be setting fire to early voting ballot boxes. This is the second time it's happened.
But see, saying that one side is acting like cartoon supervillains is unnecessarily divisive. Just as bad as the other side which truly is acting like cartoon supervillains.
![]()
Yeah, and the thing about a 2-3% uncertainty in the national pollsnote is that it cuts both ways.
It's not impossible that the polling firms overcorrected their methodology slightly, resulting in Biden being slightly further ahead then he actually appears, and then of course high turnout generally favors Democratic candidates and 2020 is looking like a year of colossal turnout.
![]()
![]()
Yeah that's something that keeps bugging me about all the rhetoric about "the country being divided". It's sort of like the Golden Mean Fallacy, and if only "bOtH sIdEs could come to some sort of compromise" blah blah blah. That logic does not apply when one party HAS been compromising for decades, and the other party has not, shifting the overton window more and more right. And when you look even closer, its like the people who say this are equating people who protest racism and sexism with, well, racists and sexists.
As an aside, I thought it was interesting that you described Republicans as cartoon supervillains. Which sort of makes me think that, in the interest of balance people look to the Democrats to be cartoon superheroes. Which of course they are not, it's an unrealistic expectation. Which therefore leads to that apathy in the sense that there are no heroes and things are pointless.
I think the biggest problem the Democrats have is also the biggest problem of the US Party system in general, i.e. there is only 2 of them.
There are so many people with so many different political viewpoints in the party that it might be hard for the outsider to properly classify them.
Edited by Forenperser on Oct 26th 2020 at 1:19:24 PM
Certified: 48.0% West Asian, 6.5% South Asian, 15.8% North/West European, 15.7% English, 7.4% Balkan, 6.6% ScandinavianYeah, but at some point we have to agree on things. If every point of view is represented by a distinct party, that's complete chaos, so these parties will have to consolidate and/or form coalitions, and those coalitions will have to agree on things that might not represent the views of all of their constituents. They may then have to compromise with other coalitions to get actual work done.
Sooner or later your vote ends up being counted for something you don't necessarily agree with. That's just how politics works. The kind of person who refuses to accept this is not going to accept any form of compromise and is not a helpful contributor to democracy.
National governance is not tolerant of "my way or the highway" points of view.
Edited to add: If your objection is that your party (Democrat or Republican) refuses to respect the majority opinion of its constituents, that is clearly a problem, but I'm not seeing that with the Dems. The majority of the primary voters wanted Biden, so they got Biden. If there's this overwhelming majority that wants things Biden doesn't stand for, where is it? It didn't make itself heard and therefore doesn't exist in a meaningful sense.
The "silent majority" isn't silent because its voice isn't heard, for the most part. It's silent because it has chosen not to participate. If it did, its voice would be heard and make a difference. Q.E.D.
(Note that this is ignoring voter suppression and other forms of cheating. Those are very real and very problematic.)
Also, sometimes what you (speaking generally) want isn't compatible with any party. There's no place in this country for racists who want single-payer healthcare. I'm sorry, that's just how things fall. Pick a lane.
Edited by Fighteer on Oct 26th 2020 at 8:29:12 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Heck, this thread has a header specifically saying not to engage in panicking and fearmongering.
Disgusted, but not surprised