TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#335676: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:13:06 PM

That is a profoundly baffling criticism O_o

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#335677: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:14:51 PM

It's not really unethical to state a possible way to lose the election. The way you described it was he was posing a possibility and not accusing anyone of having done anything. So, not at all sure how you're seeing that as unethical or whatever. (It is also a current fear of many people. Such as in this thread, who have posed the very same possibility and not been accused of being unethical for it.)

ironballs16 Since: Jul, 2009 Relationship Status: Owner of a lonely heart
#335678: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:17:21 PM

[up]

He's saying that because he saw a bunch of Trump supporters who resented the implication that Trump would steal the election - besides, everyone knows Biden plans on stealing it! Trump said so!

"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"
PresidentStalkeyes Eats moldy bread and flies into windows from United Kingdom of England-land Since: Feb, 2016 Relationship Status: Do you like me? (Yes ⎕ Definitely ⎕ Absolutely!!! ⎕)
Eats moldy bread and flies into windows
#335679: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:17:25 PM

[up][up][up][up]I figured, but like... when they originally wrote the constitution, why limit it like that?

Edited by PresidentStalkeyes on Oct 27th 2020 at 8:17:35 AM

Those sell-by-dates won't stop me because I can't read!
nightwyrm_zero Since: Apr, 2010
#335680: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:19:40 PM

[up]Coz it's written for a largely agrarian society where the writers didn't think it would take the nation more than one day to vote. And election day is on Tuesday coz Sunday is the Sabbath and it take one day (Monday) for ppl to travel to town to cast their ballots. That's how old-fashion the current US election system is.

Edited by nightwyrm_zero on Oct 27th 2020 at 1:20:34 AM

WillKeaton from Alberta, Canada Since: Jun, 2010
#335681: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:25:04 PM

Does anyone have an "Election week"? Because I haven't heard of any country who does that.

Galadriel Since: Feb, 2015
#335682: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:25:37 PM

If there was no genuine evidence of electoral malfeasance, saying of a party, “the only way they could win is by rigging things” would be arguably unethical, as sowing distrust in the system.

But when that evidence genuinely exists, when we have consistently seen the Republicans try to get in the way of people voting and when Trump has been trying for months to cast doubt on mail-in ballots, such a statement is a simple recognition of reality.

As in libel suits, truth is an absolute defense.

EDIT: Polling update.

In terms of the 538 national polling average, Trump is back up to about the same level of support he had prior to the first debate and catching COVID: 43%. Biden, however, has gained two points since then, up from 50% to 52%.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 27th 2020 at 4:28:59 AM

nrjxll Since: Nov, 2010 Relationship Status: Not war
#335683: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:38:37 PM

In my own experience, early voting has been feasible enough that I would never consider waiting until Election Day (I'm actually going to vote in literally a few minutes). But I say this from a fairly privileged position, so I'm not going to say it's a defense of the current system.

megarockman from The Sixth Borough (Experienced Trainee)
#335684: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:38:46 PM

Does anyone have an "Election week"? Because I haven't heard of any country who does that.

India votes in multiple phases. In their last election (2019), they had seven phases spread over the course of about five weeks.

The damned queen and the relentless knight.
Aszur A nice butterfly from Pagliacci's Since: Apr, 2014 Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
A nice butterfly
#335685: Oct 27th 2020 at 1:50:00 PM

The arguments for it being unethical would be that it is "priming" or "constructing an audience" of sorts. It behooves us to think that a statistician would veer away from commenting on the legal area of something and relegate themselves to opining and predicting based on the numerical data, and not factors that are possible but speculative.

However, if you wish to look for someone to blame as to making people consider the possiiblity of voting theft being a factoring risk, do not blame Silver. Blame Trump. He and his actions were the first to cast doubt into the ballots, the electoral process, and who speculated and primed people into being against one result.

The whole reason why this is a risk, is NOT on statisticians who have ot consider all angles before delivering a result. One could likewise argue it would be unethical of them NOT to warn that this is a viably statistical risk.

It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
PresidentStalkeyes Eats moldy bread and flies into windows from United Kingdom of England-land Since: Feb, 2016 Relationship Status: Do you like me? (Yes ⎕ Definitely ⎕ Absolutely!!! ⎕)
Eats moldy bread and flies into windows
#335686: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:04:59 PM

Huh, I actually didn't know that about India. Interesting.

Anyway, I'm sure someone's asked this before, but - remind me, how long did it take for us to know the outcome of the election back in 2016? I remember it being a done-and-done deal, over with very quickly. Was that only because Trump won all those Rust Belt states?

Edited by PresidentStalkeyes on Oct 27th 2020 at 9:05:20 AM

Those sell-by-dates won't stop me because I can't read!
Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#335687: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:06:00 PM

Depending on the state you do have election week (or longer), that’s what early voting is.

Also the US constitution doesn’t specify an Election Day, it doesn’t even specify that you need to have elections to decide the electors. Congress had to pass a law just to get states to coordinate their election days on one day, before that you could have one state vote a week or so before another. Once communication got fast enough that results in one state could impact another Congress legislated for a single Election Day.

[up] We broadly knew on election night, though there was talk of potential recounts in the midwest for a while (I think the Green Party stole some money via recount talk) the difference this year is mail-in-voting means that it will take a lot longer to determine the results in some states.

Edited by Silasw on Oct 27th 2020 at 9:16:51 AM

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
#335688: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:19:35 PM

In my country, the election halls open at least a few days before the official voting day, and you're free to go vote then if you like. I usually do.

NativeJovian Jupiterian Local from Orlando, FL Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
Jupiterian Local
#335689: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:24:49 PM

I remember going to bed on election night 2016 with "Trump looks likely but Clinton still has a path to victory" and then waking up to "nope, Trump won". But I'm on the east coast so that'd be relatively early by, say, Pacific time.

Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.
Memers Since: Aug, 2013
#335690: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:27:42 PM

So my brother-in-law works for the CHP and had his last day off in the forcible future, they are all apparently to work 10 hour days because of expected violence with and after the election.

....yeah....

MichaelKatsuro Since: Apr, 2011
#335692: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:33:26 PM

You know, betting money on Trump to win is pretty much like you get to decide the outcome of the election for a fee.

"Pay us 10 dollars and Trump is sure to lose!"
"Is that actually certain?"
"If we somehow fail to accomplish it, you get more than twice your money back!"

Edited by MichaelKatsuro on Oct 27th 2020 at 10:33:39 AM

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#335693: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:42:43 PM

So my brother-in-law works for the CHP and had his last day off in the forcible future, they are all apparently to work 10 hour days because of expected violence with and after the election.

....yeah....

I think violence is pretty likely yeah.

Thankfully despite the human cost it's not going to meaningfully advance the reactionary agenda, and may very well hurt it by galvanizing the public to greater oppose the far-right.

That isn't to say that the blood spilled is irrelevant, just that it's a tactical tragedy instead of a strategic threat.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
sgamer82 Since: Jan, 2001
Sivartis Captionless One from Lubberland, or the Isle of Lazye Since: Apr, 2009
Captionless One
#335695: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:49:44 PM

So my brother-in-law works for the CHP
California... Highway Patrol?

♭What.
Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#335696: Oct 27th 2020 at 2:54:00 PM

That's my assumption too when I saw those initials.

PresidentStalkeyes Eats moldy bread and flies into windows from United Kingdom of England-land Since: Feb, 2016 Relationship Status: Do you like me? (Yes ⎕ Definitely ⎕ Absolutely!!! ⎕)
Eats moldy bread and flies into windows
#335697: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:12:29 PM

Something else I thought of - IIRC, one of the reasons polls were off last time was because they undercounted Trump supporters; do we have any evidence that they've changed this? I know they've started taking education into account more, but that's not exactly the same thing.

Those sell-by-dates won't stop me because I can't read!
Draghinazzo (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: I get a feeling so complicated...
#335698: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:17:13 PM

[up]As I recall, it was mostly a case of undecided voters breaking for trump at the last minute in key states more than anything. There are way fewer undecided voters and Biden has a noticeably higher favorability rating in all swing states, so it's unlikely that this exact scenario would repeat itself.

LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#335699: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:20:45 PM

Maybe this will be reassuring to some.

Basically, Democrats are so much more likely to send in mail-in-ballots early or just drop them off directly, it's not actually a given that Democrats are most at risk at having their ballots discarded than Republicans are.

Edited by LSBK on Oct 27th 2020 at 5:22:01 AM

Silasw A procrastination in of itself from A handcart to hell (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: And they all lived happily ever after <3
A procrastination in of itself
#335700: Oct 27th 2020 at 3:25:01 PM

It actually is the same thing. Remember pollsters don’t just interview random people and give you the results from them, they interview people and then extrapolate out from those people to represent the voting population (they have the census data remember).

The more things you extrapolate out the more niche your sample gets, it’s relatively easy to find enough people to poll who are the same gender, race and party registration, but then you’re laying other things on top of that, income, age, voting history, unless you poll a very large group of people you can end up with one respondent having an outsized impact (which I think once caused a regular poll to give Trump a large share of the black vote, because one of the few black people responding happened to be a Trump supporter, who was extrapolated out as representative of like 30% of black people in the state).

So pollsters don’t extrapolate out using factors that don’t matter, if being married/unmarried doesn’t impact your vote then it doesn’t matter if they have a representative sample of married/unmarried people in their poll.

That’s why they didn’t used to weight/extrapolate based on education, it wasn’t seen as an independent variable (they generally all weight via income), that caused them to miss Trump’s strong support amongst people with less formal education, which was key to him winning.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

Total posts: 417,856
Top