The General Election

[knapplc]

It's interesting to see the NY Times with Hillary at 76%. FiveThirtyEight has shown a steady decline in the probability that Clinton would get elected, down to 64% this morning. Here's a chart with some of the major predictors:

 

 

Here's a brief discussion about the variance in some of these predictors.

 

[Red Five]

538 is obviously biased against Trump.

[Guy Chamberlin]

I have two kids and share serious concerns about their future, but it's based more on the fear and reprisal agenda the Trump forces are selling.

 

I love America. But I don't believe in the America they want to get back to, probably because it never existed.

 

So I'm gonna fight for my America, too.

 

I'd love to be more thrilled about Hillary, but I'm far less scared, because everything the Clintons have done is political calculation. I personally don't like poll-driven ideology and the pandering that comes with it, but the result is a pretty fair representation of what most Americans can live with. She's far more pro-business than she is socialist -- a stone cold fact -- and has long been considered a hawk within her own party. She was well respected and collaborated with by Republicans during her Senate career and has never taken an extreme position in her life. If she's the third term of Obama, as the RNC breathlessly warns, we could do a lot worse. If we wanted to "make America Great Again" we could aim for the 1990s of Bill Clinton's presidency and nobody would argue with the numbers. Liberals should be troubled and Conservatives relieved that Hillary Clinton is likely to follow the business-as-usual policies that have maintained order and protected the powerful, much like her predecessors from both parties. It won't work that way, of course.

 

Pretty amusing last night to watch the Republicans discuss the horrors of the past 8 years, without acknowledging that Republican obstructionism was directly responsible for much of it.

 

And God forbid it get out that Barack Obama was actually a terrorist ass-kicker.

 

Or that cop killings actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Mexican immigration actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Obamacare was originally drafted by Republicans as the alternative to socialized medicine, and endorsed by the private for-profit healthcare industry.

 

Or that Republicans blocked funding to both the VA and what would have been Benghazi security forces.

 

Just keep people angry and ill-informed.

 

That's what I want to save my children from.

[NM11046]

It's interesting to see the NY Times with Hillary at 76%. FiveThirtyEight has shown a steady decline in the probability that Clinton would get elected, down to 64% this morning. Here's a chart with some of the major predictors:

 

 

Here's a brief discussion about the variance in some of these predictors.

 

The NYT article actually links to the info you shared above Knapp.

[Danny Bateman]

I have two kids and share serious concerns about their future, but it's based more on the fear and reprisal agenda the Trump forces are selling.

 

I love America. But I don't believe in the America they want to get back to, probably because it never existed.

 

So I'm gonna fight for my America, too.

 

I'd love to be more thrilled about Hillary, but I'm far less scared, because everything the Clintons have done is political calculation. I personally don't like poll-driven ideology and the pandering that comes with it, but the result is a pretty fair representation of what most Americans can live with. She's far more pro-business than she is socialist -- a stone cold fact -- and has long been considered a hawk within her own party. She was well respected and collaborated with by Republicans during her Senate career and has never taken an extreme position in her life. If she's the third term of Obama, as the RNC breathlessly warns, we could do a lot worse. If we wanted to "make America Great Again" we could aim for the 1990s of Bill Clinton's presidency and nobody would argue with the numbers. Liberals should be troubled and Conservatives relieved that Hillary Clinton is likely to follow the business-as-usual policies that have maintained order and protected the powerful, much like her predecessors from both parties. It won't work that way, of course.

 

Pretty amusing last night to watch the Republicans discuss the horrors of the past 8 years, without acknowledging that Republican obstructionism was directly responsible for much of it.

 

And God forbid it get out that Barack Obama was actually a terrorist ass-kicker.

 

Or that cop killings actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Mexican immigration actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Obamacare was originally drafted by Republicans as the alternative to socialized medicine, and endorsed by the private for-profit healthcare industry.

 

Or that Republicans blocked funding to both the VA and what would have been Benghazi security forces.

 

Just keep people angry and ill-informed.

 

That's what I want to save my children from.

 

Doing God's work, son.

 

I don't have kids, but I likely will in the not too distant future. Bnil brought up his and you yours. I've at times thought about the future of this country for me, my fellow Americans, and my kids and wife, someday.

 

I support Clinton because though she is not perfect, I know the absolute bare minimum I can expect from four to eight years of her as president is not screwing things up and handing a more or less status quo situation off to whoever is next.

 

I have no such guarantee with Trump. He appears vastly ill-equipped for the job to me, and his nativist, exclusionary, fear-mongering rhetoric terrifies me of his intentions. Remember, we don't know what those truly are, since he can't hold a consistent position for two seconds.

 

I'd like to see lots of liberal changes under Clinton. Lots of things need fixing. But more than anything, I support her because I'm looking to reject Trump in the strongest terms possible.

 

It's not OK to spit on people who don't look just like you or may not be as advantaged as you.

 

It's not OK to pop your mouth off any time anyone challenges you to try to one up them.

 

It's not OK to treat women like dirt.

 

It's not OK to demonize all brown people because of actions by the lesser angels among their countrymen that are out of their control.

 

It's not OK to peddle counter-intellectualism and prey on people's fears and anxieties.

 

It's not OK for the leader of the free world to offer up unfounded tabloid stories or internet rumors about his adversaries and pass the buck using "people are saying this" as plausible deniability.

 

It's not OK to ride racist undercurrents in our society for your own gain, trying to delegitimize the POTUS along the way.

 

And it's REALLY not f#cking OK to mock the disabled. That was my personal breaking point. F#ck that vile, low piece of sh#t. It still leaves me seething.

 

I don't find any of this strong, or cool, or funny, or patriotic. I think it's sick, repugnant, disgusting, and absolutely unAmerican. It's completely counter to what I hold American values to be. And I'm going to fight like hell to do what I can to send his ass packing in the fall.

[Danny Bateman]

Also, if she wins Florida, it's all but over. He'd have to every single one of these other states.

 

[NM11046]

 

I have two kids and share serious concerns about their future, but it's based more on the fear and reprisal agenda the Trump forces are selling.

 

I love America. But I don't believe in the America they want to get back to, probably because it never existed.

 

So I'm gonna fight for my America, too.

 

I'd love to be more thrilled about Hillary, but I'm far less scared, because everything the Clintons have done is political calculation. I personally don't like poll-driven ideology and the pandering that comes with it, but the result is a pretty fair representation of what most Americans can live with. She's far more pro-business than she is socialist -- a stone cold fact -- and has long been considered a hawk within her own party. She was well respected and collaborated with by Republicans during her Senate career and has never taken an extreme position in her life. If she's the third term of Obama, as the RNC breathlessly warns, we could do a lot worse. If we wanted to "make America Great Again" we could aim for the 1990s of Bill Clinton's presidency and nobody would argue with the numbers. Liberals should be troubled and Conservatives relieved that Hillary Clinton is likely to follow the business-as-usual policies that have maintained order and protected the powerful, much like her predecessors from both parties. It won't work that way, of course.

 

Pretty amusing last night to watch the Republicans discuss the horrors of the past 8 years, without acknowledging that Republican obstructionism was directly responsible for much of it.

 

And God forbid it get out that Barack Obama was actually a terrorist ass-kicker.

 

Or that cop killings actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Mexican immigration actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Obamacare was originally drafted by Republicans as the alternative to socialized medicine, and endorsed by the private for-profit healthcare industry.

 

Or that Republicans blocked funding to both the VA and what would have been Benghazi security forces.

 

Just keep people angry and ill-informed.

 

That's what I want to save my children from.

 

Doing God's work, son.

 

I don't have kids, but I likely will in the not too distant future. Bnil brought up his and you yours. I've at times thought about the future of this country for me, my fellow Americans, and my kids and wife, someday.

 

I support Clinton because though she is not perfect, I know the absolute bare minimum I can expect from four to eight years of her as president is not screwing things up and handing a more or less status quo situation off to whoever is next.

 

I have no such guarantee with Trump. He appears vastly ill-equipped for the job to me, and his nativist, exclusionary, fear-mongering rhetoric terrifies me of his intentions. Remember, we don't know what those truly are, since he can't hold a consistent position for two seconds.

 

I'd like to see lots of liberal changes under Clinton. Lots of things need fixing. But more than anything, I support her because I'm looking to reject Trump in the strongest terms possible.

 

It's not OK to spit on people who don't look just like you or may not be as advantaged as you.

 

It's not OK to pop your mouth off any time anyone challenges you to try to one up them.

 

It's not OK to treat women like dirt.

 

It's not OK to demonize all brown people because of actions by the lesser angels among their countrymen that are out of their control.

 

It's not OK to peddle counter-intellectualism and prey on people's fears and anxieties.

 

It's not OK for the leader of the free world to offer up unfounded tabloid stories or internet rumors about his adversaries and pass the buck using "people are saying this" as plausible deniability.

 

It's not OK to ride racist undercurrents in our society for your own gain, trying to delegitimize the POTUS along the way.

 

And it's REALLY not f#cking OK to mock the disabled. That was my personal breaking point. F#ck that vile, low piece of sh#t. It still leaves me seething.

 

I don't find any of this strong, or cool, or funny, or patriotic. I think it's sick, repugnant, disgusting, and absolutely unAmerican. It's completely counter to what I hold American values to be. And I'm going to fight like hell to do what I can to send his ass packing in the fall.

 

It gives me hope that I read overwhelmingly more posts like yours and like Dudeguy's than I read positive posts about Trump. Well said both of you - can't "up vote" you enough.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

I have two kids under 10 and am scared to take them to large cities or places with large crowds.

 

I'm scared for your kids' development of social skills growing up under such a paranoid parent.

Wow do you not have kids? I have heard from many parents with kids our age saying the exact same thing about the world we live in right now. Being cautious and protective with them has no bearing on their social development whatsoever no matter what belief system you subscribe to.

 

 

I have 2 kids under 10. I live in a big city. Every weekend we seem to go somewhere where there are large crowds (baseball game, soccer game, amusement park, etc). I have never thought that I shouldn't go to one of these places because I might get lit up by some wacko carrying an AK. I guess I am a bad parent.

 

 

Hey, I'm not the one criticizing your parenting...you are the one that that is guilty of criticizing me. If you want to do that, so be it. And yes, I will take my son to his 2nd Nebraska game this year, but the point is that I, along with nearly every parent I know that has kids of a similar age, have made comments in the past year that its a much scarier world out there, and the thought has crossed their mind on what they would do whether they are at disney, at a large festival in a city, or other crowded venues. How many kids were killed in Nice just last week watching fireworks which is a family event. These crazy terrorists don't care who they kill as long as they maximize the number of lives they can impact.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

I have two kids under 10 and am scared to take them to large cities or places with large crowds.

 

I'm scared for your kids' development of social skills growing up under such a paranoid parent.

Wow do you not have kids? I have heard from many parents with kids our age saying the exact same thing about the world we live in right now. Being cautious and protective with them has no bearing on their social development whatsoever no matter what belief system you subscribe to.

 

That's EXACTLY what it will do.

 

If you keep your kids away from the "Big Ol' Mean City" and crowds of people, they will develop the same backward mindset that people of other colors, heritages, orientations, beliefs, etc, are going to all do them harm. Then no one learns. No one listens. And everyone becomes a Republican.

 

 

Dude, you have no idea what you are talking about. My kids are currently in some of the most racially diverse schools in our area, and have plenty of exposure to broad points of view. You sound like an elitist liberal who thinks they know better about how children should be raised in our society. Its the mindset that anybody who may not agree with gay marriage, owning guns, etc...must somehow be backwards or a redneck. I'll tell you what is backwards...a Democratic party that has been hijacked by far left followers who push and promote divisiveness along racial lines and against cops for the false claim that its all about criminal justice, and then refuses to accept and responsibility when police officers are being shot all across the nation.

[StPaulHusker]

 

 

 

 

I have two kids under 10 and am scared to take them to large cities or places with large crowds.

 

I'm scared for your kids' development of social skills growing up under such a paranoid parent.

Wow do you not have kids? I have heard from many parents with kids our age saying the exact same thing about the world we live in right now. Being cautious and protective with them has no bearing on their social development whatsoever no matter what belief system you subscribe to.

 

That's EXACTLY what it will do.

 

If you keep your kids away from the "Big Ol' Mean City" and crowds of people, they will develop the same backward mindset that people of other colors, heritages, orientations, beliefs, etc, are going to all do them harm. Then no one learns. No one listens. And everyone becomes a Republican.

 

 

Dude, you have no idea what you are talking about. My kids are currently in some of the most racially diverse schools in our area, and have plenty of exposure to broad points of view. You sound like an elitist liberal who thinks they know better about how children should be raised in our society. Its the mindset that anybody who may not agree with gay marriage, owning guns, etc...must somehow be backwards or a redneck. I'll tell you what is backwards...a Democratic party that has been hijacked by far left followers who push and promote divisiveness along racial lines and against cops for the false claim that its all about criminal justice, and then refuses to accept and responsibility when police officers are being shot all across the nation.

 

Nice deflection

[knapplc]

Can we all stop presuming we know anything about anyone's kids, anyone's parenting ability, anyone's family at all?

 

This is a tangent we shouldn't go down, guys.

[TAKODA]

Guy and Dudeguyy,

 

Both of your post are worthy reads and I truly appreciate your views.

 

I am not in the Trump corner and I also can say the same about Hillary. I do not believe there is a winning choice in this election and have some trepidation regarding who will wield what power and for what reason. If I knew one of these two candidates could gain office and we would remain status-quo for the next 4 years, I suspect I might lean that way but I lack the confidence in either choice and may vote for Johnson for the pure reason that it is the closest thing to abstaining from choosing a candidate from the circus we are witnessing.

 

Thanks for sharing your eloquent view however. +1 to both of you!

[StPaulHusker]

Can we all stop presuming we know anything about anyone's kids, anyone's parenting ability, anyone's family at all?

 

This is a tangent we shouldn't go down, guys.

I feel sorry for your kids

[HuskerNation1]

I have two kids and share serious concerns about their future, but it's based more on the fear and reprisal agenda the Trump forces are selling.

 

I love America. But I don't believe in the America they want to get back to, probably because it never existed.

 

So I'm gonna fight for my America, too.

 

I'd love to be more thrilled about Hillary, but I'm far less scared, because everything the Clintons have done is political calculation. I personally don't like poll-driven ideology and the pandering that comes with it, but the result is a pretty fair representation of what most Americans can live with. She's far more pro-business than she is socialist -- a stone cold fact -- and has long been considered a hawk within her own party. She was well respected and collaborated with by Republicans during her Senate career and has never taken an extreme position in her life. If she's the third term of Obama, as the RNC breathlessly warns, we could do a lot worse. If we wanted to "make America Great Again" we could aim for the 1990s of Bill Clinton's presidency and nobody would argue with the numbers. Liberals should be troubled and Conservatives relieved that Hillary Clinton is likely to follow the business-as-usual policies that have maintained order and protected the powerful, much like her predecessors from both parties. It won't work that way, of course.

 

Pretty amusing last night to watch the Republicans discuss the horrors of the past 8 years, without acknowledging that Republican obstructionism was directly responsible for much of it.

 

And God forbid it get out that Barack Obama was actually a terrorist ass-kicker.

 

Or that cop killings actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Mexican immigration actually decreased during his administration.

 

Or that Obamacare was originally drafted by Republicans as the alternative to socialized medicine, and endorsed by the private for-profit healthcare industry.

 

Or that Republicans blocked funding to both the VA and what would have been Benghazi security forces.

 

Just keep people angry and ill-informed.

 

That's what I want to save my children from.

 

 

Wow, do we live in the same country. Your posts are comical at least.

 

1. Hillary collaborated well in the Senate with Republicans. Please name me 2 or 3 key pieces of legislation she cosponsored that were signed into law?

 

2. What specific obstructionism has the GOP conducted the last 7 years that has resulted in the rise of ISIS and terror attacks in general? Or put another way, what plan did Obama put forward to prevent terrorism that the GOP blocked?

 

3. How can Obama be kicking the terrorists ass when the number of attacks has exploded worldwide, and ISIS has grown by 4400% under his watch according to his own CIA director, who also stated that ISIS was decimated when Bush left office?

 

4. Regarding the VA scandal, its a joke to once again blame Republicans for Obama's failures. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to google Obama and VA and find that Obama has failed our veterans time and again.

 

http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/barack-obama-scandal-veterans/2014/12/21/id/613896/

 

http://spectator.org/63393_va-scandal-linked-obama/

 

5. Regarding Obamacare, Democrats realize this is a failed program and the American public still does not like it. So the only course of action is to continue to point back to a handful of GOP Senators in 1992 that proposed something that somewhat mimics Obamacare, but was frankly an ingenuous effort at the time to offer an opposition to Hillarycare. I've read up plenty on this proposal as its the only way out a leftist has when trying to defend the Obamacare debacle, and there's no meat there. You have fallen for the typical leftist approach of relying on some study from the early 90s to align blame for a failed program that Obama and the Dems forced upon the American people.

 

6. Regarding anger, I seem to recall from 2006 to 2008 the Dems using a lot of fear and anger about the Iraq war to try to win back Congress and the Presidency. They were organizing protests, having moms of soldiers come out and speak, etc.. I recall in 2012 the Dems putting an ad out showing Paul Ryan driving granny off the cliff insinuating that the GOP was going to get rid of social security. It's completely dishonest to suggest that only one party uses anger and fear during elections. Both parties do it as they seek an emotional response to drive up turnout.

[knapplc]

 

I TAKE CARE OF MY KIDS!