prev <-> next
[2016-11-09 15:18:08] - I was sad that Hillary lost Florida but I was shocked by WI and MI. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 14:54:41] - Daniel: Yeah, that's why I always doubt the simplistic narrative around where candidates get their support. Here's another weird factoid: Apparently more democrats voted for George W Bush in Florida in 2000 than voted for Nader. -Paul
[2016-11-09 14:50:12] - Paul: Thats what people on tv are saying that blows their mind. That there are people who voted for Obama twice that now voted for Trump. Thats crazy land. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 14:33:15] - a: It's way too simplistic to say it was just bigots and people who are sexist that let Trump win. People do WEIRD things when voting. I still can't get over how large percentages of Ron Paul supporters from last election apparently voted for Trump and/or Sanders. -Paul
[2016-11-09 14:31:49] - a: I even heard that Trump won a larger percentage of the Latino vote than Romney did, which is mind-boggling. -Paul
[2016-11-09 14:31:04] - a: Yeah, that's part of something I am writing for RD. There's this theory running around (not just on social media) that this is a bunch of poor, stupid, racist, sexist white males that elected Trump, but he actually got a ton of Latino and female votes. -Paul
[2016-11-09 14:28:01] - i thought most of trump supporters were white assholes, but that couldn't be further from the truth. 1 in 3 latinos in florida voted for trump. i feel like i'm living in crazy land. if that number had been closer to 1 in 4 (or better), he would have lost. ~a
[2016-11-09 14:23:01] - a: Medicare Part D happened with Republicans in charge of all 3 chambers. - mig
[2016-11-09 14:19:10] - a: You're probably right. Still, I maintain a slight sliver of hope that the actual principled "tea party" (for lack of a better term) congressmen might team up with Democrats to stop some of the more egregious things. -Paul
[2016-11-09 14:18:50] - a: i dunno, is it ever a good time to be a moderate? post - 2010 moderates have been complaining there's never any compromise and nothing ever gets done. - mig
[2016-11-09 14:07:00] - it'll be the former. the republicans have all three branches of government for the next two years: the senate is republican and they'll appoint new supreme court members that trump selects. both houses of congress will pass all of the laws. it'll be huge. it's a bad time to be a moderate, really. ~a
[2016-11-09 13:54:32] - a: It'll be very interesting to see how Congress deals with a President Trump. Republicans held onto both the House and Senate, right? Will they be able to work together or will the antagonism from the election carry over? I pray it's the latter. -Paul
[2016-11-09 13:52:40] - I would really like some final(ish) numbers. I'm trying to write my election recap for Rampant Discourse (I had to basically trash everything I had pre-written) and I need those numbers! -Paul
[2016-11-09 13:50:47] - such great news coming from referendums in california and massachussets and nevada and arizona and maine. but i can't be happy because in my opinion the bad news outweighs the good news.
~a[2016-11-09 13:44:12] - Daniel: No idea what R's do if/when they repeal Obamacare (they might keep some of the more popular parts of it, which will just further screw up our system, IMHO). Especially have no idea what Trump will propose. I think there are steps we can take to improve our system that doesn't go to either extreme, though. -Paul
[2016-11-09 13:41:15] - a: Barely any mention of 3rd parties, except one of the analysts mentioned that nobody was talking about them.
-Paul[2016-11-09 12:41:47] - ok maybe not heh. ~a
[2016-11-09 12:36:49] - mig: i haven't looked, but i bet money wikipedia has it. ~a
[2016-11-09 11:36:59] - [2016-05-23 15:27:37] - Paul: I was talking about a Trump presidency while we played Quantum at Miguel's birthday thing. Or yours? I think Miguel's. It terrifies me, but I think he beats Clinton. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-09 11:31:03] - They have the info for Trump and Clinton, why not Johnson? - mig
[2016-11-09 11:30:22] - a: i'm not interested in state by state totals. I'm looking at his overall #s nationwide, which no one seems to have. I shouldn't have to go through each state's results to add them up manually. - mig
[2016-11-09 11:10:04] - a: I watched cnn all night and I don't remember 3rd party coming up ever? Maybe I missed it though. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 11:00:42] - mig: i'll reiterate paul's sentiment. cnn showed johnson's info in every state and every county all night. they even showed stein on some occasions. otoh, i was at a party where the volume was on pretty low. paul, did cnn have any snide remarks about johnson? ~a
[2016-11-09 10:35:11] - Any guesses on what the R's actually do once they replace the ACA? I was talking with a coworker this morning and the way I see it american health care doesn't get "solved" until hospitals can turn away uninsured or we go single payer. Am I crazy? -Daniel
[2016-11-09 10:33:12] - a: Yeah I heard some drug companies and stuff were up on the idea that the ACA gets rolled back. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 10:21:11] - oh for fucks sake, how hard is it to have a data field that displays johnson's overall vote total? seriously. - mig
[2016-11-09 10:16:58] - mig: At least CNN mostly displayed him prominently on TV, even if they barely talked about him. -Paul
[2016-11-09 10:16:24] - mig: I'm thinking I wait a few days for the wounds to heal, but now seems like a great time to try to teach my liberal friends of the benefits of limited government (and reigning in executive power). Also, looking forward to a vibrant anti-war movement again. -Paul
[2016-11-09 10:15:32] - paul: that really irritates me. I was trying to find johnson's complete vote total for a long while but could only get state by state totals. Based on the raw % between Clinton-Trump it looks like he got around 4-ish? Maybe close to 5%? - mig
[2016-11-09 10:11:52] - so ... who's ready for dissent to be patriotic again? - mig
[2016-11-09 09:58:15] - a: https://www.google.com/finance Look at sector summary. -Paul
[2016-11-09 09:57:51] - a: Interesting. I have a mixed bad. Some stocks (pharmaceuticals mainly) appear to be up big while others are down big. -Paul
[2016-11-09 09:57:14] - Not that I feel good about it, but I was fairly close with my prediction of Trump popular vote total (actual of 47.5% and I chose 47.6%), although there are still results coming in. Looks like Miguel's 48% was closest for Clinton so far. Hard to find vote totals for Johnson. -Paul
[2016-11-09 09:54:02] - paul/daniel: ok, finance question here: how (at 10am this morning) all of my individual stocks are down (-2%), but the indexes are flat (+0%)? toyota (-2%), google (-2%), starbucks (-2%), amazon (-2%), tesla (-3%), verizon (-2%), etc etc. who's up this morning to balance all of this? canned good manufacturers? ~a
[2016-11-09 09:51:24] - Daniel: Me too. I thought Trump might outperform, but I never saw this coming. -Paul
[2016-11-09 09:45:27] - at the whole thing. Not at Corey. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 09:45:11] - wow. I'm pretty shocked. -Daniel
[2016-11-09 07:34:24] - xpovos: yeah that was it. - mig
[2016-11-09 06:40:06] - mig: The Lewandowski thing the railing at the lack of concession speech? That's the only thing I found. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-09 06:39:24] - title: Trump. And please don't ask us what happens Thursday. - Austrailia
[2016-11-09 02:13:45] - And holy shit Corey Lewandoski is terrible human being. - mig
[2016-11-09 01:56:00] - and right now I'm just in awe how badly democrats fucked this up. - mig
[2016-11-09 01:50:00] - wow. I think it's probably a good idea to stay away from social media for a few days. Things are getting quite nasty. - mig
[2016-11-09 00:33:22] - I feel like somehow I've been wrong about every single prediction that I've made this campaign despite the fact that it also feels like I've picked for and against both Trump and Clinton at different points. This is just absolutely insane now. -Paul
[2016-11-08 15:37:27] - Four bond proposals and some pretty serious constitutional amendments... or at least more serious than I am used to. -Paul
[2016-11-08 13:55:18] - we had four bond proposals. i don't think i've ever seen so many. ~a
[2016-11-08 11:20:59] - First time I've voted in a while with no bond proposals on my ballot. Was a little weird. So many judges though. There were like 16 judges on my ballot. -Daniel
[2016-11-08 10:37:35] - daniel: my ballot looks like this (or this really). mcmullin's running mate, who is on my ballot, is named nathan johnson. ~a
[2016-11-08 09:55:10] - i probably should have said gary and who...
[2016-11-08 09:54:56] - g johnson and who? -Daniel
[2016-11-08 09:39:22] - bah, i'm looking at my sample ballot. there are two "johnson"s at the top. that's not going to confuse anybody, i'm sure. ~a
[2016-11-08 09:10:52] - paul: yeah sure, i sort-of agree with your sentiment. at least it only happens for a month every four years. it's not the worst really. i can live with it, i guess. ok, so for example, when sopa/pipa was going on, the whole internet got in on it. they cared about something 'big league'. it was ok, because it wasn't forever. ~a
[2016-11-08 08:23:10] - a: Figured. I'm of mixed feelings. He's perfectly entitled to his political opinion and to let us know of it (I'm the last person who should say he isn't), but a part of me wishes there were some places where I didn't have to get bombarded with the "OMG please go vote you have to!" message. -Paul
[2016-11-07 22:57:06] - not supposed to be funny. ~a
[2016-11-07 21:46:02] - a: xkcd: I don't get it.... unless it's not supposed to be funny.
-Paul[2016-11-07 21:45:09] - a: I watched some CNBC today and all they talked about is how the market seems to be reacting to the chances of a Clinton win. -Paul
[2016-11-07 20:04:14] - also interesting: http://xkcd.com/ ~a
[2016-11-07 19:55:18] - aaron/paul: the chance of HRC winning on fivethirtyeight is almost exactly correlated to the S&P500 for the past five days. ~a
[2016-11-07 15:46:58] - i came up with n!/((n/2)!^2 * 2^n), so 0.246 for n=10, 0.0252 for n=1000, 0.00252 for n=100000.... (thanks wolfram alpha!) but it's kind of an ugly equation so i wonder if there's a way to simplify it - aaron
[2016-11-07 15:29:34] - http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-puzzle-will-you-yes-you-decide-the-election/ You're voting in an election with N other people who vote completely randomly, and have a 50-50 chance of voting for either candidate. What are the odds that your vote changes the outcome? - aaron
[2016-11-06 09:40:52] - a: Thanks for catching the Scott/Steve problem. It should be fixed and the editor has been shot.
-Paul[2016-11-05 21:33:18] - Daniel: Hopefully I get a little back on track now that I'm ONLY home alone with two kids for two weeks... -Paul
[2016-11-05 21:33:01] - Daniel: Sorry. The past 5 days have been kind of insane. Besides launching RD, I also spent half a day in the hospital, two days away on a business retreat and all day today celebrating Gurkie's birthday since I was gone for her actual birthday. -Paul
[2016-11-04 10:28:02] -
~a[2016-11-04 09:44:36] - Paul: Why won't you reply to me on your discourse article?! It makes me feel un-engaged and less appreciated as a reader! -Daniel
[2016-11-03 13:45:54] - a: Awesome. Thank you. That was it. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-03 13:33:56] - xpovos: posted by me here a few years ago (from amy's facebook). nina suggested i try a team sport (which i have done in the past), someone else suggested underwater hockey and bossaball. ~a
[2016-11-03 13:29:49] - xpoovs: smbc: these are your lifetimes. USE THEM! ~a
[2016-11-03 13:26:27] - xpovos: i remember what you're talking about. it was probably not xkcd. i'll try to find it. ~a
[2016-11-03 11:18:44] - xpovos: hmm doesn't ring a bell - aaron
[2016-11-03 10:35:48] - I'm looking for a bit by Randall Munroe (I think), probably xkcd, but maybe one of his other works. The premise something like it takes 7 years to become an expert at something, and people work for 42 years so they go through 6 career changes where they're experts by the end. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-03 07:54:48] - paul: I'm confused. Is it steve dillon or scott? ~a
[2016-11-02 16:46:54] - a: Apparently there is.
But now, we're ready for prime time (kinda). -Paul[2016-11-02 16:35:27] - paul: isn't there already a link up there ↗ ? i'm glad you posted the link again because i didn't see miguel's new stuff. ~a
[2016-11-02 14:32:49] - all: http://rampantdiscourse.com/ It's (a)live! Would love it if you all checked it out and provided feedback and/or spread the word. Thanks all! -Paul
[2016-11-02 12:57:24] - aaron: Say hello to Fibonacci for me.
-- Xpovos[2016-11-02 11:44:33] - a: Clinton may not have generated more scandals as some predecessors, but she does have an amazing ability to somehow always make them worse. - mig
[2016-11-02 09:26:47] - shoot nevermind, i figured it out. that's cool. - aaron
[2016-11-02 09:20:42] - so i've figured out through pencil and paper that f(0)=1, f(1)=3, f(2)=6, f(3)=10 and f(4)=15. this is the sequence of triangular numbers. is there an intuitive reason why this is the sequence of triangular numbers?? that seems so random to come up here. i figure there must be an intuitive reason but i can't work it out, it seems so random to come up here - aaron
[2016-11-02 09:19:14] - we have x identical candies and we want to divide them among 3 people, and we want to find how many distinct ways we can divide them. for example for 3 candies, there's 10 ways. 3 ways one of us gets all three candies, 6 ways where one of us gets 2 candies and someone's left without candy, and 1 way for us to split the candies equally... 3 + 6 + 1 = 10 - aaron
[2016-11-01 20:25:03] - Of course, I say that having long ago realized that I need to stop underestimating The Donald. There is always a chance he's a bigger fuckwad than we thought, but I'm going to be impressed when that scandal breaks. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 20:23:45] - There's also just the liklihood that more and more dirt will be dug out on her. Again, meanwhile, what more dirt can they possibly dig on Trump? He's pretty close to the worst thing that human being can be and has been definitively shown as such. What new scandal could possibly top what already exists? -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 20:22:45] - a: Sure, every president is. But 1) Trump don't care. 2) Trump supporters don't care. Meanwhile poor Hillary is still playing by the "pretend to be a decent human being" playbook, so she has the decency to occasionally admit being wrong or feeling some shame for her misdeeds. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 17:25:19] - "particularly if she's continued to be dogged by scandals, which of course she will be" can't tell if you were joking or not. why would she be dogged by scandals compared to say trump, or omaba, or w, or whoever? ~a
[2016-11-01 13:24:32] - Xpovos: That's a good point. If Trump can get enough support to win... then I guess who's to say he can't get that same amount of support to win re-election? I just don't know if he would want to bother.
-Paul[2016-11-01 13:18:35] - Meanwhile, Clinton could easily face challenges to her incumbancy from the left and the right, particularly if she's continued to be dogged by scandals, which of course she will be. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 13:14:38] - It's obviously an untestable hypothesis, but I get the feeling that we're far more likely to see 8 years of Trump than we are 8 years of Clinton. Trump is outside of the mainstream, but has a very energized base. If he avoids self-destruction, or world destruction, his inertia could carry him on. -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 13:11:45] - While I still think Clinton can win a second term (not sure the world will survive past one term of Trump), I do wonder if she has the political skills to get stuff done as president. Her husband was able to change his stripes when Republicans took control of congress to work with them. Can Hillary do the same? -Paul
[2016-11-01 12:39:27] - aaron: The NPR interview with him for that album was hilarious. http://www.npr.org/2016/01/19/463589100/comedian-jon-benjamins-jazz-album-is-full-of-real-untapped-un-talent -- Xpovos
[2016-11-01 12:13:11] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS5p4M08jJs h jon benjamin has an entire jazz album where he plays piano, despite not knowing how to play piano - aaron
[2016-11-01 11:56:27] - mig: but i agree with aaron regardless of not being aaron. i don't know if it's my own personal biases, but i think bush's approval rating was pretty low in 2004. ~a
[2016-11-01 11:54:37] - mig: aaron? ~a
[2016-11-01 10:10:58] - a: Bush Jr. didn't come into office hated (though admittedly with controversy). Trump or Clinton will come into office as one of the most despised candidates ever, and I don't see that improving. - mig
[2016-11-01 09:58:53] - mig: eesh i don't know man. if bush jr can be reelected i'm not sure if i'd bet against an incumbent again. i think i've literally never seen a lower presidential approval rating in my lifetime and he still won the reelection. - aaron
[2016-10-31 13:43:42] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/31/donald-trump-warns-that-650-million-immigrants-could-come-to-the-u-s-in-a-week-lets-do-the-math/ ~g
[2016-10-31 12:09:20] - mig: Sure, sounds good (I really need to keep track of all these bets I've made). $20? -Paul
[2016-10-31 11:41:17] - I'll have to figure out odds if it's Trump. Even odds works for Clinton. - mig
[2016-10-31 11:36:43] - mig: So you're looking for somebody who thinks they'll be a two term president? Hmmm... I could easily see Hillary being a two term president. So much inertia towards incumbents. I also think she'll win at this point, so.... maybe? Even odds? -Paul
[2016-10-31 11:30:04] - a longterm bet proposal on a bold prediction of mine - whoever wins next week will be a one-termer. Any takers? - mig
[2016-10-31 10:51:30] - It definitely will look bad for Comey if it ends up they find nothing but at the same time it might have looked even worse if this re-opening of the investigation got leaked (and it almost certainly would have been). - mig
[2016-10-31 10:47:45] - Daniel: Yeah, I can see why it definitely has the appearance of being fishy, with it being so close to the election and there not being clear evidence of what the FBI is looking into, but at the same time, I don't think Clinton should be getting a clear pass just because the election is close. -Paul
[2016-10-31 09:58:37] - I think Clinton breaks 50% on popular vote. I'm not sure how low Trump goes. Depends on how the Johnson / McMullan's of the world do. -Daniel
[2016-10-31 09:56:44] - Everyone seems all crazy about Comey, but I'm not really sure what he was supposed to do. It definitely seems a damned if you do damned if you don't situation for him. -Daniel
[2016-10-30 08:48:14] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-comeys-dangerous-october-surprise/2016/10/29/ee60d4c0-9e08-11e6-b3c9-f662adaa0048_story.html on 2nd thought, maybe we don't love him so much... - mig
[2016-10-30 08:47:30] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/blaming-mr-comey-for-doing-his-job/2016/07/06/7e46eaf6-43b0-11e6-bc99-7d269f8719b1_story.html we love FBI directory Comey, leave him alone! - mig
[2016-10-28 14:54:02] - c=48.4%, t=46.6%, j=3.1% - aaron
[2016-10-28 14:28:42] - paul: I don't know if charges will happen (since it will have to come form DoJ), but I think there's a good chance something really embarrassing pops up again. - mig
[2016-10-28 14:12:27] - mig: That would be great, but that projection has been steadily going down for weeks (months?) and I can't remember the last time a libertarian DIDN'T under-perform, let alone surprisingly over-perform. -Paul
[2016-10-28 13:49:47] - paul: 538 projects Johnson at around 4.9, and I think he overperforms a little over that. - mig
[2016-10-28 13:49:24] - a: Heh, I actually posted that without refreshing, so I hadn't seen your guys' posts yet. -Paul
[2016-10-28 13:43:49] -
~a[2016-10-28 13:43:31] - mig: i don't think paul reads your links. ~a
[2016-10-28 13:41:24] - http://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-re-opening-investigation-into-hillary-private-e-mail-server-2016-10 99% chance that this means absolutely nothing, but how crazy would it be (and strangely fitting for this election) if charges ended up being brought against Clinton days before the election? -Paul
[2016-10-28 13:40:28] - c = 48, t = 46, j = 5, o = 1 - mig
[2016-10-28 13:38:53] - c=50, t=43, j=4. ~a
[2016-10-28 13:37:21] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/fbi-to-conduct-new-investigation-of-emails-from-clintons-private-server/2016/10/28/0b1e9468-9d31-11e6-9980-50913d68eacb_ that's umm ... interesting. - mig
[2016-10-28 13:34:30] - Anybody want to make a bet on what the national popular vote percentages will be? I'm going with 49.5% for Clinton, 47.6% for Trump and 2.1% for Johnson. -Paul
[2016-10-27 16:20:41] - hmmm. yes, i think so. 52% to 42% seems like a double-digit popular vote margin to me. ~a
[2016-10-26 13:14:01] - a: Double digit as a percent? So something like 52% to 42%? -Paul
[2016-10-26 13:07:36] - paul: fivethirtyeight uses "double-digit popular vote margin". and they put hrc's current chances of that at 19% and djt at 0%. ~a
[2016-10-26 11:51:14] - I think Adams support of Trump in general is serious. Not sure how much of this piece is, though. - mig
[2016-10-26 10:30:36] - aaron: Important to define "landslide", because I could see a crazy scenario where Trump does greatly outperform his polling, but I don't see any way he wins huge. -Paul
[2016-10-26 10:29:46] - Daniel: Yeah, and considering the source is somebody who uses comedy, I thought it might be a parody, but I'm not sure it is. -Paul
[2016-10-25 17:30:22] - paul/aaron: "in December 2011 that, if he were president, he would do whatever Bill Clinton advised him to do because that 'would lead to policies that are a sensible middle ground'" vs "on election day, Republicans are far more likely to unholster in an effort to protect their voting rights. Things will get wet fast" this guy is all over the map. ~a
[2016-10-25 16:03:32] - paul: i'll put up $1,000 at 50:1 odds. i think i could stand to part with $1,000 on the off chance that trump either loses, or at least doesn't win *by a landslide* - aaron
[2016-10-25 16:02:21] - paul: "today i put trump’s odds of winning in a landslide back to 98%." can you get a hold of scott adams? sounds like you stand to make a great deal of money with a political bet - aaron
[2016-10-25 16:00:51] - "I endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States because I oppose bullying in all its forms" - Thats one of the craziest things I think I've read. -Daniel
[2016-10-25 15:05:00] - aaron: interesting. ~a
[2016-10-25 15:03:56] - http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152293480726/the-bully-party So... I can't tell if this is parody or not, but it's amusing either way. -Paul
[2016-10-25 14:04:09] - a: yeah, two dimensions. and it's not infinity - aaron
[2016-10-25 13:59:49] - daniel: ok that makes more sense. I dunno. While the intense unfavorability does play a role, I think it's just exasperated by the hardening partisan tribalism that's been going around since like 2000. - mig
[2016-10-25 13:38:12] - mig: meant unfavorability, just typed wrong word. apparently chrome corrects unfavorability to unavailability. maybe thats what i did and just didn't notice? -Daniel
[2016-10-25 12:49:51] - aaron: also i'm guessing based on the word "grid" you're working in two dimensions? ~a
[2016-10-25 12:48:16] - aaron: i'm guessing based on your wording that it's not infinity? ~a
[2016-10-25 12:44:14] - i don't want to spoil the answer but i thought it was mildly interesting (had a 90-minute meeting yesterday) - aaron
[2016-10-25 12:43:42] - next time you're bored in a meeting, try to figure out how many unique ways there are to pattern an infinite grid of Xs and Os that doesn't result in 3-in-a-row, horizontally vertically or diagonally. and see if you can exhaustively prove there's not more than that - aaron
[2016-10-25 12:09:58] - Daniel: And I don't think it's necessarily because of the quality of the third party candidates (Gary Johnson ran last time too). -Paul
[2016-10-25 12:09:30] - Daniel: Yeah, I think I agree that paradoxically, the worse the candidates are, the more compelled people feel to vote for them. Still, it's not like having popular candidates has caused people to vote third party either. Outside of the Perot oddity, this is the longest that Americans have flirted with a third party in a long time. -Paul
[2016-10-25 11:51:42] - The other problem is that while the other parties are just starting their campaigns, the LP pretty much has to work around the clock just trying to get on the ballot. It's pretty criminal that the Greens and the LP still have to work that much just for ballot access. - mig
[2016-10-25 11:49:16] - Unavailability at the debates you mean? - mig
[2016-10-25 11:43:25] - it exists. -Daniel
[2016-10-25 11:43:21] - Paul: I think the unavailability works against 3rd party. Even though you don't agree lots of people have the don't waste my vote argument because they super hate the other side. If both candidates were super popular then people would care less which got elected and would be more able to "throw their vote away". I know you don't agree with that line of thought but
[2016-10-25 11:35:07] - a: Change might come slowly, but these are historically bad candidates in terms of negative perception. When are we going to have another Trump and Clinton running? If people can't wake up and break out of the two party mindset now... then when? -Paul
[2016-10-25 11:26:12] - yeah wow. 19% is crazy high. i guess i remember him being in the debates, but i don't remember him seeming like a smart guy. he actually reminds me a lot of trump without the asshole. ~a
[2016-10-25 11:17:19] - a: Does 1992 count as recent history? Or does that mean post 2000? -Daniel
[2016-10-25 09:40:02] - what's more, even with cnn's poll, fivethirtyeight has gj still at 6% (popular vote). ~a
[2016-10-25 09:37:24] - change comes slowly. i like to look at the positive: almost 10% of likely voters were considering a third party seriously. has that happened in recent history? honestly, i believe we would have kept that 10% if gary hadn't put his foot in his mouth so many times. ~a
[2016-10-24 21:19:42] - http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/24/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-presidential-polls/ Gary Johnson down to 3% in latest CNN poll. Looks like he's finally hit the third party wall where his support disappears by the election. God, this whole two party system thing sucks. -Paul
[2016-10-21 16:00:48] - mig: I hope so, but he seems to have dropped a lot in polls lately. I worry he ends up with something like 2% and only doing marginally better than last year despite all the hope. -Paul
[2016-10-21 15:44:46] - I think he'll have a floor of about 5% nationally. - mig
[2016-10-21 15:42:12] - Any thoughts on the popular vote percentage Johnson gets nationwide? In New Mexico? -Paul
[2016-10-20 13:07:16] - a: -583.41 for me. Should go up if the merger goes through, though. Hopefully. -Paul
[2016-10-20 13:04:16] - i bought some solarcity too! so far, not exactly the best return on my investment (-$150). ~a
[2016-10-20 13:00:36] - a: Hopefully I make more than that in my Tesla and SolarCity stock. -Paul
[2016-10-20 13:00:24] - a: Man, only $10? I lost ten times that amount on stupid Donald Trump and the stupid GOP.
-Paul[2016-10-20 12:48:54] - paul: the tesla model 3 is billed as a "level 5" (which is dubious). it's msrp is over 30k, but i think i may lose this bet in 2018 let alone 2025. ~a
[2016-10-20 12:46:09] - paul: "Sure" ~a
[2016-10-20 12:46:03] - paul: "bet is $10 in bitcoin. you win if there is a level 3 car for sale with a sticker price of 20k or less by 2025-12-18 or sooner. you also win if there is a level 4 car for sale with a sticker price of 30k or less by 2025-12-18 or sooner. i win otherwise. (available for sale in virginia.)" "Sounds like a deal I can accept" "does this count as acceptance?" ~a
[2016-10-20 11:13:27] - aaron: They had me at baby Groot on Rocket's back (alright, they had me well before that). -Paul
[2016-10-20 10:32:05] - a: Heh, what are the specifics of our bet again? -Paul
[2016-10-19 22:35:14] - paul: oh shit. it looks like i might be losing one of our bets. only time will tell, but i'm definitely less confident with my bet all of a sudden. ~a
[2016-10-19 19:02:01] - Yeah ok, that was just an example: replace Virginia with another state. ~a
[2016-10-19 15:09:41] - a: They should say that Trump has pulled out of Virginia so don't worry, he won't win anyway.
-paul[2016-10-19 15:08:25] - mig/paul: ok, another thought i had. example. what if too many virginian republicans come onto balancedrebellion.com and they don't have enough democrats to balance them out. what will the website do? will it be like, nahhh, go ahead and vote for trump, we don't have enough democrats? i somehow doubt the website will ever say this. ~a
[2016-10-19 14:50:12] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WhQcK-Zaok guardians of the galaxy vol. 2 sneak peek - aaron
[2016-10-19 14:31:01] - a: Yeah, that was the first thing I (and Gurkie) thought of. Seems prone to fraud, although I think it's more likely not enough people will use it to be worthwhile. I like the effort (and think it's a genuinely well done video), but I would rather people just get over their obsession with the two parties naturally. -Paul
[2016-10-19 13:07:52] - Paul: I hate Facebook. I saw it when Nithin posted it, but not you. I guess FB thinks I like him better? -- Xpovos
[2016-10-19 13:02:22] - mig: excellent (taps fingers). ~a
[2016-10-19 13:01:33] - a: honor system, i suppose. - mig
[2016-10-19 12:59:55] - http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/10/valve-pushes-back-against-government-threats-over-steam-skin-gambling/ welp, I was wondering when the busybodies were going to start trying to dig their fingers into the steam community market. No mention of Dota 2's market but I suspect that will get roped into this spat as well. - mig
[2016-10-19 12:59:41] - i don't understand balancedrebellion.com. can't i lie about who i said i would vote for? ~a
[2016-10-19 12:56:11] - Funny enough, the video afterwards was Colbert apparently telling young voters not to vote for Johnson.
-Paul[2016-10-19 12:50:21] - Xpovos: I shared that on Facebook a few weeks ago.
-Paul[2016-10-19 12:39:35] - xpovos: it's inventive, and a good counter to the whole - not clinton = pro trump and vice versa. - mig
[2016-10-19 12:29:55] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLAh3pui-CI Probably choir preaching, etc. But still interesting. -- Xpovos
[2016-10-19 12:00:28] - mig: It might be an ad. -Paul
[2016-10-19 11:58:47] - "Government to cease payouts of social security soon" Yeesh, I know yahoo had gone into the "Let's sprawl click-baity shit on our sports site" business but this is getting really ridiculous. - mig
[2016-10-18 15:42:27] - a: I imagine a lot of minorities who feel oppressed love that quote. Libertarians do too.
-Paul[2016-10-18 15:28:48] - paul: bitcoiners love that quote. it's a rephrasing of a quote from nicholas klein. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:21:43] - But it is super frustrating that this year of all years, people are still falling for the whole "You have to vote for X because you can't let Y win" argument, even though that way of thinking has led us to the two major parties nominating these two people. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:21:17] - paul: If you accept the list that Oliver provides are "valuable things government does" as THE UNDISPUTED TRUTH, then sure, you can draw that conclusion. - mig
[2016-10-18 15:19:36] - I guess the good thing is we're apparently on step 3 (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/mahatmagan103630.html). Also, I know that is a mis-attributed quote. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:18:17] - "I'm sure these agencies do a lot of useful things, but we think much of what they do can be cut" or something like that. But then it sounds like he's walking back his support for cutting government drastically. Basically, it's a damned if you do, damned if you don't. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:16:47] - a: Yeah, I don't disagree, especially in this context. I guess I just have more sympathy for careful phrasing because I feel like people are too willing to jump down your throat for making minor mistakes. Take this Gary Johnson thing with the government agencies. He should've carefully phrased it... -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:16:44] - paul: not really paranoid when the intent is that clear. - mig
[2016-10-18 15:14:05] - paul: "designed to sway people away from voting third party" i sadly agree with this. lots of democrats seem to be doing this and it actually kinda makes me mad. on the other hand, i sorta liked the segment because at least it was about the issues. and they're getting press. the buzz is happening. i guess i'm torn honestly. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:11:22] - "careful with their phrasing" more like a dog-whistle. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:10:31] - a: Ugh, that sounded awkward. Basically, if I were a politician, I would use the 2nd phrase 10 times out of 10 because it's so much safer. People can read whatever they want into it. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:09:57] - it was a short segment. he covered a lot of issues and honestly only spent a fraction of the time making fun of their idiosyncrasies. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:09:49] - a: I understand where you are coming from with the vaccine thing, and I do think context matters (ie, it's a little damning that she changed from the former to the latter). However, I do think the second phrasing is fine to me because it just shows somebody being careful with their phrasing. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:08:35] - mig: Because it was clearly designed to sway people away from voting third party. I know that sounds paranoid, but that's how it seems. -Paul
[2016-10-18 15:07:23] - and how do you even not touch on either Stein or Johnson's foreign policy in that segment? - mig
[2016-10-18 15:05:14] - "There's no evidence that autism is caused by vaccines." -> "I'm not aware of evidence linking autism with vaccines." are both of those statements correct? of course. is one of them definitely something i'd never say because it's clearly misleading? of course. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:01:45] - no need to convince me. ~a
[2016-10-18 15:01:43] - a: Not sure I follow. Wasn't her revised language that she wasn't aware of any evidence? That seems pretty non-objectionable to me. Hell, that's probably my stance. I don't think vaccines cause autism because I am not aware of any evidence that it does, but I'm willing to believe evidence might eventually be found. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:59:51] - a: But no, that's totally the same thing as believing that 3 government agencies can be eliminated AND that they might do some good things. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:59:25] - a: Seriously. One person wants to ban all Muslims from immigrating, build a wall with Mexico and brags about sexually assaulting women. Another lied dozens of ways about a blatantly illegal private email server which likely compromised national security and has a sketchy pay-to-play foundation and a list of scandals. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:56:52] - "still came down against the idea of any evidence against the link to autism" i disagree with that sentence. her revised language was intentionally vague and definitely not "against the link". against the idea of any evidence against the link . . . isn't even what you meant i don't think. which is sort of the point. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:56:46] - a: " i don't question people who don't give him the benefit of the doubt" I only question it when the person in question is trying to blow it out of proportion and equate it when all the stuff Trump and Clinton have done. "i don't question you when you don't hear what other people mean" Examples? I'm honestly not sure what you're talking about. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:54:30] - I can't even think of what the "worst" thing he had on Johnson. And yet somehow this gets them lumped in the same category as Trump and Clinton. Not on the same level to me. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:52:39] - with the pretty glaring problems of Trump and Clinton. So Stein softened her language about vaccines to try to appeal to some people. She still came down against the idea of any evidence against the link to autism. She sang in a band? Who cares? -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:51:44] - I don't have the same opinion of Oliver as Miguel (I did really enjoy his Trump piece, and my guess is he's usually funnier and less sanctimonious than this), but I do think he's doing a disservice to his audience (who are probably fairly likely to entertain a third party vote) by trying to equate these minor things... -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:51:43] - paul: you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. which i do as well, and it's why i vote for him. but, i don't question people who don't give him the benefit of the doubt, just like i don't question you when you don't hear what other people mean, and instead focus on what they say. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:50:35] - mig: hmm, well i guess i disagree with that. his show is pretty much the only reason i have hbo. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:49:40] - a: Well, I definitely agree that he didn't express himself well. He never has. I just think it's a bit of a stretch to make it sound like he completely contradicted himself there. It doesn't take much brainpower to figure out what he meant. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:40:50] - a: I think my opinion that Oliver is a shitty comedian and a total fucking sanctimonious blowhard have been hardened some more. - mig
[2016-10-18 14:37:12] - paul: another example of this is, never begin a thesis with "if i could wave a magic wand". you'll eventually end up saying something stupid after that start. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:35:24] - paul: yes and i agree with that too. i just wish that was what johnson had said in those interviews. cherry-picking or not, you have to be careful of every word you say in front of a camera when you're running for president. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:35:23] - a: I don't really see anything contradictory about that at all. I don't even see him disagreeing with himself. It's not a black and white issue where a government agency is either completely worthless or only does good things. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:34:27] - a: But what I believe he means (based on what I've heard and read) is this: 90% of what those agencies do is wasteful and bad and needs to end. However, some of those agencies do some things which are good. Those 10% of things will continue on in other agencies. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:34:00] - honestly, he's a bad politician. which isn't necessarily a bad thing. but it does mean that tv personalities are going to have a lot to make fun of. look at trump, for example. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:33:25] - a: I 100% agree that he provided a terribly vague answer. He's bad on public speaking. Full stop. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:31:27] - maybe he could have argued that those agencies are badly run, and that they need to be overhauled. but to say that they do something of value, and that they do nothing of value, at the same time, that doesn't seem right. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:28:10] - paul: "yes, we would be looking to continue those operations" i mean fuck, he had to have been able to come up with a better response, but in the moment he spit out some shitty responses. ~a
[2016-10-18 14:27:17] - paul: well, wait "Those agencies do these things, so I guess you don't like those things getting done. Burn" except johnson explicitly agreed to that. johnson was (for better or worse) disagreeing with himself! "well gee and golly gosh, you'd have to assume they were doing something that was of value, and . . . yeah if they are doing something of value . . . " ~a
[2016-10-18 14:26:51] - a: I mean, the clip Oliver used showed that GJ didn't want to eliminate all the things those departments do and wanted to preserve some (possibly Pell grants) in other departments. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:26:11] - a: He basically cherry picked some things those agencies do that he thought would sound good to his audience and made it sound like GJ was specifically trying to get rid of those things when in fact there are lots of other things those agencies do that are objectionable that GJ was probably specifically talking about. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:24:42] - a: Again, I understand that a John Oliver audience is probably all for Pell Grants and government subsidized housing and whatever else, but I really don't see how it's like a major knock against GJ for either not supporting those things or having them rolled into other departments. -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:23:14] - a: What defense did he provide for the list of things that he said those three government agencies did? He basically said, "Those agencies do these things, so I guess you don't like those things getting done. Burn!" -Paul
[2016-10-18 14:21:29] - a: Their Q3 results were great on all levels. More US subscribers. More international subscribers. More money. Good guidance. -Paul
[2016-10-18 13:21:51] - http://www.9news.com/news/nation-now/delta-releases-new-statement-after-doctor-accuses-company-of-discrimination/336533168 Can Delta do anything right? -- Xpovos
[2016-10-18 12:59:29] - paul: 100m people are about to vote for a candidate that you consider "disqualified" so your definition of disqualified is clearly broken. ~a
[2016-10-18 12:59:22] - paul: the only thing i thought he did that was unfair was gloss over the good things (things that a leftist like oliver would actively agree with) and focus only on the bad things. i feel like people are quick to jump to what "disqualifies" a candidate for potus, without qualifying that they consider everybody but "their" candidate is disqualified. ~a
[2016-10-18 12:59:16] - paul: "'Gary Johnson doesn't support Pell grants!' and the crowds goes, 'Ooooohhhhh'" i didn't get anything like that from this video. every place he said essentially "this thing is bad" he at least qualified it or explained why it was bad. ~a
[2016-10-18 12:57:01] - paul:
yeah i'm a nflx shareholder. what's the news? why so much money to us today? ~a[2016-10-18 12:53:43] - Great day to be a Netflix shareholder. My portfolio is up 3% on the day.
-Paul[2016-10-18 12:18:48] - aaron: I honestly didn't read much of the article (although I loved the "Barack Obama has now been President for 19 years" quote), but I had to stop watching the GIFs at the end because I started laughing out loud at work.
-Paul[2016-10-18 12:13:12] - a: But the criticism of his proposals, even given that Oliver is a leftist, seemed pretty weak to me. He seemed to rely on the old Jon Stewart trick of just being like, "Gary Johnson doesn't support Pell grants!" and the crowds goes, "Ooooohhhhh". That's not funny OR insightful. That's pandering to your audience. -Paul
[2016-10-18 12:11:52] - a: Obviously I'm biased, but I feel like Gary Johnson's proposals are a lot more solid than Clinton's and obviously tons more solid (and specific) than Trump's. I'll grant you he's weird, and he says goofy things and honestly has trouble expressing himself and defending his positions... -Paul
[2016-10-18 12:11:43] - http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2014/6/3/5772796/nba-y2k-series-finale-the-death-of-basketball simulating an NBA doomsday scenario in NBA Y2K - aaron
[2016-10-18 12:10:21] - a: Followed by a bunch of complaining that he didn't want to get into minutiae about tax code on a CNN town hall and then some hyperbolic statements about proposals falling apart under the "slightest" scrutiny. Uh, which proposals fell apart under scrutiny for either? -Paul
[2016-10-18 12:05:37] - a: Gary Johnson is asked to name a world leader he admires and he has trouble. Bad! Gary Johnson is asked to name 3 government departments that he would eliminate and he does. Bad? I'm confused how that's at all a bad thing. -Paul
[2016-10-18 12:04:55] - a: Ugh, so I'm only about 2/3rds of the way through, but I already kind of hate it. Only one good joke so far (the Paul Krugman one was great) and the rest is just a bunch of super weak attacks (even the ones on Jill Stein). -Paul
[2016-10-18 11:46:22] - a: I haven't watched or even read/heard about this yet. I can imagine how it will go, though. FPtP is the death knell for third parties. All of that said... I voted today. My ballot was atrocious. I had the top of the ticket disaster, of course, but my representative (whom I hate) was running unopposed, and we have two constitutional amendment questions. -- Xpovos
[2016-10-18 10:39:20] - it's got a few funny parts. and he's fair, but very very harsh. i'm curious to what you think though, because, although it hasn't swayed my vote any, it did make me feel a little bit less awesome about my decisions. ~a
[2016-10-18 10:36:20] - a: Is it funny? It sounded a little depressing when I heard about it.
-Paul[2016-10-17 20:59:28] - paul/mig/xpovos: ok, i guess, everybody. . . if you didn't see the john oliver on third parties, it's here ~a
[2016-10-17 11:59:35] - mig: http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/17/utah-poll-shocker-trump-30-mcmullin-29-c Here comes McMullin! -Paul
[2016-10-17 11:51:12] - mig: Without excusing the act at all, I can sympathize with why some are getting really worked up over the idea of a Trump presidency. I'm usually pretty immune to all the claims of "this is the most important election of our lifetimes", but I really do think Trump could be a historically disastrous President. -Paul
[2016-10-17 00:46:26] - http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/north-carolina-gop-office-attacked-229865 some people are taking this electoral cycle a little too super serial. - mig
[2016-10-14 15:10:58] - https://www.predictit.org/Market/2498/What-percentage-of-the-popular-vote-will-Gary-Johnson-win-in-New-Mexico This is my current obsession (and best hope for good news on election day). -Paul
[2016-10-14 13:05:44] - mig: Not sure. It looks like his name has largely been excluded from polls. Virginia has disappointed me many times in the past.
-Paul[2016-10-14 12:59:33] - paul: I think most Virginia republicans would be more inclined to go with Johnson. Does McMullan even register in the polls here? - mig
[2016-10-14 10:56:37] - mig: He's on Virginia's, and I could see him walking away with this election with more votes than Gary Johnson (especially after Trump supposedly pulled out of VA). -Paul
[2016-10-13 16:40:00] - Paul: maybe, but he's not on enough state ballots for that to be a significant worry I think. - mig
[2016-10-13 15:06:56] - mig: I think the saddest (while still being likely) result is that Hillary wins because Trump continues to implode. Except, instead of Gary Johnson (and the Libertarian Party) picking up the feeling Trump voters, McMullin picks them all up so there is really zero things to look forward to in the election.
-Paul[2016-10-13 15:04:39] - a: I went out on a limb in guessing Trump wasn't going to win the Republican nomination. I'm not on a limb anymore. -Paul
[2016-10-13 13:51:41] - Paul, I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Gary Johnson won't win. ~a
prev <-> next