Recent posts
#21
Politics / Re: Opinion: Americans are bu...
Last post by Zeo - October 07, 2024, 03:27:38 AMUnfortunately no.
The main issue here is that this election was deliberately "rigged", mostly by people who have money, to be batshit crazy bullshit.
Kamela shouldn't even be in this horse race. She has no military experience (not abnormal anymore,but was until recently.) She needs a governorship or Cabinet position under her belt, and a house term to be properly qualified. Minimum at least one or the other, and some more time in the Senate. Hell to be frank, she shouldn't even be Vice President by rights! And without Trump she wouldn't be.
She literally has been a Short term Senator and Short term VP. Since Carter, Only Reagan and Trump would be objectively more under qualified then her if elected. (ironically both republicans)
*side note to be fair, Bill Clinton was also somewhat under qualified, but no where NEAR Reagan or Trump, and probably slightly ahead or tied with Harris with a 12 year tenure as a Governor, and was also an Attorney General.
In short:
!!!!*Kamela Harris is -one- of the LEAST qualified candidates in RECENT US HISTORY*!!!!
But as woefully under-qualified as she is, Trump, my god!
Let's just go over why his chances should have been the same as any random non politician, since he put his hat in the ring again, and ANY ONE OF THESE should have ended him. IF Kamela was a man, this would be Game over Coyote
1. The presidency was his FIRST time in the public sector period. no military, no offices, no customer service, no law, no retail, just mismanaging business and having a TV show.
2. He got impeached, No president that has gotten impeached has been re-elected. EVER. *(To be fair, Clinton wasn't eligible to run)
3. He got impeached twice, and it was fairly clear he was going to be removed, but since everyone thought his goose was cooked, they let the fucker slide. This should have ended any other politicians career.
4. He lost a reelection. With the exception of Cleveland, NO ONE comes back from that. Cleveland also won the popular vote and narrowly lost the EC. Trump by no means lost the EC narrowly, even IF HE WON CALIFORNIA, it would not have changed the outcome in the least.
5. Jan 6th
6. Arlington
7. The Ohio pets comment(which may actually cost him Ohio)
A. The ROC is now basically against him, and he's put DeWine in a corner, forcing him to reprimand him. Ohio has also been cost plenty of tax dollars fixing Trump's mouthiness. This is highly uacceeptable, and I hooped Ohio gives him a much deserved slap in the face.
B. There is a forgotten law on the books, which I need to use on some people, that allows you to sue someone for criminal time. Trump has been sued under this law, and is expected to receive an arrest warrant this week for gross public disorder, meanacing, and something akin to a supercharged version of inciting a riot (gross public safety hazard maybe?)
8. 30+ felony convictions and more coming.
9. Clear and utter contempt for, Biblical, Constitutional and established law.
10. "Grab them by the pussy."
11. Backstabbing the LGBT community after wooing them in 2026 (this is a signification reason, possibly THE reason,he lost in 2020).
But he still holds sway, because some people are just that afraid of a woman! And most conservatives that are un or under educated will cut off their noses to spite their faces. From plain out ignoring all mainstream media(because it;s liberal controlled, they're saying it's 100% lies)
AGN discord chat appears to be a good example of this toxic and self defeating conservationism. Anything to "Own the libs" and paint anyone that think Trump's a fucking fool as having "Trump Derangement Syndrome", which is about as real as Santa Claus marrying Easter Bunny in Times Sqaure with Mother Nature as the Priest!
But they are hardly alone in this: The Midwest and South in particular continuously vote to shoot themselves in the foot over issues that barely affect them, just to piss of the "liberal" coasts and are 10-20 years behind the eight ball, and like it that way. This story is old, but it's still true.
People don't care that Trump is an utter failure at the Diplomatic side of the Presidency. His policies are bad enough, but not totally unsurvivable, at least not for 2016-2020. His attitude, leadership, fucking ridiculous legal challenges and general tone he set's for public behavior on the other hand, is DANGEROUS to the continued existence to this country, and like Springfield, often directly destroys the foundations of civilized society.
The main issue here is that this election was deliberately "rigged", mostly by people who have money, to be batshit crazy bullshit.
Kamela shouldn't even be in this horse race. She has no military experience (not abnormal anymore,but was until recently.) She needs a governorship or Cabinet position under her belt, and a house term to be properly qualified. Minimum at least one or the other, and some more time in the Senate. Hell to be frank, she shouldn't even be Vice President by rights! And without Trump she wouldn't be.
She literally has been a Short term Senator and Short term VP. Since Carter, Only Reagan and Trump would be objectively more under qualified then her if elected. (ironically both republicans)
*side note to be fair, Bill Clinton was also somewhat under qualified, but no where NEAR Reagan or Trump, and probably slightly ahead or tied with Harris with a 12 year tenure as a Governor, and was also an Attorney General.
In short:
!!!!*Kamela Harris is -one- of the LEAST qualified candidates in RECENT US HISTORY*!!!!
But as woefully under-qualified as she is, Trump, my god!
Let's just go over why his chances should have been the same as any random non politician, since he put his hat in the ring again, and ANY ONE OF THESE should have ended him. IF Kamela was a man, this would be Game over Coyote
1. The presidency was his FIRST time in the public sector period. no military, no offices, no customer service, no law, no retail, just mismanaging business and having a TV show.
2. He got impeached, No president that has gotten impeached has been re-elected. EVER. *(To be fair, Clinton wasn't eligible to run)
3. He got impeached twice, and it was fairly clear he was going to be removed, but since everyone thought his goose was cooked, they let the fucker slide. This should have ended any other politicians career.
4. He lost a reelection. With the exception of Cleveland, NO ONE comes back from that. Cleveland also won the popular vote and narrowly lost the EC. Trump by no means lost the EC narrowly, even IF HE WON CALIFORNIA, it would not have changed the outcome in the least.
5. Jan 6th
6. Arlington
7. The Ohio pets comment(which may actually cost him Ohio)
A. The ROC is now basically against him, and he's put DeWine in a corner, forcing him to reprimand him. Ohio has also been cost plenty of tax dollars fixing Trump's mouthiness. This is highly uacceeptable, and I hooped Ohio gives him a much deserved slap in the face.
B. There is a forgotten law on the books, which I need to use on some people, that allows you to sue someone for criminal time. Trump has been sued under this law, and is expected to receive an arrest warrant this week for gross public disorder, meanacing, and something akin to a supercharged version of inciting a riot (gross public safety hazard maybe?)
8. 30+ felony convictions and more coming.
9. Clear and utter contempt for, Biblical, Constitutional and established law.
10. "Grab them by the pussy."
11. Backstabbing the LGBT community after wooing them in 2026 (this is a signification reason, possibly THE reason,he lost in 2020).
But he still holds sway, because some people are just that afraid of a woman! And most conservatives that are un or under educated will cut off their noses to spite their faces. From plain out ignoring all mainstream media(because it;s liberal controlled, they're saying it's 100% lies)
AGN discord chat appears to be a good example of this toxic and self defeating conservationism. Anything to "Own the libs" and paint anyone that think Trump's a fucking fool as having "Trump Derangement Syndrome", which is about as real as Santa Claus marrying Easter Bunny in Times Sqaure with Mother Nature as the Priest!
But they are hardly alone in this: The Midwest and South in particular continuously vote to shoot themselves in the foot over issues that barely affect them, just to piss of the "liberal" coasts and are 10-20 years behind the eight ball, and like it that way. This story is old, but it's still true.
People don't care that Trump is an utter failure at the Diplomatic side of the Presidency. His policies are bad enough, but not totally unsurvivable, at least not for 2016-2020. His attitude, leadership, fucking ridiculous legal challenges and general tone he set's for public behavior on the other hand, is DANGEROUS to the continued existence to this country, and like Springfield, often directly destroys the foundations of civilized society.
#22
News / Re: THEMES!!!!!!!
Last post by Zeo - October 07, 2024, 02:02:12 AMoops, apparently maintenance mode disables theme selection. fixed
#23
Politics / Re: Opinion: Americans are bu...
Last post by RetroCheats - October 06, 2024, 05:34:05 AMIsn't trump so hated, the opponent is guaranteed a win?
He was almost shot twice.
He was almost shot twice.
#24
News / Re: THEMES!!!!!!!
Last post by RetroCheats - October 06, 2024, 05:32:51 AMAny way to change themes?
The blue look is kind of nice though
The blue look is kind of nice though
#25
Politics / Opinion: Americans are buying...
Last post by Zeo - October 04, 2024, 04:25:17 PMThis will be short and sweet: Kamela Harris is America's choice via popular vote(and likely by double digits), but that doesn't mean she's won (yet). The Electoral College, hailed as the rural savior, or the Republican Welfare office, depending on who you ask, is harder to convince.
However, when
A. The popular vote is this highly favored.
B. Kamela has had a meteoric rise.
C.Trump has held steady , despite several events that couold have boosted him.
D. Favorbilty polls trounce Trump.
E.the conservatives, even the "moderate" ones like the WSJ and the "other" Cnn, aren't posting polls, and Fox News is deliberately posting out dated reference points.
The only 2 reasons trump is still in the race:
He's a master mud slinger and lier.
He has a penis and she doesn't.
It's clear Kamela's ahead, and only an EC broblock can stop her.
References:
538 pretty much has the only aggregate relatively neutral favorability poll result, and it's held to be the gold standard. (Most other sites have extreme biases or cherry pick) Kamela is TROUNCING trump in favorability, and is pulling ahead in the polls toward that magic number called "margin of error:."
The Guardian And BBC, while also being main stream media and sharing the slant that media has, agree.
Even aljazeera, who's best interests (as in their SURVIVAL in my opinion) lie in Trump winning, by a LONG SHOT, is more optimistic about Harris.
Conservative Fox News never started tracking approval OR poll ratings for Harris after Biden dropped out, because well, A relatively even contest is fine, getting your candidate trounced isn't. Fox news clearly understands this as is they the only track Biden's favorability poll numbers(a self made lame duck).
They know a loser when they see one, and Biden and Trump are peas in that pod. Old news, and should stay that way.
And not surprisingly, all the other conservative sites that discuss polls, have very small samples, and extra ordinary cherry picking. You can blame that on the mainstream media bias if you want, but truth be told, adfontes (and allsides) clearly shows there's not a lot of reliable conservative sites as there are liberal ones. I used the 40 out of 70 facts over opinions rating, which does NOT include Fox News or CNN.
World news today, Christian news network and the Wall Street Journal are as good as it gets, and none of them show polls. This is telling.
But WSJ does have an article saying Kamela's rise is definitely something to be considered.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/kamala-harris-election-2024-fd6ca18b?mod=election2024<---paywall, but necessary to prove the point, and the free title is making that point)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model}
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/aug/23/presidential-polls-kamala-harris-donald-trump-election
https://www.aljazeera.com/us-election-2024
https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls
https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/
However, when
A. The popular vote is this highly favored.
B. Kamela has had a meteoric rise.
C.Trump has held steady , despite several events that couold have boosted him.
D. Favorbilty polls trounce Trump.
E.the conservatives, even the "moderate" ones like the WSJ and the "other" Cnn, aren't posting polls, and Fox News is deliberately posting out dated reference points.
The only 2 reasons trump is still in the race:
He's a master mud slinger and lier.
He has a penis and she doesn't.
It's clear Kamela's ahead, and only an EC broblock can stop her.
References:
538 pretty much has the only aggregate relatively neutral favorability poll result, and it's held to be the gold standard. (Most other sites have extreme biases or cherry pick) Kamela is TROUNCING trump in favorability, and is pulling ahead in the polls toward that magic number called "margin of error:."
The Guardian And BBC, while also being main stream media and sharing the slant that media has, agree.
Even aljazeera, who's best interests (as in their SURVIVAL in my opinion) lie in Trump winning, by a LONG SHOT, is more optimistic about Harris.
Conservative Fox News never started tracking approval OR poll ratings for Harris after Biden dropped out, because well, A relatively even contest is fine, getting your candidate trounced isn't. Fox news clearly understands this as is they the only track Biden's favorability poll numbers(a self made lame duck).
They know a loser when they see one, and Biden and Trump are peas in that pod. Old news, and should stay that way.
And not surprisingly, all the other conservative sites that discuss polls, have very small samples, and extra ordinary cherry picking. You can blame that on the mainstream media bias if you want, but truth be told, adfontes (and allsides) clearly shows there's not a lot of reliable conservative sites as there are liberal ones. I used the 40 out of 70 facts over opinions rating, which does NOT include Fox News or CNN.
World news today, Christian news network and the Wall Street Journal are as good as it gets, and none of them show polls. This is telling.
But WSJ does have an article saying Kamela's rise is definitely something to be considered.
https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy/kamala-harris-election-2024-fd6ca18b?mod=election2024<---paywall, but necessary to prove the point, and the free title is making that point)
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/
https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model}
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/aug/23/presidential-polls-kamala-harris-donald-trump-election
https://www.aljazeera.com/us-election-2024
https://www.foxnews.com/official-polls
https://adfontesmedia.com/interactive-media-bias-chart/
#26
Drawing / new eye tutorial
Last post by Zeo - October 03, 2024, 06:16:26 PM #27
News / THEMES!!!!!!!
Last post by Zeo - October 02, 2024, 12:38:02 PMThemes!
finally there's some to be had, including, but not limited to, THIS one in Dark mode!
Expect an update tomorrow and finally getting the forums back on it's dark gamer mode.
finally there's some to be had, including, but not limited to, THIS one in Dark mode!
Expect an update tomorrow and finally getting the forums back on it's dark gamer mode.
#28
Politics / Editorial: Why polls are misle...
Last post by Zeo - October 01, 2024, 02:27:50 PMThis is a direct data interpretation from a September 2019 poll by New York Times/Sienna college of likely voters, and is solely my opinion.
I am doing something called cross reference polling interpretation, and it does lean toward to who ever wins the most categories wins, but that's it's intent. Voters only have one choice in the ballot box, but these polls have several questions. You can't just say the majority of this poll says T+1, when you as them to vote 3 times, based on criteria you give them. And then weigh them on statistics(which how they do it isn't 100% clear.)
Meanwhile I just simply take each Unique category, and add all the percentages together and average them out.
While I have slight hesitation calling Penn, hence the election, for Kamela, it's only because this is only one poll. I am doing so anyway. I can't see the cross voting going far enough to eat that approximately +6-7 advantage even with the NYT lean. It's over the adjusted normal polling error edge too(normal is 3%, but no year has been normal with Trump), so it would take a somewhat significant shift in fortune toward Trump to change, and it's getting pretty damn late for that. Kamela has gained pretty much the entire cycle, and baring a major fuck up, I don't see that changing.
However it's just a demographics poll of likely voters Sept 19th New York/sienna, with their aggregate being trump 1% ahead. While I disagree with a trump +1 result (keep in mind the NYT polls are considered D+ 1 at least, so them showing a T+1 on this kinda data is them trying very hard to be fair, and not repeat 2016.), it's important to remember, as I noted in my foot notes, issues are just as important, and I found zero good data on that,
Kamela has also picked up like 1-2 points since then(this is the most recent full data set I could find.). Also with Hispanics being counted both in and out of their racial group, this kinda makes a big difference. Which is why we have a "Latino" vote, however to do that correctly, they should be 100% their own race. ( I call this part specifically bad polling.)
Also again I see intent to not underestimate Trump, again, despite the sampling being heavily in his favor by default, as evidenced by the amount of whites polled, and As noted in my disclaimers as well, Hispanics are counted twice (see point 2), as well as education being counted several hodgepodge ways. See point 1.
Despite the high rank of this poll, I find this "deskew" for Trump somewhat aggressive, and am leaving it, because it proves my point even better then if I tried to fix it. While I'm not unqualified to do so, and know how, I am no where near as such as Nate Silver or Professor Litchman, and both explain how to do skew and deskew correctly if interested.
*Disclaimers
1. "with college" education voting data shouldn't be presented ONLY as combined with racial data. An associates degree is important to separate from race, as is not all races are equally represented, and a more then significant amount of people with an associate SHOULD have a BA, save Foreign language gen ed requirements, esp among millennial voters. This is especially true when they have data on what percentile of respondents have some college!
2. Race and heritage are different, I do not approve of the double categorization of Hispanics, or Asians just being part of other.
3. I am an independent, but I am definitely against trump, however I hope my methods show I'm not massaging the numbers.
4. I wanted to includes stances on abortion, immigration, and lgbt as the big topics, but can't find a reliable poll on those to factor in for this election, that doesn't combine these with party affiliations(which are useless to me THIS election) . Its not R vs D, its literally referendum on Trump!
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/
https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
Edited for grammer and punctuation (Capital letters and a coma replaced with a period).
I am doing something called cross reference polling interpretation, and it does lean toward to who ever wins the most categories wins, but that's it's intent. Voters only have one choice in the ballot box, but these polls have several questions. You can't just say the majority of this poll says T+1, when you as them to vote 3 times, based on criteria you give them. And then weigh them on statistics(which how they do it isn't 100% clear.)
Meanwhile I just simply take each Unique category, and add all the percentages together and average them out.
| Trump | Harris | Percentile of responses | Spread | Outside of a 5% margin of error | |
| Under 30 | 37 | 58 | 13 | 21 | TRUE |
| 30-44 | 39 | 45 | 22 | 6 | TRUE |
| 45-64 | 49 | 47 | 33 | 2 | FALSE |
| 65+ | 51 | 44 | 28 | 7 | TRUE |
| men | 54 | 40 | not stated | 14 | TRUE |
| women | 37 | 54 | not stated | 17 | TRUE |
| no college | 56 | 38 | 25* see note 1 | 18 | TRUE |
| 4 year college degree | 35 | 61 | 25* see note 1 | 26 | TRUE |
| black | 15 | 79 | 11 | 64 | TRUE |
| white | 54 | 43 | 67 | 11 | TRUE |
| Asian/Other(as per poll question) | 43 | 46 | 3 | FALSE | |
| Hispanic | 51 | 39 | 12 | TRUE | |
| Final result raw | 43.42% | 49.50% | 6.08% | TRUE | |
| final result without double counting Hispanics (toggling the "Hispanic" row since they are also considered white or black) | |||||
| Final result adjusted | 43.73% | 50.75% | 7.73% | TRUE |
While I have slight hesitation calling Penn, hence the election, for Kamela, it's only because this is only one poll. I am doing so anyway. I can't see the cross voting going far enough to eat that approximately +6-7 advantage even with the NYT lean. It's over the adjusted normal polling error edge too(normal is 3%, but no year has been normal with Trump), so it would take a somewhat significant shift in fortune toward Trump to change, and it's getting pretty damn late for that. Kamela has gained pretty much the entire cycle, and baring a major fuck up, I don't see that changing.
However it's just a demographics poll of likely voters Sept 19th New York/sienna, with their aggregate being trump 1% ahead. While I disagree with a trump +1 result (keep in mind the NYT polls are considered D+ 1 at least, so them showing a T+1 on this kinda data is them trying very hard to be fair, and not repeat 2016.), it's important to remember, as I noted in my foot notes, issues are just as important, and I found zero good data on that,
Kamela has also picked up like 1-2 points since then(this is the most recent full data set I could find.). Also with Hispanics being counted both in and out of their racial group, this kinda makes a big difference. Which is why we have a "Latino" vote, however to do that correctly, they should be 100% their own race. ( I call this part specifically bad polling.)
Also again I see intent to not underestimate Trump, again, despite the sampling being heavily in his favor by default, as evidenced by the amount of whites polled, and As noted in my disclaimers as well, Hispanics are counted twice (see point 2), as well as education being counted several hodgepodge ways. See point 1.
Despite the high rank of this poll, I find this "deskew" for Trump somewhat aggressive, and am leaving it, because it proves my point even better then if I tried to fix it. While I'm not unqualified to do so, and know how, I am no where near as such as Nate Silver or Professor Litchman, and both explain how to do skew and deskew correctly if interested.
*Disclaimers
1. "with college" education voting data shouldn't be presented ONLY as combined with racial data. An associates degree is important to separate from race, as is not all races are equally represented, and a more then significant amount of people with an associate SHOULD have a BA, save Foreign language gen ed requirements, esp among millennial voters. This is especially true when they have data on what percentile of respondents have some college!
2. Race and heritage are different, I do not approve of the double categorization of Hispanics, or Asians just being part of other.
3. I am an independent, but I am definitely against trump, however I hope my methods show I'm not massaging the numbers.
4. I wanted to includes stances on abortion, immigration, and lgbt as the big topics, but can't find a reliable poll on those to factor in for this election, that doesn't combine these with party affiliations(which are useless to me THIS election) . Its not R vs D, its literally referendum on Trump!
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/
https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model
Edited for grammer and punctuation (Capital letters and a coma replaced with a period).
#29
Fox News is a credible source, if fact checked. Actually fact check everything, but FN is of special note.
DO:
-post about what you do and don't like policy wise.
-Post about a candidates character
-Aggregate opinions
-Format your posts as below
Do NOT:
-post untrue topics, fact check yourself.
-post or copy any pay walled article, (With dependency on it's paywalled contents.) Find an open one. Pay walled articles are often VERY biased, and can't be reviewed by staff here.
-refuse to accept credible sources because you think the main stream media is biased. We all know most mainstream media has a slight left lean, that doesn't mean it's "fake news".
-Post editorials and opinion blogs as facts.
-Post any opinion or link to any opinion that endorses "*insert name here* Derangement Syndrome"- instant BAN
-insult or dismiss an opinion as invalid just because it's a Accumulation of facts, not the exact smoking gun you want.
Post labeling:
"NEWS: News post! READ ME!" these must be linked and fact check linked at the bottom.
"Opinion: This is my opinion." These must not be deliberately or over offensive. They do not HAVE to be fact checked,but it's a good idea that you do when available.
"Editorial: This is an interpretation of someone else's article or site." These must follow the same criteria as news, Link to the editorial and fact check on the topic, if available.
"Date Dump: Data" Just data, no explanations. fact check and linked.
examples
"News! Litchman calls election for Harris!"
Opinion: "Nate Silver is leaning too far right to avoid repeat of 2016 blunder."
"Editorial: Why poll rankings suck(hint: It has:nothing to do with Nate Silve'sr or 538's criteria.)
"Data dump: Copy of Litchman's keys"
DO:
-post about what you do and don't like policy wise.
-Post about a candidates character
-Aggregate opinions
-Format your posts as below
Do NOT:
-post untrue topics, fact check yourself.
-post or copy any pay walled article, (With dependency on it's paywalled contents.) Find an open one. Pay walled articles are often VERY biased, and can't be reviewed by staff here.
-refuse to accept credible sources because you think the main stream media is biased. We all know most mainstream media has a slight left lean, that doesn't mean it's "fake news".
-Post editorials and opinion blogs as facts.
-Post any opinion or link to any opinion that endorses "*insert name here* Derangement Syndrome"- instant BAN
-insult or dismiss an opinion as invalid just because it's a Accumulation of facts, not the exact smoking gun you want.
Post labeling:
"NEWS: News post! READ ME!" these must be linked and fact check linked at the bottom.
"Opinion: This is my opinion." These must not be deliberately or over offensive. They do not HAVE to be fact checked,but it's a good idea that you do when available.
"Editorial: This is an interpretation of someone else's article or site." These must follow the same criteria as news, Link to the editorial and fact check on the topic, if available.
"Date Dump: Data" Just data, no explanations. fact check and linked.
examples
"News! Litchman calls election for Harris!"
Opinion: "Nate Silver is leaning too far right to avoid repeat of 2016 blunder."
"Editorial: Why poll rankings suck(hint: It has:nothing to do with Nate Silve'sr or 538's criteria.)
"Data dump: Copy of Litchman's keys"
#30
GU Fighter / Re: Tech Support questions
Last post by Zeo - October 01, 2024, 12:54:39 PMi concur, but his call.