Advertisement

Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Recently Flagged Comments

Recently flagged comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

Deadfool the Blind.

www.cnbc.com

btw... Pls don't try to grok the thread article; I wouldn't want to be responsible for your 'brain' exploding from the effort.

Here is a love letter for boaz:

Kamala Harris is hard to avoid in North Carolina these days. Turn on your TV and there she is (except when Donald Trump is on instead). On the radio: Kamala. Switch to Spotify if you want, but you'll get Kamala ads there too. It's enough to make you want to get out of the house and drive somewhere, but that's only going to take you past a parade of Kamala billboards. You might even find yourself passing a Harris-Walz field office.

This makes sense. North Carolina is a key swing state in the election. Harris can win without it, but Trump probably cannot. In 2020, it gave Trump his narrowest victory, with a margin of fewer than 75,000 votes. Harris; Trump; their respective running mates, Tim Walz and J. D. Vance; and a host of surrogates have made many visits to the state and plan to keep coming right up until Election Day. Both campaigns are blanketing the airwaves.

You're most welcome, boaz.

"Shrimpbrain is funny." -

#17 | Posted by Angrydad

Notice how shrimptacodan* writes like "bushlover2/afkabl2/"babbles" who, at his advanced age, finally earned his GED!!!

* shrimptacodan has me plonked. Would someone be so kind as to let him/her know that while he/she cannot see my posts (head in the sand, if you will) I can still see his/her posts, and he/she cannot see my retort.

Thank you.

God, I hope so:

From Letters from an American:

Yesterday, in Time magazine, Eric Cortellessa explained that the electoral strategy of the Trump campaign was to get men who don't usually vote, particularly young ones, to turn out for Trump. If they could do that, and at the same time hold steady the support of white women, Trump could win the election. So Trump has focused on podcasts followed by young men and on imitating the patterns of professional wrestling performances. . . .

Rather than keeping women in his camp, Trump's strategy of reaching out to his base to turn out low-propensity voters, especially young men, has alienated them. That alienation has come on top of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision that overturned Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that recognized the constitutional right to abortion.

Early voting in Pennsylvania showed that women sent in 56% of the early ballots, compared to 43% for men. Seniors--people who remember a time before Roe v. Wade--also showed a significant split. Although the parties had similar numbers of registrants, nearly 59% of those over 65 voting early were Democrats. That pattern holds across all the battleground states: women's early voting outpaces men's by about 10 points. While those numbers are certainly not definitive--no one knows how these people voted, and much could change over the next few days--the enthusiasm of those two groups was notable....

In Flagstaff, Arizona, today, Democratic presidential candidate and Minnesota governor Tim Walz told a crowd: "I kind of have a feeling that women all across this country, from every walk of life, from either party, are going to send a loud and clear message to Donald Trump next Tuesday, November 5, whether he likes it or not."

heathercoxrichardson.substack.com

Vote to End the Trump Era

You already know Donald Trump. He is unfit to lead. Watch him. Listen to those who know him best. He tried to subvert an election and remains a threat to democracy. He helped overturn Roe, with terrible consequences. Mr. Trump's corruption and lawlessness go beyond elections: It's his whole ethos. He lies without limit. If he's re-elected, the G.O.P. won't restrain him. Mr. Trump will use the government to go after opponents. He will pursue a cruel policy of mass deportations. He will wreak havoc on the poor, the middle class and employers. Another Trump term will damage the climate, shatter alliances and strengthen autocrats. Americans should demand better. Vote.

Based on a binomial distribution - which assumes that all polls are independent of one another, which theoretically they should be - it's realllllllllllllly unlikely. Specifically, the odds are 1 in 9.5 trillion against at least this many polls showing such a close margin.

This is a clear-as-day example of what we call herding: the tendency of some polling firms to move with the flock by file-drawering (not publishing) results that don't match the consensus or torturing their turnout models until they do.

In this election, the incentives are doubly bad, because the polling averages in the swing states are close to zero - so a pollster can both herd toward the consensus and avoid taking a stand that there's a ~50/50 chance they'll later be criticized for by publishing a steady stream of Harris +1s, Trump +1s and ties. Lately, a lot of national polls have also shown near-ties after usually showing Harris leads earlier in the race. We wonder if there's been an increasing amount of herding there too, perhaps involving the use and abuse of likely voter models - national polls have tightened and moved toward Trump considerably more than state polls have become Trumpier over the past month, except in Nevada and Florida.

All of this herding - and hedging - increases my concern about another systematic polling error. It might be an error in Trump's favor again, but it won't necessarily be: pollsters may be terrified of showing Harris leads after two cycles of missing low on Trump, and they probably won't be criticized too much for a Harris +1 or even a Trump +1 if she wins in Michigan by, say, 3 or 4 points.

Just a little peek 'behind the numbers' of the polling in this presidential race. Not necessarily predictive, simply informative for us political geeks keeping track of the process as much as we do the candidates.

In 60 or so hours, none of this will matter anymore except as ground for forensic examinations of the pollsters based on the accuracy - or lack thereof - of their work.

It's up to us, the voters to show up - if you haven't already voted - and make your individual voice heard amongst the tens upon tens of millions of fellow Americans in deciding the type of future you want this nation to have and particularly whom you want to see representing us as elected representatives for the next 2/4/6 years. VOTE!

Another aspect of stop and frisk ...

Stop-and-frisk in New York City
en.wikipedia.org

... In 2016, a reported 12,404 stops were made under the stop-and-frisk program. The stop-and-frisk program has previously taken place on a much wider scale. Between 2003 and 2013, over 100,000 stops were made per year, with 685,724 people being stopped at the height of the program in 2011.[1][2]

The program also became the subject of a racial-profiling controversy. Ninety percent of those stopped in 2017 were African-American or Latino, mostly aged 14"24. [3] By contrast, 54.1% of the population of New York City in 2010 was African-American or Latino;[4] however, 74.4% of individuals arrested overall were of those two racial groups.[5]

Research shows that "persons of African and Hispanic descent were stopped more frequently than whites, even after controlling for precinct variability and race-specific estimates of crime participation."[6] ...


@#28 ... Can't you read you askhole goof? I already give you solutions how to solve it in #25. I am done with you. ...

Yes, I can read.

And my reading tells me that your current alias seems to want to attack the problem, and not solve the cause of that problem.

From your current alias' #25, which it seems to be so proud of ...

... Step 1 would be to actually enforce the law in deep blue -------- cities. Stop and Frisk in NYC worked wonders. Second would be locking up gun violence offenders for way longer sentences so they are not able to re-offend. 3-strike laws had a huge positive influence in making the cities safe. Third, we could enforce the border to finally tackle our drug problem and the violence that goes with it. Forth, we could turn back 60 years of Democrat policies which encouraged black women to have kids without a father around to raise the kid. So, those are some normal solutions that don't involve stripping the rights away from law-abiding people. ...

All that seems to be attacking the symptom (a symptom that seems to have been discerned in a politically racist view, but I digress).

So, I will ask once again ...

How does your current alias propose to resolve the problems it cites?

For starters...

... Stop and Frisk in NYC worked wonders. ...

NYPD's Infamous Stop-and-Frisk Policy Found Unconstitutional (2013)
civilrights.org

... In a decision announced last week, a federal judge found the New York City Police Department's "Stop-and-Frisk" policy unconstitutional. ...

So... your current alias seems to agree with fmr Pres Trump when he says he may want to terminate the rule of the Constitution?


Trump rebuked for call to terminate' Constitution over 2020 election results (2022)
www.pbs.org

... Former President Donald Trump faced rebuke Sunday from officials in both parties after calling for the "termination" of parts of the Constitution over his lie that the 2020 election was stolen. ...


"@#20 ... Because as the data clearly points out, we have a racial/cultural problem. ...
Thank-you for admitting that."

I said we had a culture problem from my very first post moron.

"And, now can we get back to the question I have been intimating? ...
Why do we have a racial/cultural problem?"

Why do you think? Why do blacks shoot and murder people at rates multitudes higher than whites?

"It is easy to highlight a problem.
Symptoms are obvious. Solutions, more difficult."

Well, the first step to a solution is admitting that we have a problem. Do you now want to admit this is a problem in black American almost exclusively?

"So, how does your current alias propose we resolve that racial/cultural problem?"

Step 1 would be to actually enforce the law in deep blue -------- cities. Stop and Frisk in NYC worked wonders. Second would be locking up gun violence offenders for way longer sentences so they are not able to re-offend. 3-strike laws had a huge positive influence in making the cities safe. Third, we could enforce the border to finally tackle our drug problem and the violence that goes with it. Forth, we could turn back 60 years of Democrat policies which encouraged black women to have kids without a father around to raise the kid. So, those are some normal solutions that don't involve stripping the rights away from law-abiding people.

"What should we do differently to find a solution to the racial/cultural problem your current alias highlights?
#23 | Posted by LampLighter"

I would also think deporting Obama would make a huge positive step.

"The FBI crime statistics and other reputable studies show that the vast majority of homicides are intraracial, not interracial as suggested."

That was NEVER SUGGESTED by anything I wrote above. I spoke about the homicide rates for black males and black females being much higher than every other ethnic/gender pair. The only comment I made on the victims was that it was mainly Democrats killing Democrats. Given most of these killings occur in deep blue -------- cities, it is usually black Democrat killing black Democrat.

"The claim about Black-on-white crime rates is not supported by evidence. FBI data from 2019 shows that of white victims, about 17% were killed by Black offenders, not the 81% claimed."

No such claim was ever made. However, if you actually want to inform people, why don't you tell us of number of incidents of white perpetrator / black victim in the case of the rape and then the inverse?

"It's also important to note that various socioeconomic factors influence crime statistics and should not be used to make broad generalizations about racial groups or political affiliations."

Sure they do. Which is why murder rate in the US is almost 100% correlated with the % of black population by county.

"IOW, your reality does not align with the evidence and data in the real world.
#10 | Posted by rstybeach11"

Nothing you posted addressed a single claim I made in my original posting. So, let's test the claims and you can then prove me wrong:

What is the per capita murder rate for black males?
What is the per capita murder rate for black females?
What is the per capita murder rate for white males?

Please, bring actual data to the discussion.

Nate Silver: There's more herding in swing state polls than at a sheep farm in the Scottish Highlands

In our database as of this afternoon's model run, there were 249 polls in the seven battleground states that met Silver Bulletin standards and did at least some of their fieldwork in October. How many of them showed the race in either direction within 2.5 percentage points, close enough that you could basically call it a tie?

Well, 193 of them did, or 78 percent. That's way more than you should get in theory - even if the candidates are actually exactly tied in all seven states, which they almost certainly aren't.

Based on a binomial distribution - which assumes that all polls are independent of one another, which theoretically they should be - it's realllllllllllllly unlikely. Specifically, the odds are 1 in 9.5 trillion against at least this many polls showing such a close margin.

The problems are most acute in Wisconsin, where there have been major polling errors in the past and pollsters seem terrified of going out on a limb. There, 33 of 36 polls - more than 90 percent - have had the race within 2.5 points. In theory, there's just a 1 in 2.8 million chance that so many polls would show the Badger State so close.

... A new Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll "shows Vice President Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump 47% to 44% ...

2024 Iowa: Multi-Candidate
www.realclearpolling.com

...
Des Moines Register 10/28 - 10/31 Harris +3
Des Moines Register 9/8 - 9/11 Trump +4
...

That's a 7-point swing, some of that may be due to RFK Jr losing 3 points.

Not a good trend for fmr Pres Trump.


x.com

Lyz Lenz
@lyzl
People want to know how Iowa could swing towards Harris, when the state has been solidly red for so long and let me tell you, as someone who lives here & writes about this state. It's the abortion ban. Women are furious.

Shock Iowa Poll Shows Harris With Lead Over Trump

The poll, sponsored by the Des Moines Register and conducted by J. Ann Selzer, nailed the final results of the presidential race in Iowa in both 2016 and 2020. While Iowa is no longer considered a swing state and rewards only six electoral voters, the Register survey remains closely watched as an indicator of how white voters across the Midwest may vote.

The poll found Harris earning 47 percent of the vote to 44 percent for Trump.

"It's hard for anybody to say they saw this coming," Selzer told the newspaper. "She has clearly leaped into a leading position."

Selzer and the Register surveyed 808 likely Iowa voters from Oct. 28 to Oct. 31. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.4 percentage points.

www.huffpost.com

This is friggin' incredible. Iowa isn't even a swing state and at worst (considering the MOE) Harris is in a dead heat with Trump 48 hours from Election Day. Hans wants a prediction and I've been loathe to jinx it, but this news confirms what I feel: Women are going to defeat Trump beyond any point of argument, while the GOP nationally will see unprecedented defeats of candidates they thought were bulletproof.

And Donnie will become a sentenced felon in a matter of days after his crushing defeat. What a way to end the year! Happy Roevember everybody.

#23 | Posted by AmericanUnity at 2024-11-02 06:46 PM | Reply | Flag: Insightful

Another view...

Trump's anxiety builds with Election Day in sight
www.axios.com

... Donald Trump's team is projecting confidence in the days before what looks to be a coin-flip election, but Trump is anxious, asking more questions about his status and demanding more work from his aides, a campaign official close to him tells Axios.

Why it matters: Trump's restlessness has helped shape his recent strategy, from flashy rallies and media stunts " which he enjoys " to headline-making allegations of voter fraud, his pet obsession.

Zoom in: Trump was boosted Thursday by an internal memo from Tony Fabrizio, the chief pollster for all three of Trump's presidential campaigns, that said Trump is in a better position to win this election than he was at this time in 2020.

- - - But beneath the surface, Trump's anxiety is evident in his late-night and early morning calls to aides in which he peppers them with questions on how things are going " and whether they think he'll win. ...


#18 | Posted by Corky at 2024-11-02 05:58 PM | Reply | Flag: Amazingly Newsworthy

Thank you for posting that, Corky.

About 77 hours left: What's your prediction?

"If it's So Great why do so many people say it's Not?"

#3 | Posted by Effeteposer

Perhaps it will always be a mystery to you, Effeteposer.

I cannot imagine the mental pain it doesn't cause you.

www.dementia.org.au

Living with dementia

Mood and behaviour changes

Disinhibition

Inhibitions are the self-control mechanisms we all have that stop us doing things that break the rules of our society.

If someone close to you has dementia, you might notice that they stop following these social rules and behave in a way that's very out of character for them.

This is called disinhibition, and it can look like:

rude, tactless or hurtful comments
sexual comments or inappropriate flirting
undressing in public places
touching their -------- in public
impulsive actions, like dangerous driving.

Advertisement

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable