Closed Thread
Page 1369 of 1501 FirstFirst ... 369 869 1269 1319 1359 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1379 1419 1469 ... LastLast
Results 34,201 to 34,225 of 37508

Thread: Election 2016

  1. #34201

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    Discussion of the popular vote remains a stupid argument, but that doesn't seem to stop any of Hillary's supporters from using it.


    But, I don't think you can trumpet that she "handily" won the popular vote, when one single state yielded the entirety of the differential. You might find that observation to be stupid. I think it's relevant. The majority of voters in thirty states voted for Trump.
    What difference does it make what state people choose to live in? Californians are just as much a part of the country as Iowans or Texans or anyone else.

  2. #34202

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ojo View Post
    This election was an unfortunate display of the Dunning-Kruger effect where you have a collection of white folks in crap jobs hoping a rich business man whisks them away to a better place. It's born from the same trappings of anosognosia...And it's no irony a particular segment of white society (devout) that fell for it.
    Poll results show that some segments of the minority community fell for it as well, more so than in some previous years.


  3. #34203

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    Discussion of the popular vote remains a stupid argument, but that doesn't seem to stop any of Hillary's supporters from using it.
    No, discussion of what it *means* is important. Those are citizens expressing their political will. It's not a sporting event that ends on the score, despite Trump holding what is essentially a parade for just his voters, he has to govern *all* of us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    But, I don't think you can trumpet that she "handily" won the popular vote, when one single state yielded the entirety of the differential. You might find that observation to be stupid. I think it's relevant. The majority of voters in thirty states voted for Trump.
    That state exists, and it's filled with citizens. And it's a major economic engine for the country.

  4. #34204
    NYYF Legend

    ojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Girardi's reprieve...

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by jcarey View Post
    Poll results show that some segments of the minority community fell for it as well, more so than in some previous years.
    I don't doubt it. But the message from the populist was targeted to frustrated whites.

  5. #34205

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Gregorius Chant View Post
    I can't support my weakass arguments so...


  6. #34206
    Let's go Rangers! RhodyYanksFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    lil'rhody

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    Discussion of the popular vote remains a stupid argument, but that doesn't seem to stop any of Hillary's supporters from using it.


    But, I don't think you can trumpet that she "handily" won the popular vote, when one single state yielded the entirety of the differential. You might find that observation to be stupid. I think it's relevant. The majority of voters in thirty states voted for Trump.
    California has 39,155,000 people. That's 12.5% of the entire US population. Why exactly should their vote be discounted?

    So by your logic states matter when they're small (as you've repeatedly touted how the EC protects small states) but don't when they're large. Aren't we all Americans?

  7. #34207
    NYYF Legend

    Yankee Tripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Left coast

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    She won California handily. If you look at the entirety of the national vote outside of California, Trump had more votes than Hillary.
    1 out of every 8 Americans lives in the state of California.

    The population of California is more than any two states combined if you don't include Texas.
    Baseball is life;
    the rest is just details.

  8. #34208

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ojo View Post
    I don't doubt it. But the message from the populist was targeted to frustrated whites.
    For sure. I guess time will tell what the other data means.



  9. #34209
    NYYF Legend

    Yankee Tripper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Left coast

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    Discussion of the popular vote remains a stupid argument, but that doesn't seem to stop any of Hillary's supporters from using it.


    But, I don't think you can trumpet that she "handily" won the popular vote, when one single state yielded the entirety of the differential. You might find that observation to be stupid. I think it's relevant. The majority of voters in thirty states voted for Trump.
    Of those 30 states how many had a non-white population over 30%

    I honestly don't know I'm asking a legitimate question.

    I believe California is one of the few states in the union where Whites are less than 50% of the population. Whites are still a plurality in CA just no longer a majority.
    Baseball is life;
    the rest is just details.

  10. #34210
    Rawger in Jawge's Bawx ArodEra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ojo View Post
    Impeached or assassinated. Take your pick.
    My pick would be for you to get permanently banned. You should thank your lucky stars that Maynerd has been so good and forgiving.



  11. #34211

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    She won California handily. If you look at the entirety of the national vote outside of California, Trump had more votes than Hillary.
    Not to pile on, but I don't see how that matters either.


  12. #34212

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ArodEra View Post
    My pick would be for you to get permanently banned. You should thank your lucky stars that Maynerd has been so good and forgiving.

  13. #34213
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by jcarey View Post
    Not sure who you're quoting here.
    It's a lot easier to "win" an argument when you make up both sides.

  14. #34214
    Rawger in Jawge's Bawx ArodEra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Gregorius Chant View Post
    Boring and predictable as usual. Time to come up with a new persona, Slappy.



  15. #34215

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    It's a lot easier to "win" an argument when you make up both sides.
    Given that, you'd think his W-L record would be better.


  16. #34216

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by Maynerd View Post
    She won California handily. If you look at the entirety of the national vote outside of California, Trump had more votes than Hillary.
    Graphical representation:

    14096de8fe1c42b682fb09ee8c49ef37.jpg
    Hideki Matsui is capable of anything

  17. #34217

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ArodEra View Post
    Boring and predictable as usual. Time to come up with a new persona, Slappy.
    Duly noted.

  18. #34218
    Let's go Rangers! RhodyYanksFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    lil'rhody

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by NerfBall55 View Post
    Let's have fun with this "fact" you just posted.

    Assuming you're using the article GC posted, we can take this:

    Out of a subset of 1,011 people, 29% were shown to believe Trump won the general election. So that narrows the sample of people who actually believed this down to 293 people total, with the 293 being a mix of Republicans, Democrats, Independents and (guessing) something else. Of that subset, 52% of the Rebublicans in that subset think Trump won the general election.

    But the title of the article is:
    But, by the polls own words, it's 52% of the 29% who are Republicans who actually believe this happened, not 52% of Republicans.

    Even if the whole 293 were Republicans (which they're not, since it referenced the % of Democrats, Independents and possibly "other") the total that actually believed this would be a whopping 152 people, but we know it's less.

    But that's not stopping you from now taking the headline as a fact, applying it to all Trump voters, and assuming it's true.

    This would be no different if I took the following youtube clip, and said it was a fact that all Obama voters thought he was going to cover their gas and mortgage expenses.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

    While I admit it will be enjoyable for me to watch you ride this continued meltdown wave and poke fun at it, your pre-election post history suggests you're better than this.
    OK you got me. I'm big enough to admit. I didn't read into it, just went off the headline about 52%.

    Still doesn't change my mind (actually it kinda proves my point) that Trump rode in on a wave of ignorance and fake news (and racism and xenophobia) which was more easily digested than wonky policy details in this election.

  19. #34219

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by NerfBall55 View Post
    Graphical representation:

    Attachment 22928


  20. #34220
    Let's go Rangers! RhodyYanksFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    lil'rhody

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by NerfBall55 View Post
    Graphical representation:

    Attachment 22928
    A good chunk of "Trumpland" is counties the size of Rhode Island who have 1500 people living there and 800 of those 1500 voted for Trump.

    Any way you look at it, we're one nation, and "Clinton Archipelago" has more Americans than "Trumpland".

  21. #34221
    NYYF Legend

    theDurk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Basking Ridge, NJ

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by JL25and3 View Post
    Maynerd, you make it sound as if previous EPA directors have seen it as their job to dream up an ideal environment and try to regulate their way there. In fact, "implementing laws passed by Congress" is exactly what they do. The Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act set mandates that are both broad and specific for the EPA to clean up - and keep clean - our air and water. And the way they do that, according to the law, is to promulgate regulations. That's not all they do - set up pilot projects, do research, and so on - but, basically, the law requires the EPA director to regulate, regulate, regulate.

    Nowhere in those laws is the director charged with preventing bureaucratic overreach. You just made that up as part of the job description because that's how you'd like it to be. It doesn't say that in the Constitution, either. It says the executive branch is supposed to execute the laws, which is what the EPA does. As for enumerated powers, (a) your problem is with Congress, not the EPA, and (b) I can't think of much of anything that falls more squarely under "promote the general welfare" than breathable air and drinkable water. I can't think of much that's more purely interstate than air and water, either. Illinois can't set its own air standards if Gary, Indiana is buried under a cloud of smog, or its own water standards if Green Bay is dumping poisons into Lake Michigan.

    If Pruitt was fighting against bureaucratic overreach, it was entirely imaginary overreach, or some court somewhere probably would have agreed with him on some point, sometime. It seems more likely that he's hiding behind a pretend principle in order to obstruct the EPA and let Oklahoma businesses run amuck. Which is OK, I guess, as long as the air and the ozone layer and the climate and the rivers and the water table stay entirely inside Oklahoma and don't affect any of the other states.
    I'm a little late on this, but there is plenty to take issue with here. It is true that the prevention of bureaucratic overreach is not part of the formal responsibility of the regulator. That said, it does not mean that regulators should have open license to paralyze the industries they regulate (and EPA regulates virtually everyone, including me), because eventually there are political consequences. It's called pushback.

    The fact that anything is theoretically in favor of a single lofty goal, does not mean it should be done. It would be far simpler to simply shut down every single point of air and fluid emissions and deliver a pristine environment with zero economic activity.

    You argue that it is the job of the regulator to regulate. So it is. There is enormous discretion in how that regulator regulates. I have babysat a federal act from first house Bill to final regulation promulgation and program implementation. There is an enormous latitude in the possible impacts of different sets of regulations all of which could be said to be within the discretionary range allowed by the act.

    How do regulators regulate stuff like this? They set standards. They set timelines. They tell people to report their emissions. They tell them to submit plans for meeting the standards. Then they revise the plans. Then they follow-up on the plans. At every stage, there is huge latitude in both degree and timing to balance the negative impact of compliance with the benefit. THIS is what regulators do. It's balance, balance, balance--not regulate, regulate, regulate, otherwise activity comes to a stop. Every administrator recognizes this, even if it not per se part of their legal charge. That's why you have this elaborate comment process. I got to travel around the country holding hearings where we got to listen to everyone complain about the regs I helped write and the purpose is to incorporate the comments as best we could while fulfilling our legal mandate. Fun times.

    So I agree with the thrust of Maynerd's statement, even if the formal language is not exact.
    "Deep to left! Yastrzemski will not get it! It's a home run! A three-run homer by Bucky Dent! And the Yankees now lead by a score of 3-2!" - New York Yankees announcer Bill White (October 2, 1978)

  22. #34222
    Get Off My Lawn. Maynerd's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Colorado Springs

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by RhodyYanksFan View Post
    California has 39,155,000 people. That's 12.5% of the entire US population. Why exactly should their vote be discounted?

    So by your logic states matter when they're small (as you've repeatedly touted how the EC protects small states) but don't when they're large. Aren't we all Americans?
    I'm not suggesting we discount the voters in California. I'm just stating that there's as much merit in pointing out Trump won the popular vote outside this state as there is in trumpeting Hillary's popular vote lead. Neither is relevant, as far as how we select a President.


    But when her supporters insist on throwing out the fact that "OMG, SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE BY ALMOST THREE MILLION VOTES!!!!!", isn't it relevant that Trump won the non-California popular vote by over a million votes?


    We count votes in all sorts of demographic categories. By race, by age, by gender, by level of education. None of these are relevant to which candidate won, but they make for effective talking points. I bring up that a block of 49 states went for Trump over Hillary, and find this to be an equally effective talking point, and it's dismissed as "stupid."


    Isn't it equally stupid to attribute Trump's victory to the uneducated? Doesn't that marginalize the educated voter? Isn't it equally stupid to attribute Trump's victory to racist voters? Doesn't that marginalize the non-racist voters? The non-Californian subset of our population amounts to 87.5% of the country. Isn't that significant? Well, that subset did NOT give Hillary a popular vote lead. And that fact, to me, is equally relevant as the national popular vote differential. YMMV.

    "But what people tend to forget...is that being a Yankee is as much about character as it is about performance; as much about who you are as what you do."
    - President Barack Obama

  23. #34223

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by theDurk View Post
    I'm a little late on this, but there is plenty to take issue with here. It is true that the prevention of bureaucratic overreach is not part of the formal responsibility of the regulator.
    I didn't mention this earlier, but strictly speaking, overreach should be a concern because overreach equals lawsuit equals money and resources spent in litigation.

    Of course, most lawsuits would happen no matter what when the EPA is involved.


  24. #34224

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by ClownPickle View Post
    It's a lot easier to "win" an argument when you make up both sides.
    Quote Originally Posted by jcarey View Post
    Given that, you'd think his W-L record would be better.

  25. #34225

    Re: Election 2016

    Quote Originally Posted by RhodyYanksFan View Post
    OK you got me. I'm big enough to admit. I didn't read into it, just went off the headline about 52%.

    Still doesn't change my mind (actually it kinda proves my point) that Trump rode in on a wave of ignorance and fake news (and racism and xenophobia) which was more easily digested than wonky policy details in this election.
    It's not just you dude. That whole article / headline was designed to deceive, which validates your second paragraph about fake news. The only thing I'd add is that the fake news and ignorance goes both ways. Pretty equally. I don't denounce the wave trump rode, I just don't believe the racism/xeno had the magnitude of impact many people here argue it did.

    The only reason I dove into the article was because there was no way I thought 52% of people would believe it. Just like when I'd read tons of stuff about Clinton. There's too much BS out there now that I can't believe anything without spending/wasting time doing what I just did.
    Hideki Matsui is capable of anything

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 17 guests)

     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts