**** Elections thread *****

[Savy]

Maybe. 11 out of the last 13 presidents have had serious academic credentials. Like Yale, and Harvard Law.

Loads of people run as the "common man", but it's rarely true. There's nothing common about running for president or senate.

Yeah I'm not meaning they're picking people without a high school education but that being at the top end of the scale tends to be a bad thing. There's an idea that you want the smartest people running the show but in practise that's shown not to be true. How many (phd) doctors have been president? It's surprisingly low IIRC.

[a500lbgorilla]

Yeah I'm not meaning they're picking people without a high school education but that being at the top end of the scale tends to be a bad thing. There's an idea that you want the smartest people running the show but in practise that's shown not to be true. How many (phd) doctors have been president? It's surprisingly low IIRC.

None of them campaign well.

[a500lbgorilla]

I don't even doubt he was intellectually up there until some time around his election the first time when he started to develop early onset dementia. I tried to find a video of him being articulate but all they have on youtube are ones of him looking impaired.

I don't think he was intellectually up there. I think I was sold on him.

[Savy]

None of them campaign well.

I don't know the history well enough to comment but that seems slightly dismissive.

----edit----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_by_education

I'm sure that list is probably slightly swayed by the fact education over time has become more of a thing but lots of not graduating & what not amongst relatively recent presidents.

/edit

None of the examples I cited had experience, and likely would not have been elected in the UK at least. That's what I'm getting at. We don't have any wrestler or actor MPs, for example. All of Reagan, Ventura and Schwartzenegger were elected governor with no experience in public office at all.

We have tonnes of MPs with no prior experience who also aren't famous. Look at the huge rise of the SNP & some of the people they ran and won with.

I'm pretty sure we've had actors as MPs too.

edit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenda...litical_career

Also the house of lords is full people who are famous.

[Poopadoop]

Ok my bad.

House of Lords are appointed, though I suppose that's even worse.

[wufwugy]

No-one's yet made a good argument for why any of these guys were qualified apart from being easily recognizable and having charisma (i.e., being marketable).

Your observation on this topic is not wrong. One way of looking at this is that the difference between Britain and America comes down to our religions. One of the marked traits of American Christian innovation was anti-credentialism (formally known as anti-intellectualism, but that's a confusing term). Basically, our Christianity became one where anybody could hold a leadership role; whereas in European Christianity, leaders had to be properly credentialed.

I'd probably say when the values of the Protestant Reformation hit the geography of America, it incentivized anti-credentialism.

[wufwugy]

Thanks for the response.

So bet the house on trump? It's paying 3.5:1

Do I think that's a steal? Yes. Do I recommend betting on it? No.

[wufwugy]

Hey Rilla what's up with Hillary?

[wufwugy]

We gettin' close to muh ~356 electoral votes landslide prediction. Recent polls show Trump winning New Hampshire, Maine, Michigan, and Wisconsin.

[wufwugy]

If Trump got ~25% of the black vote, America's second-wave slavery would begin the fall to its final end.

[a500lbgorilla]

Hey Rilla what's up with Hillary?

Fucking nothing.

[wufwugy]

I had you pegged as probably supporting Trump more than Clinton. So mark me surprised.

[a500lbgorilla]

I can't vote for Trump. He's not properly equipped for the job, in my estimation.

[wufwugy]

What is the estimation?

[a500lbgorilla]

I don't know the history well enough to comment but that seems slightly dismissive.

----edit----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...s_by_education

I'm sure that list is probably slightly swayed by the fact education over time has become more of a thing but lots of not graduating & what not amongst relatively recent presidents.

/edit

Dismissive a bit, but, you do need to campaign well to win an election. And education doesn't make a candidate, it's just a line on their resume.

[a500lbgorilla]

What is the estimation?

Well, for one, when he speaks, he searches out feedback that supports him and ignores whatever slights him.

And when I say 'speaks', I mean 'tweets', which makes it that much worse.

[wufwugy]

Well, for one, when he speaks, he searches out feedback that supports him and ignores whatever slights him.

And when I say 'speaks', I mean 'tweets', which makes it that much worse.

It's a campaign.

[a500lbgorilla]

It's a campaign.

It's not. It's Trump.

[wufwugy]

It's not. It's Trump.

This aligns with his public persona, but when applied to his private life, makes no sense anymore.

[a500lbgorilla]

Remember, Romney was convinced he was going to win going into 2012, yet here we are.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...mbers_bad.html

[wufwugy]

Keep up on Scott Adams. You'd love his premise of irrationality.

[a500lbgorilla]

This aligns with his public persona, but when applied to his private life, makes no sense anymore.

Yeah, and I thought Bush knew every other Yaler by name.

[wufwugy]

Remember, Romney was convinced he was going to win going into 2012, yet here we are.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...mbers_bad.html

If we're using heuristics, I predicted 2012 better than Nate Hydrogen did.

[a500lbgorilla]

Keep up on Scott Adams. You'd love his premise of irrationality.

I haven't heard a peep out of him recently. He was calling the hail mary on Trump months ago, but he's been under the radar since trump has squared up with an actual political opponent of substance.

[a500lbgorilla]

If we're using heuristics, I predicted 2012 better than Nate Hydrogen did.

Romney was surprised to lose that election, but he still lost it.

[wufwugy]

I haven't heard a peep out of him recently. He was calling the hail mary of Trump months ago, but he's been under the radar since trump as squared up with an actual political opponent of substance.

Read his blog.

BTW Trump no longer being the frontrunner doesn't coincide with being up against a "political opponent of substance." After Bernie dropped out, Clinton suddenly abandoned all substance and went full bore persuasion. I wish she stayed on substance, because she'd be losing by huge margins if she had. Instead, she's doing what Cialdini tells her, which is speak only in terms of Trump being scary.

[wufwugy]

Romney was surprised to lose that election, but he still lost it.

I guess that's what happens when people believe things for the wrong reasons. The situation is hardly analogous.

[JKDS]

Why would we want a doctor to be president? I guess if Healthcare was the top issue, but even then he'd be ill-equipped compared to a lawyer.

[JKDS]

Also, trump will lose hard. He's got weird chances in states he shouldnt, but he's still gonna get crushed. Stopping "literally hitler" will get people voting, whether the comparison is fair or not.

[wufwugy]

Also, trump will lose hard. He's got weird chances in states he shouldnt, but he's still gonna get crushed. Stopping "literally hitler" will get people voting, whether the comparison is fair or not.

Only if the caricature holds up. Signs are pointing to it not holding up, but it certainly could.

[Savy]

Dismissive a bit, but, you do need to campaign well to win an election. And education doesn't make a candidate, it's just a line on their resume.

Ye but I'd expect more overlap that's all. I struggle to see why the education part stops all the other attributes that matter.

Why would we want a doctor to be president? I guess if Healthcare was the top issue, but even then he'd be ill-equipped compared to a lawyer.

Can't remember if i said but I meant doctor in the academic sense rather than medical. For the record I think doctors tend to be pretty poor judges of healthcare as they are incredibly bias and have an incredibly narrow view of the process they're involved in.

[a500lbgorilla]

Read his blog.

BTW Trump no longer being the frontrunner doesn't coincide with being up against a "political opponent of substance." After Bernie dropped out, Clinton suddenly abandoned all substance and went full bore persuasion. I wish she stayed on substance, because she'd be losing by huge margins if she had. Instead, she's doing what Cialdini tells her, which is speak only in terms of Trump being scary.

Yeah, he has a solid blog post on for today.

I'm still voting Hillary.

I would literally vote for a warm pile of shit before Trump.

And wouldn't you know it, I can vote Hillary all the same.

[wufwugy]

Yeah, he has a solid blog post on for today.

You'd like him. He blogs mostly daily. He's the guy who first spotted that the author of your favorite book (Cialdini) began working for Clinton (which is when her persuasion game went from non-existent to "Trump will nuke your house"). His most foundational premise is that humans are always and incorrigibly irrational, and the best we can do is learn about it and get better at noticing it when it arises and taking a few steps to avoid some of the pitfalls.

If you don't like Trump, it's a great blog.

[boost]

If you don't like Trump, it's a great blog.

I get what you're saying, and I know you're not trying to encourage partisanship, in fact, on the face of it, you're doing the opposite-- yet I still find this caveat troublesome.

[wufwugy]

How come?

So, I said that for mostly three reasons: to provide Rilla with something great, it's a partial copy of Adams (he ends all his blog posts with "if you such and such, or if you don't, you'll like my book"), and, most importantly, it was the blog that taught me to view Trump without my previous biases and blinders.

[JKDS]

The Spirit Holloween Store is selling Trump and Hillary costumes. I can get a "make America great again" hat as part of a costume prop.

[wufwugy]

combine the maga hat with american flag pants and this shirt.


i think i have my halloween cosutme. i'll call him perfect man.

[wufwugy]

Sigh. I really want to dump money on Trump. I think him winning at 80% is low. But I've learned my lesson about gambling on things you care about. Don't do it. It makes the experience terrible. My enthusiasm for MMA died big league after I began betting on it.

[boost]

Wuf, yeah, I don't think my concern was so much with your post as it was with the tendency for people to build bubbles and encourage others to do so. You weren't really doing that-- I guess I just wanted to force a moment in which I could share this concern.

I've never really gambled on anything I care about, except games where gambling is integral to the game, but I can say that gambling on things you don't care about makes them crazy fun.

/sidetracks

[Keith]

bet on hilary wuf , happy either way then

[a500lbgorilla]

Sigh. I really want to dump money on Trump. I think him winning at 80% is low. But I've learned my lesson about gambling on things you care about. Don't do it. It makes the experience terrible. My enthusiasm for MMA died big league after I began betting on it.

I'll bet avatars. I'll take Hill

[wufwugy]

time limit?

[a500lbgorilla]

On accepting the bet? 6 days.

[a500lbgorilla]

Or on keeping the avatar? 6 weeks.

[wufwugy]

lol @ 6 days to decide. if i needed more time than 6 nanoseconds to decide you'd know that my posts are bullshit.

deal.

if anybody else wants to take hill against my trump for the next 6 weeks after rilla's bet, i'll take it.

[JKDS]

I'll in. Hill will crush.

[wufwugy]

Woooooooo you get the second bloc of six weeks to choose my avatar if I lose. If I win your avatar changes at same time as Rilla.

I'm taking all takers. Y'all need to get on this. Betting on Hillary (and against me!) is good stuff. Very great.

[Keith]

oooooo lots of new acounts could take this bet and we could choose wufs avatar for years lol

[boost]

oooooo lots of new acounts could take this bet and we could choose wufs avatar for years lol

I never know how to communicate this to civilians, but it seems to almost go unsaid amongst poker players-- finding the angle is possibly the most rewarding thing to strive for in life.

[wufwugy]

it's not like i'd take any bets from new accounts.

i'll give y'all 2 to 1. 6 weeks for your avatar if i win, 12 weeks for my avatar if you win.

[wufwugy]

c'mon. trump is so gonna lose. he's terrible. he's the worst.

he called all mexicans rapists and hillary has the media at her beck and call. he wants to marry his daughter and hillary's teflon. easy win.

[Savy]

I can only imagine Wuf has some good avatars in mind for people for him to think what he's doing is +EV.

[JKDS]

I get 2 to 1? You're crazy!

[wufwugy]

not you. you already took it at 1 to 1.

im trying to generate action. i look forward to a 6 week period of all o youse having avatars of my choice.

[boost]

Speaking of some killer angle shooting: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.8af646ee8f73

[wufwugy]

k fine, 3 to 1. final offer.

[BankItDrew]

k fine, 3 to 1. final offer.

I'll take Hillary at 1:3. Let's make the numbers represent months of avatars.

[wufwugy]

k. you get the 3rd bloc. if hillary wins you choose my av for 3 months after jkds, if trump wins i choose yours for 1 month.

[BankItDrew]

Deal

[wufwugy]

In all honesty, this is a no-lose bet for you guys since I may not even give you embarrassing avatars. Trump is a lock.

[JKDS]

I'll probably give you something you can use ironically.

[wufwugy]

In an alternate universe, foo. This one MAGAing.

[Savy]

I'll probably give you something you can use ironically.

A penis then? lolololol

[BankItDrew]

A penis then? lolololol

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

FUCKING HILARIOUS

[wufwugy]

your mom doesn't think it's ironic.

you win.

[a500lbgorilla]

If Hillary dies before the election, deals off.

[wufwugy]

Well ofc.

Bumping it to 4 to 1. People should get down on this because the avatar I've chosen isn't even bad. You'll probably enjoy having it.

[wufwugy]

Trump 3rd act has been pretty amazing.

By design, he stopped saying "non-presidential" things and his poll numbers closed to even. This means that his real numbers are quite a bit above even since the polls are consistent in using the wrong weighting strategy. Hillary spent all this time following her poor strategy of "we ahead therefore we sit back". She just recently came out of the woodworks because Trump gained so much. But her coming out has been an utter disaster, revealing that it makes sense for why she lost to Obama and to Sanders (but "won" only because of the DNC cheating).

I'm sticking w/ my mid-300s EV prediction for Trump. My only real change is that instead of him being >80% to win, I think he's >95% to win. Of the 5% he loses, 3% is random disaster like he dies or the votes are rigged. 2% is that Hillary actually gets more votes.

[JKDS]

Hillary is at least 75% to win. Polls be dammed.

[a500lbgorilla]

She's just letting the race cinch up a bit to scare her donors into giving her another 300 mil. After the first debate, it'll be all over.

[Poopadoop]

I'm actually pretty damn curious about what the US would be like if Trump wins if I'm perfectly honest. Do you think he'll rename it Trumpland?

[JKDS]

He'll sell the Mexican States back to mexico. As part of the deal, mexico will finance a wall

[wufwugy]

He will win every state with a large proportion of Mexicans except for Cuckifornia.

[Keith]

looked like Hilary had been on the gin today from our news coverage. Maybe at the debates Trump should ask her if she'd prefer a chair to sit on.

[wufwugy]

After the Trump win, we are likely to see a drastic shift away from victimhood culture and the nanny-state.