US 2024 Presidential Election

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,111
964
118
Country
USA

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,188
6,449
118
Are they dumb enough to think they'll genuinely get my vote this way, or do they think I'm dumb enough to fall for it?
Protip: you're not the intended audience of that political advertising.

* * *

I would not for a minute say that political campaigns are flawless. Far from it. But I do think that they have employed a large number of specialist experts whose job it is to know what people tend to vote for, what appeals to them, what motivates them, and so on. Odds are, those people know better what's going to shift votes than 98-99% of the public do. If you don't understand why they're campaigning on an issue, it's probably because you haven't worked out who they are trying to appeal to and why.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
2,222
1,668
118
Country
The Netherlands

And news organizations wonder why people don't trust them anymore.
I'm not sure its cowardice to begin with. Just a case of one corrupt billionaire supporting another. Or supporting someone perceived to be a billionaire at least. Bezoz wants his tax break and if the rest of the world needs to pay the price then that's a sacrifice he's willing to make.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
7,111
964
118
Country
USA
Protip: you're not the intended audience of that political advertising.
My original comment was "what are they doing" and "why is she running as a Republican?" Questions posed.

The part you quoted was in response to someone else saying "they want the tstorm vote" as an answer. I was responding directly to that suggestion.

That's a pretty poor excuse for a lecture.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,976
6,303
118
Country
United Kingdom
Again, probability does not matter when trying to figure out what any one specific person will do.
If we had complete knowledge of that person, then sure. But I don't-- until I asked.

On election night, higher numbers for Stein will translate to lower numbers for Harris. You know this. I know this. You can say that this is only relevant when talking about large numbers of people. It's true that predictability decreases the fewer people are involved, and things get highly unpredictable at the individual level. And yet: if there was literally no higher likelihood for any given Stein voter to vote Harris than Trump under other circumstances, then that correlation wouldn't exist for the larger group either. Yet it does.

You keep arguing that Tippy voting for Stein is bad, because he's statistically likely to be a Harris voter if Stein wasn't running, and Tippy has repeatedly told you that under no circumstances would he be voting for Harris's current platform. This means that the probability of Tippy voting for Harris is 0, but you keep arguing otherwise.
No, i don't keep arguing that at all. I explicitly invited Tippy to correct the assumption in his case in the very first post on this topic, and said that the probabillity calculation doesn't hold for anyone who treats the two other candidates as exactly equal. I then reiterated numerous times that it doesn't apply to him in that case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,713
3,442
118
Country
United States of America

those who lie down with dogs get fleas
If we had complete knowledge of that person, then sure. But I don't-- until I asked.

On election night, higher numbers for Stein will translate to lower numbers for Harris. You know this. I know this. You can say that this is only relevant when talking about large numbers of people. It's true that predictability decreases the fewer people are involved, and things get highly unpredictable at the individual level. And yet: if there was literally no higher likelihood for any given Stein voter to vote Harris than Trump under other circumstances, then that correlation wouldn't exist for the larger group either. Yet it does.
key words: other circumstances

pointless comparison
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,713
3,442
118
Country
United States of America
But I do think that they have employed a large number of specialist experts whose job it is to know what people tend to vote for, what appeals to them, what motivates them, and so on.
And to square that with how to get funding, which is prioritized because it is what gets those specialist experts paid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crimson5pheonix

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,976
6,303
118
Country
United Kingdom
key words: other circumstances

pointless comparison
So you say. Yet you know as well as I do that higher Stein numbers on election day is likely to mean lower Harris numbers.

When Tippy says that if Harris were to hypothetically withdraw support from Israel, then she could earn his vote, he's discussing other circumstances.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,713
3,442
118
Country
United States of America
So you say. Yet you know as well as I do that higher Stein numbers on election day is likely to mean lower Harris numbers.
They're also likely to mean lower Trump numbers, as they are votes that are not for Trump that could have been.

When Tippy says that if Harris were to hypothetically withdraw support from Israel, then she could earn his vote, he's discussing other circumstances.
ok..?

If Donald Trump pledged to withdraw support from Israel and correct a bunch of his other policies, I might consider voting for him. So what? These aren't who these people are.
 

Dirty Hipsters

This is how we praise the sun!
Legacy
Feb 7, 2011
8,542
3,053
118
Country
'Merica
Gender
3 children in a trench coat
If we had complete knowledge of that person, then sure. But I don't-- until I asked.

On election night, higher numbers for Stein will translate to lower numbers for Harris. You know this. I know this. You can say that this is only relevant when talking about large numbers of people. It's true that predictability decreases the fewer people are involved, and things get highly unpredictable at the individual level. And yet: if there was literally no higher likelihood for any given Stein voter to vote Harris than Trump under other circumstances, then that correlation wouldn't exist for the larger group either. Yet it does.
Someone being more likely to vote for Harris than Trump does not mean that they are likely to vote for Harris.

If someone votes for Stein there's no guarantee that they would have otherwise voted for Harris. There's a much higher likelihood that they would have stayed home and voted for no one, or voted for a different 3rd party.

To pretend that every vote for Stein is a vote stolen from Harris, and that if Stein wasn't running that Harris would get all of her votes is dreamland thinking.

Only 37% of US adult citizens who are eligible to vote participated in all three of the previous elections from 2018 to 2022. Harris isn't just competing with Trump and Stein, they're all competing with people apathetically not getting up from the couch. If people aren't compelled to vote for her they'll just stay home.

If Stein voters are energized enough by her to go vote that doesn't mean that they would have otherwise been energized enough to go vote for Harris.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,976
6,303
118
Country
United Kingdom
They're also likely to mean lower Trump numbers, as they are votes that are not for Trump that could have been.
If you think that higher Stein numbers on the day is just as bad news for Trump as it is for Harris, you're being wilfully obtuse.

ok..?

If Donald Trump pledged to withdraw support from Israel and correct a bunch of his other policies, I might consider voting for him. So what? These aren't who these people are.
Yet, I think we can both much more easily imagine circumstances in which someone who prefers Stein may vote for Harris. After all, there are quite a few such people in this very thread.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,976
6,303
118
Country
United Kingdom
Someone being more likely to vote for Harris than Trump does not mean that they are likely to vote for Harris.

If someone votes for Stein there's no guarantee that they would have otherwise voted for Harris. There's a much higher likelihood that they would have stayed home and voted for no one, or voted for a different 3rd party.
All of this is true, and doesn't affect my original argument. Higher inclination for one of the leading two is all that's required. If that inclination is nonetheless very small, then the shift in probability will be minuscule.

Btw: You are already acknowledging that people have likelihoods of acting in certain ways, and that this depends in part on their inclinations. Acknowledgement of that is implicit in your own post-- and that's really my entire point.

To pretend that every vote for Stein is a vote stolen from Harris, and that if Stein wasn't running that Harris would get all of her votes is dreamland thinking.
Hence why i never said or thought that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,976
6,303
118
Country
United Kingdom
From Trump's rally at Madison Square Garden, courtesy of Tony Hinchcliffe:

"There's literally a floating island of garbage in the middle of the ocean right now. Yeah. I think it's called Puerto Rico."

"And these Latinos, they love making babies too, just know that. They do, they do. There's no pulling out. They don't do that. They come inside, just like they did to our country".

"That's cool, Black guy with a thing on his head. What the hell is that, a lamp shade? Look at this guy! Oh, my goodness. Wow! I'm just kidding, that's one of my buddies. He had a Halloween party last night. We had fun, we carved watermelons together."
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
29,192
12,169
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male






 
Jun 11, 2023
2,845
2,081
118
Country
United States
Gender
Male
In case anyone’s confused about this meme, because it’s a funny story -

Michael Jordan and Chris Paul were attending a kids basketball camp in 2016. At one point, Paul challenged Jordan to play a game of "Around the World." If he missed three shots, every kid in the camp would have gotten Jordans for free.


The game varies from player to player, with Jordan taking shots from the elbow and the 3-point line.

He knocked down his first shot from the elbow before making a free-throw jumper. The basketball legend then moved to the 3-point line and drained three long-range shots in a row.

On his sixth shot, Paul put his hand in front of Michael Jordan, trying to get him to miss a shot. Unfortunately for the kids, that did not help and Jordan ended up making every single shot.


Making every single shot against no defense should be easy for every NBA player. However, it's important to note that Jordan was 53 years old during the challenge. That's probably why Paul thought that Jordan was going to miss a couple of shots.

Despite his retirement, Jordan is still very competitive and daring him to make all the shots was a bad idea. When the video resurfaced in 2018, Twitter user Killa Tex made a meme that became very popular.

Jordan broke the hearts of every kid at the basketball camp and became the subject of a popular meme as a reward

The meme quickly spread all over social media and some versions of it included other NBA players and characters from pop culture. Chris Paul, unsurprisingly, wasn't too happy about it.



Some of the comments are also golden.