What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (4 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Missed Indiana.

Colorado is up to 4.3%, the same as PA, in favor of Hillary.  

Giving him Nebraska's 2nd (+3.1) as well of the rest of NE, Iowa (+1.5), Ohio (+0.6), NC (-0.5), Nevada (-1.4), and Florida (-1.5) yields this:

(Hillary 272, Trump 266).

He would need all of those states go his way and still put a big upset in Colorado or PA.  That's four states overall that he needs upsets in and Hillary can't have a single upset.
Clinton is the favorite for a reason.  But, she is not the prohibitive favorite that many here think, or want.

I think this all comes down to turnout - and I would give Clinton the edge there - particularly in Florida and Pennsylvania.  I still think Florida ends up going to Trump - just can't believe that a NASCAR state won't go to Trump.  But, I don't think Clinton's ground game will be as prevalent or effective in a state like Colorado.

 
Clinton is the favorite for a reason.  But, she is not the prohibitive favorite that many here think, or want.

I think this all comes down to turnout - and I would give Clinton the edge there - particularly in Florida and Pennsylvania.  I still think Florida ends up going to Trump - just can't believe that a NASCAR state won't go to Trump.  But, I don't think Clinton's ground game will be as prevalent or effective in a state like Colorado.
Agreed with this, and that Hillary missed her chance in FL. Obama won it in 2012, she was leading there, and then she went with basket of deplorables, and hasn't recovered there since that week.

 
Being an isolationist doesn't mean you have to be a dummy on world affairs. No excuse for not being able to name the leader of one nation in the entire world he admires. At the very least it shows a complete lack of curiosity as to what goes on beyond our borders and in 2016 that is not a quality that most people look for in whoever will be the next leader of the free world.
I don't disagree.

 
The country will go into full blown shtstorm if this happens.
 So, taking a look at the current make-up of the House of Representatives.  Its not a good picture for Clinton.

If States voted along party lines, as it is currently constituted, and no real reason to think they would not vote along party lines within each state - then Trump would win 32-16, with three states tied - Maine, New Hampshire, and New Jersey.

 
60/40 is the simulation chances of winning. The projected vote share is a lot closer than this would indicate:

4.Projected vote share for Nov. 8 - Weighted average 89% polls-based, 11% demographics

47.3% (Clinton) -45.7% (Trump) -5.8% (Johnson)
So weighting all the polls and adjusting for demographics she has a 1.6% lead as of right now in FL. It's a lead, but it's not a runaway.

 
Tone and context.   You would have to see the entire sequence.  Palin was I obviously irritated for some reason.  Who knows.  Katie accomplished her objective.  
I imagine Couric was shocked Palin couldn't a standard/stock question that had been asked of every Presidential candidate since the 1960 election.

And even Palin now admits that Couric's question was "fair" and that she gave "a crappy answer" (from Nov 2015 intereview):

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/260302-palin-couric-question-was-fair

Palin: Couric's newspaper question was 'fair'

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is admitting her infamous response to a Katie Couric question about what newspapers she reads was "crappy" in a new interview with CBS.  

During the 2008 presidential election, then-CBS news anchor Couric asked Sen. John McCain's (R-Ariz.) GOP running mate what newspapers she regularly reads to stay informed. 

"I read most of them with a great appreciation for the press and media," Palin responded. 

Couric asked her to clarify specific newspapers and magazines to which Palin responded, "All of them." 

Palin took a lot of heat for that answer. 

"Was it a fair question? Yeah, sure," Palin said in an interview with CBS's Tracy Smith. "I had a crappy answer, but it was a fair question." 

 
 So, taking a look at the current make-up of the House of Representatives.  Its not a good picture for Clinton.

If States voted along party lines, as it is currently constituted, and no real reason to think they would not vote along party lines within each state - then Trump would win 32-16, with three states tied - Maine, New Hampshire, and New Jersey.
I'd agree with that.

The People however by and large haven't exactly been keeping up on their civics lately.

 
60/40 is the simulation chances of winning. The projected vote share is a lot closer than this would indicate:

So weighting all the polls and adjusting for demographics she has a 1.6% lead as of right now in FL. It's a lead, but it's not a runaway.
I was responding to a post that stated that "she missed her chance" in Florida. I'd agree that it's not a done deal yet. I do think that it looks pretty darn good for Hillary, though, particularly seeing as how there are still two debates left to go, and every time Trump is under the national spotlight, he makes a complete fool of himself, and it turns out to be an utter disaster for him. The conventions and the first debate both provided HUGE bumps for Clinton.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
squistion said:
Being an isolationist doesn't mean you have to be a dummy on world affairs. No excuse for not being able to name the leader of one nation in the entire world he admires. At the very least it shows a complete lack of curiosity as to what goes on beyond our borders and in 2016 that is not a quality that most people look for in whoever will be the next leader of the free world.
An Isolationist likely wouldn't admire leaders of other countries. A globalist on the other hand would kiss a lot of their asses. HIllary is stocked up on lipstick for that task. 

 
BassNBrew said:
So which employers are buying plans in the marketplace.
The market place is a tree or two in the larger forest.  The problems with this tree's health is not now nor has ever been indicative of the health of the larger healthcare forest.  The individual market of today will recover from its fever but I'm guessing that you doubt it.  So it probably needs to be cut down with new seedlings planted to insure those that aren't covered by current government plans nor their employers  (for purpose of this statement that would exclude the coverage obtained by the self employed).   It seems that the ideas floating around now would be that those insurers that participate with Medicare Advantage or Medicaid MSO would either be required to offer individual market policies on the exchanges, or would need to allow individuals to buy in to those plans.  Obviously this would require new legislation.  The alternative idea floating around is to be creative with State waivers such that state level "public options" can be created.  This,, arguably would require no new legislation.   I guess we will see.

 
 The individual market of today will recover from its fever but I'm guessing that you doubt it.  So it probably needs to be cut down with new seedlings planted to insure those that aren't covered by current government plans nor their employers  (for purpose of this statement that would exclude the coverage obtained by the self employed).
Sorry, what exactly is being cut down, ie who are the trees? People with actual current insurance plans?

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
Sorry if this has already been posted as I was on vacation and have skipped a lot of pages recently but thought this was a really good article from NYT about Hillary


How Hillary Clinton Grappled With Bill Clinton’s Infidelity, and His Accusers


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/us/politics/hillary-bill-clinton-women.html?_r=0


Ms. Blair wrote in that entry a direct quotation from Mrs. Clinton: “Most people in this town have no pain threshold.”
Sounds like G. Gordon Liddy.

 
Baloney Sandwich said:
Sorry if this has already been posted as I was on vacation and have skipped a lot of pages recently but thought this was a really good article from NYT about Hillary


How Hillary Clinton Grappled With Bill Clinton’s Infidelity, and His Accusers


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/03/us/politics/hillary-bill-clinton-women.html?_r=0
Weeks later, a small group of campaign aides, along with Mrs. Clinton, met at the governor’s mansion in Little Rock, and they made a pivotal decision: They would hire Jack Palladino, a private investigator known for tactics such as making surreptitious recordings and deploying attractive women to extract information.

An aide to the campaign, who declined to be publicly identified because the aide had not been authorized to speak for the Clintons, said Mrs. Clinton was among those who had discussed and approved the hiring, which shifted the campaign to a more aggressive posture.

Mr. Kantor, the campaign chairman, said he did not know whether Mrs. Clinton had specifically approved Mr. Palladino’s employment as the other aide recalled. But he said that she had seen a need for outside help.

“She believed we had to deal with the issue directly,” Mr. Kantor said.

Mr. Palladino, who did not respond to requests for an interview, reported to James Lyons, a lawyer working for the campaign. In a memo that he addressed to Mr. Lyons on March 30, Mr. Palladino proposed a full-court press on Ms. Flowers.

“Every acquaintance, employer, and past lover should be located and interviewed,” Mr. Palladino wrote. “She is now a shining icon — telling lies that so far have proved all benefit and no cost — for any other opportunist who may be considering making Clinton a target.”

Soon, Ms. Flowers heard from ex-boyfriends and others who said they had been contacted by a private investigator.

“They would say that he would try to manipulate them,” Ms. Flowers recalled, “or get them to say things like I was sexually active.”

Karen Steele, who had worked with Ms. Flowers at the Roy Clark Celebrity Theater in Branson, Mo., was among those who received a visit. “I remember I got questioned about brothers Gennifer and I once dated,” she said. “It wasn’t warm and fuzzy.”


Going on Offense


The information gathered by Mr. Palladino was given to Betsey Wright, a former chief of staff to Mr. Clinton in Arkansas who, with Mrs. Clinton’s support, was put in charge of dealing with accusations of infidelity.

“Betsey Wright was handling whatever those issues were,” Susan Thomases, a friend of the Clintons who had served in the campaign, told the oral history project. “And it had been very comfortable because Hillary had let her do it.”

Through Ms. Wright, the digging into Ms. Flowers and other women would be passed on to reporters.

Ms. Wright declined to be interviewed, saying in an email, “It is reprehensible that The New York Times is joining The National Enquirer and Donald Trump by dredging up irrelevant slime from the past.”

At the time, Ms. Wright boasted to The Washington Post of Mr. Palladino’s success in countering what she memorably called “bimbo eruptions,” and in defusing two dozen accusations of affairs, which she contended were false.

In the cover story of an issue of Penthouse in which Ms. Flowers posed nude — she would earn at least $500,000 selling her story to media outlets — Ms. Wright pushed allegations about her gathered by Mr. Palladino, including “résumé hype, attempted blackmail, manufacturing a self-styled 12-year affair with Clinton to salvage a flopola singing career.”

Ms. Wright read to the Penthouse reporter a statement, taken by Mr. Palladino, that “when the richest of her many lovers would not leave his wife, or come across with more money, she staged a suicide attempt with wine and Valium.”


- eta - This is our next President, folks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BassNBrew said:
So which employers are buying plans in the marketplace.
The market place is a tree or two in the larger forest.  The problems with this tree's health is not now nor has ever been indicative of the health of the larger healthcare forest.  The individual market of today will recover from its fever but I'm guessing that you doubt it.  So it probably needs to be cut down with new seedlings planted to insure those that aren't covered by current government plans nor their employers  (for purpose of this statement that would exclude the coverage obtained by the self employed).   It seems that the ideas floating around now would be that those insurers that participate with Medicare Advantage or Medicaid MSO would either be required to offer individual market policies on the exchanges, or would need to allow individuals to buy in to those plans.  Obviously this would require new legislation.  The alternative idea floating around is to be creative with State waivers such that state level "public options" can be created.  This,, arguably would require no new legislation.   I guess we will see.
Good to see you finally coming around.

28.5-33 million currently uninsured depending on the source.  Are they just a tree or two?  13 million more have insurance now than in 2013.  So basically Obamacare was 30% or less effective and for each person helped, there's been one person tossed into the death spiral.

Going back to your point about the healthy forest, the solution to this is to deprived the rest of the forest of some water and light to allow the part of the forest dying to recover.  A public option would be interesting, but I don't see a way around single payer given the rate medical technology is growing.

 
From Twitter:

Wikileaks says they'll surprise and shock us all with their findings on Hillary. They must have found a trace of ethical behavior.

 
Good to see you finally coming around.

28.5-33 million currently uninsured depending on the source.  Are they just a tree or two?  13 million more have insurance now than in 2013.  So basically Obamacare was 30% or less effective and for each person helped, there's been one person tossed into the death spiral.

Going back to your point about the healthy forest, the solution to this is to deprived the rest of the forest of some water and light to allow the part of the forest dying to recover.  A public option would be interesting, but I don't see a way around single payer given the rate medical technology is growing.
Coming around to what?  

 
Sorry, I know for many around here thinking is seen as a weakness, but I can't help it
Hey man, never apologize for thinking.

I was told the song was about socialism/fascism by an old friend. I'm not sure if it's true but it lines up with Peart's POV and it always made sense to me. Almost everything he wrote had some philosophical genesis, or at least that's my take.

 
It's music, enjoy it or hate it, you don't have to think about it.
I thought the whole point of progressive rock was that it has DEEP MEANING. Because without that, what's the point of listening to that band? You're not in it for Geddy's whiny vocals, or Neal's endless drum rolls, are you? 

 
I thought the whole point of progressive rock was that it has DEEP MEANING. Because without that, what's the point of listening to that band? You're not in it for Geddy's whiny vocals, or Neal's endless drum rolls, are you? 
Yeah I'm not into prog rock, King Crimson etc, they're a fun, good band and they're great in concert. Unfortunately for them in terms of critics who prefer VH rip offs they have a great sense of tone and invention. The list of great rock trios is short. They also have a great backstory. And they're prodigious. Go drone out to Bob Zimmerman, man, if that's your bag.

 
I don't know, was just trying to understand your metaphor.
I'm sure you have heard the expression "can't see the forest for the trees".   My reply was simply that the individual/small group health insurance markets have never been indicators of the health of the healthcare industry.   It certainly isn't a precursor as those waiting for the "other shoe to drop" think for ESI (or Medicare/Medicaid for that matter) - at least not unless it stumbles onto something different that the masses want.    Focusing on the problems of the individual market misses that the overall industry is doing well - maybe too well.  (Well maybe not for profit companies looking for inpatient admits being thwarted by a mild flu season last year - maybe this flu season will be more profitable.)

 
Bill must not have liked the bump in the polls Hillary received post-debate, pissing all over Obamacare in Michigan.  He really doesn't want her to win.

 
I'm sure you have heard the expression "can't see the forest for the trees".   My reply was simply that the individual/small group health insurance markets have never been indicators of the health of the healthcare industry.   It certainly isn't a precursor as those waiting for the "other shoe to drop" think for ESI (or Medicare/Medicaid for that matter) - at least not unless it stumbles onto something different that the masses want.    Focusing on the problems of the individual market misses that the overall industry is doing well - maybe too well.  (Well maybe not for profit companies looking for inpatient admits being thwarted by a mild flu season last year - maybe this flu season will be more profitable.)
Gotcha, thanks.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top