The Next President is...

[herkbum]

Hay-sus Krist, this 'thing' won't die...
Multiple political outlets have reported on the Clintons spooling up their "Clinton Global Initiative" machinery again.
You know, that multi-hundreds of millions of dollars in donations for access to then-Senator, later SecState, later presumed POTUS heir apparent.  When she crashed and burned in 2016, donations went down from the 10s of millions per year in, largely, foreign money - Russia/Saudi/Pakistan, etc - to the thousands.
Now, the old band is getting back together.
She's gonna try again.

It’s hard to kill the devil


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[kaputt]

Possible Biden Saudi Arabia trip could mean embracing oil, ignoring brutality

Still have yet to see an article about this administration looking to re-embrace domestic oil production. 

[tac airlifter]

56 minutes ago, kaputt said:

Possible Biden Saudi Arabia trip could mean embracing oil, ignoring brutality

Still have yet to see an article about this administration looking to re-embrace domestic oil production. 

Because they aren’t.  They’ve done everything possible to shit on domestic production. My brother works in the oil industry, it’s heartbreaking to see what this administration has done: appeal to domestic environmentalists by crushing domestic oil, simultaneously increasing reliance on brutal dictators.  I love the environment, but green energy isn’t ready for the volume  our nation requires.  And sending money to OPEC instead of US based production has been awful for national security.

[dream big]

3 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Because they aren’t.  They’ve done everything possible to shit on domestic production. My brother works in the oil industry, it’s heartbreaking to see what this administration has done: appeal to domestic environmentalists by crushing domestic oil, simultaneously increasing reliance on brutal dictators.  I love the environment, but green energy isn’t ready for the volume  our nation requires.  And sending money to OPEC instead of US based production has been awful for national security.

The hyenas on the green new deal squad have more influence and cojones than this current POTUS. 

[ViperMan]

2 hours ago, dream big said:

The hyenas on the green new deal squad have more influence and cojones than this current POTUS. 

I'm a pretty big naysayer of this current administration, but what they've done so far with Javelins and tough sanctions (what they've been able to do), has been commendable. Russia's economy is getting absolutely crushed, and there is still a lot more that we can do. And we should. Putin should be relegated to permanent pariah status.

https://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=RUB&to=USD&view=1M

[FLEA]

https://newsworldupdate.com/politics/more-republicans-than-democrats-would-stay-and-fight-if-what-happened-in-ukraine-occurred-in-us-poll/

 

BLUF: if the US were in the exact same situation as the Ukraine, the majority of Republicans would defend the country while the majority of Democrats flee. 

 

[Waingro]

41 minutes ago, FLEA said:

https://newsworldupdate.com/politics/more-republicans-than-democrats-would-stay-and-fight-if-what-happened-in-ukraine-occurred-in-us-poll/

 

BLUF: if the US were in the exact same situation as the Ukraine, the majority of Republicans would defend the country while the majority of Democrats flee. 

 

I feel sorry for anyone still falls for this tribal nonsense. What a ridiculous thing to buy into. I can't imagine harboring this much disdain for my fellow Americans. 

[FLEA]

21 minutes ago, Waingro said:

I feel sorry for anyone still falls for this tribal nonsense. What a ridiculous thing to buy into. I can't imagine harboring this much disdain for my fellow Americans. 

Its an observation. If you're going to dismiss it as tribal nonsense, extrapolate. Why do you think democrats would significantly poll differently? 

Of note, in the same poll, dems are more willing to support Ukrainian refugees than Republicans. This indicates a significant difference in values and perceived responsibilities in a security challenged world. I have my ideas and none of them cast anyone as the bad guy, im just curious what other people think first. 

 

Edit: Also of note, this is a university poll, not a media poll. which gives it a bit more relevance in my opinion since it would have had to meet scholastic norms for ethical human research and it would have deliberately tried to omit population biases. 

Here is a link to the study if anyone is interested in reading it: 

https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us03072022_ujca44.pdf

Edited March 8, 2022 by FLEA

[Waingro]

12 minutes ago, FLEA said:

Its an observation. If you're going to dismiss it as tribal nonsense, extrapolate. Why do you think democrats would significantly poll differently? 

Because people aren't two-dimensional caricatures. There are more than two different belief systems out there. Subscribing to a dialogue that can't deviate from a binary solution is asinine.

[HeloDude]

8 hours ago, Waingro said:

I feel sorry for anyone still falls for this tribal nonsense. What a ridiculous thing to buy into. I can't imagine harboring this much disdain for my fellow Americans. 

Really?  Progressives literally think that requiring an ID to vote is “Jim Crow 2.0”.

Edited March 8, 2022 by HeloDude

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

I just don't see Canada or Mexico ever driving tanks across our border, or letting China/North Korea/Russia hold military exercises on our border. Ever. One of the benefits of being a newer country, we don't have all that baggage that comes with a thousand years of empires spreading and collapsing.

[FLEA]

2 hours ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I just don't see Canada or Mexico ever driving tanks across our border, or letting China/North Korea/Russia hold military exercises on our border. Ever. One of the benefits of being a newer country, we don't have all that baggage that comes with a thousand years of empires spreading and collapsing.

Probably not in the next 1-4 decades but Mexico did have enough fascist at the time that Hitler thought he had a reasonable chance of getting them to join the Axis. I would never say never. The biggest obstacle is our terrain. We have an ocean to the east/west and a single neighbor to the north/south. Neighbors bring more baggage than history, so only having one of each is advantageous. Additionally, we are probably the only country in the world at the moment that can stage an army on a different continent but that gap will close over time.

Regardless, its just a thought experiment. As I've said, I have my ideas on some of the gap but I cant explain it all. The real clues are probably in race/gender/immigration status, how they vote, and how/why they would see their war time responsibility differently. For example, far more women in the democratic party than men, and women might be more likely to see their war time responsibility to flee with children and get them to safety. No one would fault anyone for that or say they're less committed Americans. In the full meta data it shows that women were only 40% likely to stay vs men 70%. 

[pawnman]

18 hours ago, FLEA said:

Its an observation. If you're going to dismiss it as tribal nonsense, extrapolate. Why do you think democrats would significantly poll differently? 

Of note, in the same poll, dems are more willing to support Ukrainian refugees than Republicans. This indicates a significant difference in values and perceived responsibilities in a security challenged world. I have my ideas and none of them cast anyone as the bad guy, im just curious what other people think first. 

 

Edit: Also of note, this is a university poll, not a media poll. which gives it a bit more relevance in my opinion since it would have had to meet scholastic norms for ethical human research and it would have deliberately tried to omit population biases. 

Here is a link to the study if anyone is interested in reading it: 

https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us03072022_ujca44.pdf

Omit population biases? Its focused on college students - people who are predominantly from wealthier families, and who skew away from violence in almost all forms.

[FLEA]

4 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Omit population biases? Its focused on college students - people who are predominantly from wealthier families, and who skew away from violence in almost all forms.

They have a full population sample up to 65+. Where do you see it focused on college students? A university poll means it was conducted by a university, doesn't mean it just poll'd university students. 

From the study "The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Doug Schwartz, Ph.D. since 1994, conducts independent, non-partisan national and state polls on politics and issues. Surveys adhere to industry best practices and are based on random samples of adults using random digit dialing with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones."

"1,374 U.S. adults nationwide were surveyed from March 4th – 6 th with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percentage points."

Edited March 8, 2022 by FLEA

[pawnman]

1 minute ago, FLEA said:

They have a full population sample up to 65+. Where do you see it focused on college students? A university poll means it was conducted by a university, doesn't mean it just poll'd university students. 

From the study "The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Doug Schwartz, Ph.D. since 1994, conducts independent, non-partisan national and state polls on politics and issues. Surveys adhere to industry best practices and are based on random samples of adults using random digit dialing with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones."

Ah. In that case, it likely skews much older than average. Good luck get a twenty-something to answer an unknown number, and good luck finding anyone under 30 with a landlines.

It's a self-selecting sample of people willing to talk to a survey taker.

[FLEA]

Just now, pawnman said:

Ah. In that case, it likely skews much older than average. Good luck get a twenty-something to answer an unknown number, and good luck finding anyone under 30 with a landlines.

It's a self-selecting sample of people willing to talk to a survey taker.

Thats fair and a criticism of any poll. But there is only so much you can do to eliminate selection bias. No polling is perfect, just ask Hilary!

[nsplayr]

3 hours ago, FLEA said:

From the study "The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Doug Schwartz, Ph.D. since 1994, conducts independent, non-partisan national and state polls on politics and issues. Surveys adhere to industry best practices and are based on random samples of adults using random digit dialing with live interviewers calling landlines and cell phones."

"1,374 U.S. adults nationwide were surveyed from March 4th – 6 th with a margin of error of +/- 2.6 percentage points."

All good polling organizations use this model, it's an industry best-practice for a reason. It's not perfect obviously and there is both an art and a science to getting your demographics right based on who picks up the phone. Efforts are being made in the industry to layer on additional data since as was pointed out, not everyone is excited to pick up the phone and talk to a pollster calling from an unknown number.

That being said, the fact that Quinnipiac is a university has absolutely nothing to do with it. Polls can be conducted by media companies, universities, private companies, or any combination of the three and can either do a good job or not, but the best-practices are the same. Quinnipiac happens to do a pretty good job, but that's not because they are associated with a university necessarily.

The confusion for a lot of people comes in because A) there are pollsters who do not do a good job on a particular poll or cycle either due incompetence, bad data, or bad practices and B) there are also polls conducted and released specifically for influence rather than inform the public. Be wary of internal campaign polling that is released publically or organizations that do not follow industry best-practices and/or are looking to influence public opinion rather than report on the world as it actually is.

Most pollsters benefit by calling races accurately and putting out good and interesting data, but some less scrupulous or less neutral groups benefit by either giving politicians the numbers they want to see or by pushing hot-button patsian issues backed by dubious "data," and they are paid well to do so.

This from 538 is a good place to start when evaluating how good a particular pollster is, and Quinnipiac currently rates an A-.

Edited March 9, 2022 by nsplayr

[nsplayr]

3 hours ago, FLEA said:

No polling is perfect, just ask Hilary!

And Romney! Both very seriously believed they would win even late into the evening on election day.

Edited March 9, 2022 by nsplayr

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

All good polling organizations use this model, it's an industry best-practice for a reason. It's not perfect obviously and there is both an art and a science to getting your demographics right based on who picks up the phone. Efforts are being made in the industry to layer on additional data since as was pointed out, not everyone is excited to pick up the phone and talk to a pollster calling from an unknown number.

That being said, the fact that Quinnipiac is a university has absolutely nothing to do with it. Polls can be conducted by media companies, universities, private companies, or any combination of the three and can either do a good job or not, but the best-practices are the same. Quinnipiac happens to do a pretty good job, but that's not because they are associated with a university necessarily.

The confusion for a lot of people comes in because A) there are pollsters who do not do a good job on a particular poll or cycle either due incompetence, bad data, or bad practices and B) there are also polls conducted and released specifically for influence rather than inform the public. Be wary of internal campaign polling that is released publically or organizations that do not follow industry best-practices and/or are looking to influence public opinion rather than report on the world as it actually is.

Most pollsters benefit by calling races accurately and putting out good and interesting data, but some less scrupulous or less neutral groups benefit by either giving politicians the numbers they want to see or by pushing hot-button patsian issues backed by dubious "data," and they are paid well to do so.

This from 538 is a good place to start when evaluating how good a particular pollster is, and Quinnipiac currently rates an A-.

Good stuff. When I talk about media polling im mainly critical of the practice of using a web polling which is obviously going to target readers who are probably geared to a political bias based on what media they are already consuming. This then gets published in an effort to influence public opinion, as you've mentioned. 

[Waingro]

 

On 3/7/2022 at 10:26 PM, Waingro said:

I feel sorry for anyone still falls for this tribal nonsense. What a ridiculous thing to buy into. I can't imagine harboring this much disdain for my fellow Americans. 

On 3/8/2022 at 7:19 AM, HeloDude said:

Really?  Progressives literally think that requiring an ID to vote is “Jim Crow 2.0”.

Go back to the first thing I said. Your response is more tribal nonsense. I've never met any of these two-dimensional people in real life.

[dream big]

12 minutes ago, Waingro said:

 

Go back to the first thing I said. Your response is more tribal nonsense. I've never met any of these two-dimensional people in real life.

Neither have I, thankfully…however many of them are sitting at the highest level’s of government to include in our military so that is concerning. 

[HeloDude]

2 hours ago, Waingro said:

 

Go back to the first thing I said. Your response is more tribal nonsense. I've never met any of these two-dimensional people in real life.

I’m literally quoting the President…

https://www.foxnews.com/media/biden-excoriated-twitter-insinuating-blocks-legislation-jim-crow-2-0

[brickhistory]

Special Counsel Durham questioned in front of a grand jury a Georgia Tech contract data analyst as to why DoD - specifically DARPA - was using him to find out who hacked the DNC servers during 2016 campaign.  Why was DARPA involved?

I really, really, really hope some mid-level and senior-level governments heads eventually roll over this.

The message to be apolitical as a government employee must be brutally reinforced or the misuse of government agencies/tools to harm political opponents will only continue and get worse.

Edited March 11, 2022 by brickhistory

[dream big]

11 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Special Counsel Durham questioned in front of a grand jury a Georgia Tech contract data analyst as to why DoD - specifically DARPA - was using him to find out who hacked the DNC servers during 2016 campaign.  Why was DARPA involved?

I really, really, really hope some mid-level and senior-level governments heads eventually roll over this.

The message to be apolitical as a government employee must be brutally reinforced or the misuse of government agencies/tools to harm political opponents will only continue and get worse.

Did any heads roll with Afghanistan? Hands down our most embarrassing moment since 1972 courtesy of the Biden Administration?  Nothing will come of this.

[ClearedHot]

The latest from the nitwit in chief:

"And, by the way, we can’t be — this is the United States of America.  We can’t be the country where for a mom to get her kid on the Internet to be able to do their homework has to pull into a McDonald’s parking lot.  I mean, for real, that’s what was happening. 

This law is going to put an end to all of that.  It’s going to put people in a much different position to be able to determine their own — their own judgments about when to sell their cattle, when they should — I just — just — we’re going to change things."

In case you think it is fake you can find the exact transcript here on Whitehouse.gov.