USA Kamala Harris the 47th President of the United States - Hopefully.

[Not Important]

i don’t wish to stoke the fire but......

 

[Not Important]

dare to dream. the dems get a majority in both houses.

 

[happy_eagle]

Are the endorsements of Bloomberg and Dick Cheney really going to win over undecided voters?

 

[Not Important]

Are the endorsements of Bloomberg and Dick Cheney really going to win over undecided voters?

10 million might help and yes i do think republicans turning on the scam artist will have a positive effect. the degree....we'll only know after polling day

 

[Not Important]

what an asset tim is to the dems campaign.

 

[big_e]

Are the endorsements of Bloomberg and Dick Cheney really going to win over undecided voters?

My mother has spent the last week with about 30 people from Virginia, mostly aged in their 60s and 70s. After sheepishly broaching the subject of politics, it appears there are a significant number of the group who are Republicans but who are coming around to the notion of voting Democrat rather than abstaining because they can't stand the MAGA crowd. The vibe seems to be that not voting for Trump is one thing, but voting Democrat is the only way to make sure he loses.

Part of it is safety in numbers - if you've been a lifelong voter for one party but you don't want to do it anymore, it's much easier to vote for the other party if you know that others are doing it too.

So if you were a Bush fan, knowing that Dick Cheney was endorsing Kamala Harris probably would have an impact, yeah.

 

[Not Important]

You didn't request that ban yourself did you?

Being unable to post in the Trump thread while deflecting every mention of Trump addressed to you with "this isn't the Trump thread" is actually genius for someone like you still pretending to be not overly invested in the bloke, well played.

when i need some laughter i read stokey's stuff.... then move on. some mirth lightens the day. long may they continue.

 

[Not Important]

Yeah I got it wrong. He’s currently completing a doctorate in theology.

did he ever complete an undergraduate degree or has he been given special dispensation to write a doctoral thesis?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

did he ever complete an undergraduate degree or has he been given special dispensation to write a doctoral thesis?

You’ve reached the outer limits of my Stan Grant trivia knowledge.

 

[big_e]

did he ever complete an undergraduate degree or has he been given special dispensation to write a doctoral thesis?

Yes, he did.

• After leaving school Stan worked part-time for the Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies in Canberra. It was there that he met Marcia Langton, who advised him to attend University. (pp.271-272)
• After graduating Stan was offered a cadetship at the Macquarie Radio Network. (p.272) From there he was employed as a political correspondent for the ABC for four years. (p.287) He gained prominence in Australia as a reporter and host of current affairs programs on Channel Seven.

Biography - Stan Grant - Indigenous Australia

ia.anu.edu.au

Page numbers are a reference to his book.

 

[TheSunGod]

My mother has spent the last week with about 30 people from Virginia, mostly aged in their 60s and 70s. After sheepishly broaching the subject of politics, it appears there are a significant number of the group who are Republicans but who are coming around to the notion of voting Democrat rather than abstaining because they can't stand the MAGA crowd. The vibe seems to be that not voting for Trump is one thing, but voting Democrat is the only way to make sure he loses.

Part of it is safety in numbers - if you've been a lifelong voter for one party but you don't want to do it anymore, it's much easier to vote for the other party if you know that others are doing it too.

So if you were a Bush fan, knowing that Dick Cheney was endorsing Kamala Harris probably would have an impact, yeah.

 

[OneGreatClub]

 

[Borough Blood]

She has to make it to 300 EC votes because she uses a teleprompter. Seems only fair.

 

[Blue1980]

Just heard Allan Lichtmann being interviewed on ABC RN this morning, going into detail about his 13 keys to the White House methodology.

As you know, he’s predicting Harris will win, and he hasn’t often been wrong.

Very impressive and well worth a listen.

He was arguing for Biden to stay in the race, not sure he’s that bright.

 

[Not Important]

Yes, he did.

Biography - Stan Grant - Indigenous Australia

ia.anu.edu.au

Page numbers are a reference to his book.

thanks! appreciated.

You’ve reached the outer limits of my Stan Grant trivia knowledge.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

He was arguing for Biden to stay in the race, not sure he’s that bright.

Can you name anyone with a better prediction record?

 

[big_e]

Can you name anyone with a better prediction record?

Have there been that many elections terribly hard to predict? He started in 1984, and since then it's been:

1984 - Reagan 97.5% of electoral college votes
1988 - Bush 79.2%
1992 - Clinton 68.8%
1996 - Clinton 70.5%
2000 - He got this one wrong
2004 - Bush 53.2%
2008 - Obama 67.8%
2012 - Obama 61.2%
2016 - He got this one wrong
2020 - Biden 56.9%

It would be harder to come up with someone with a worse record, tbh.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Have there been that many elections terribly hard to predict? He started in 1984, and since then it's been:

1984 - Reagan 97.5% of electoral college votes
1988 - Bush 79.2%
1992 - Clinton 68.8%
1996 - Clinton 70.5%
2000 - He got this one wrong
2004 - Bush 53.2%
2008 - Obama 67.8%
2012 - Obama 61.2%
2016 - He got this one wrong
2020 - Biden 56.9%

It would be harder to come up with someone with a worse record, tbh.

One has to wonder how much Putin’s interference skewed the 2016 result

 

[Satan]

You’ve reached the outer limits of my Stan Grant trivia knowledge.

Stan and fellow broadcaster Tracey holmes had an affair in 2000 and were dumped from sevens olympic coverage

 

[Bloods86]

Have there been that many elections terribly hard to predict? He started in 1984, and since then it's been:

1984 - Reagan 97.5% of electoral college votes
1988 - Bush 79.2%
1992 - Clinton 68.8%
1996 - Clinton 70.5%
2000 - He got this one wrong
2004 - Bush 53.2%
2008 - Obama 67.8%
2012 - Obama 61.2%
2016 - He got this one wrong
2020 - Biden 56.9%

It would be harder to come up with someone with a worse record, tbh.

I think there's so many pundits that you'll be bound to get some with good track records, and don't really take much from it.

Having said that, Lichtman got 2016 right (he predicted Trump) and 2000 is questionable as to whether he was wrong.

 

[Dazzler9]

Stan and fellow broadcaster Tracey holmes had an affair in 2000 and were dumped from sevens olympic coverage

Aren't they married?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Have there been that many elections terribly hard to predict? He started in 1984, and since then it's been:

1984 - Reagan 97.5% of electoral college votes
1988 - Bush 79.2%
1992 - Clinton 68.8%
1996 - Clinton 70.5%
2000 - He got this one wrong
2004 - Bush 53.2%
2008 - Obama 67.8%
2012 - Obama 61.2%
2016 - He got this one wrong
2020 - Biden 56.9%

It would be harder to come up with someone with a worse record, tbh.

Um, no, he predicted Trump in 2016, and 2000 you could probably call a black swan event.

Off you go, find someone with a better record.

 

[Satan]

Aren't they married?

Not at the time

 

[big_e]

Um, no, he predicted Trump in 2016, and 2000 you could probably call a black swan event.

Off you go, find someone with a better record.

He predicted Trump would win the popular vote in 2016, which he did not do.

Source, his own university's website, which said: "Lichtman’s “13 Keys” system predicts the outcome of the popular vote"

And if you hold someone up as being a hotshot predictor of events, you can't claim credit for getting the easy ones right and then write off the times when they got it wrong as being black swan events.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

He predicted Trump would win the popular vote in 2016, which he did not do.

Source, his own university's website, which said: "Lichtman’s “13 Keys” system predicts the outcome of the popular vote"

And if you hold someone up as being a hotshot predictor of events, you can't claim credit for getting the easy ones right and then write off the times when they got it wrong as being black swan events.

Maybe you should have referenced the updated site. Lichtmann doesn’t claim his system predicts the popular vote, only the winner:

13 Keys Prediction

Distinguished history professor Allan J. Lichtman predicts a Trump win.

www.american.edu

I think what happened with Bush Gore in 2000 would be considered a black swan. Not aware of any other US election like it.

Anyway, again, who has a better record? If you’re so certain he’s nothing special I would have thought that would be pretty easy to answer.