What's next after impeachment?

[Mayhem]

Trump’s Support Among Orthodox Jews Is at 89 Percent: Poll
https://m.theepochtimes.com/trumps-s...l_3172472.html



You are wrong...

https://www.pewforum.org/2015/08/26/...orthodox-jews/

No, he's not. You're just strictly talking about orthodox jews who make up just about 10% of all jews in the US.

[Spectral]

Yay! Another low post alt. Anyways, [Citation Needed]

Most polls had her ahead of Trump, or slightly behind Trump, by small margins.

This is generally worth covering a bit.

The two polling aggregator/analyst groups that I'd regard as the most credible, competent, and serious are Fivethirtyeight and New York Times TheUpshot. Fivethirtyeight had the election as being a 71% chance of a Clinton victory, repeatedly wrote about the chance of a popular vote win and electoral loss for Clinton, and finalized the odds of that as being ~10%. Any reasonable person looking at their outcome would say that they did a pretty good job and appropriately cautioned that a Trump win wasn't just an edge case, but a very real possibility. The UpShot had a bit rosier picture for Clinton, giving her an 85% chance of winning. That's probably more like a miss, but still, 15% chance events can and do happen all the time, so it's not like they were just plainly wrong.

After the election, I lost no trust in either group - their data and analysis is highly informative.

Trending worse, Reuters-Ipsos had it at 90%. Again, 10% events do happen, but it's not a great look if you miss that multiple times. I'll wait and see before having a negative opinion - I think they're still an excellent polling agency, but maybe their analytics aren't great. Maybe they're doing better after some lessons learned, they're probably still worth paying attention to.

Out on the far end, HuffPo pegged it as 98.2% Clinton. OK, we all know HuffPo is partisan, but they were at least pretending to have a real model that would actually be predictive. In the aftermath of having a model that only gave Trump a 1.8% chance, we could pretty well put the nail in any notion that they're trying to do a good job modeling anything.

Finally, Sam Wang with Princeton Consortium used a Bayesian model and came up with 99%. I think we can safely conclude that Wang badly miscalibrated his model. I don't know anything else about him, but I do plan to ignore him going forward.

[Ghostpanther]

New York Times
Clinton 85 percent chance of winning

Hypermind: Clinton 74 percent chance of winning

PredictWise: Clinton 89 percent chance of winning

Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation: Clinton 90 percent chance of winning

ABC News Political Analyst Matthew Dowd: Clinton 95 percent chance of winning

https://www.thewrap.com/every-poll-t...-donald-trump/


Well its mostly important that Ukraine president denied it too lol but ofcourse that does not fit your narrative.

Yep. The polls in 2016 where off by several different sources. And in some cases, by a lot. Ohio for example, had Hillary up by 1 - 2 points before the election. Trump won the state by 8% points. The second most nationally accurate polling source in 2016, was the liberal's hated Rasmussen. The top one was none of the more common sources. Some business type one that I forget the name of. It can be found with a quick google for those interested enough.

[Cizr]

Yep. The polls in 2016 where off by several different sources. And in some cases, by a lot. Ohio for example, had Hillary up by 1 - 2 points before the election. Trump won the state by 8% points. The second most nationally accurate polling source in 2016, was the liberal's hated Rasmussen. The top one was none of the more common sources. Some business type one that I forget the name of. It can be found with a quick google for those interested enough.

Yeah it was quite funny. Especially the 99% chance of Hillary winning one that poster above you posted. Cant wait for 2020 polls

[Thepersona]

It's funny because they think the exact same thing about you people.

Oh stop with the enlightened centrism bullshit

[Mayhem]

Secular Jews have a very low birthrate. Look that up.... Orthodox Jews have 5,10,15 kids... I know who wins that game...

Do they also have some unknown technic to grow them faster or how does this matter with regards to Trump's support?

- - - Updated - - -

Secular Jews have a very low birthrate. Look that up.... Orthodox Jews have 5,10,15 kids... I know who wins that game...

Funny you mention that. You don't seem to have any problem with the different birthrates in secular American Jews and Israel Jews and how the Orthodox ones seem to disregard social services that facilitate higher birthrates in Israel. Talk about voting against one's interests.

[Mayhem]

Their kids are 4 years older, some of them can vote now, where they could not before... but this is a long term game... liberals in general have less kids than religious conservatives...

And besides that:

Baal teshuva movement:

The baal teshuva movement is a description of the return of secular Jews to religious Judaism. The term baal teshuva is from the Talmud, literally meaning "master of repentance". The term is used to refer to a worldwide phenomenon among the Jewish people.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal_teshuva_movement

The point he was wrong on is that minorities are moving away from republicans... some are, some are not... so his blanket absolute statement is wrong.

He is not though and the numbers agree with him. Of course, your only argument as always is some wishful thinking about some religious change based on scripture, if the facts don't support your argument, resort to belief.

That is all I will say about it with you, as you like to argue too much.

Oh, I am sorry that I actually have arguments and not just "but the bible says, and I have faith in that".

[Thepersona]

Their kids are 4 years older, some of them can vote now, where they could not before... but this is a long term game... liberals in general have less kids than religious conservatives...

.

And religious Conservatives are losing ground in the US (and in the rest of the planet. Secularism and Atheism is quickly overtaking old religions).

[Mayhem]

What does that matter...?

What does voting against your interests matter? Is this really your question?

Their birth rate is higher... if you are destined to have a kid you will have them, if not you aren't, you won't...

So the stuff you brought up about how the Israeli government is supporting family and that's part of the reason for higher birthrates was just bullshit? Ha, that didn't take long.

If you are talking about the haredi community shrinking, thats a good thing, ultimately... for different reasons...

They aren't shrinking, do you have trouble reading numbers?

Chabad is growing, both in the US, Israel, Russia, as well as around the world more generally... while the Secular Jews that do not come back to the faith are declining...

Uff, that's not a good sign but you seem to be cheering this on, so yeah, I guess.

[Mayhem]

Religiosity is falling, yes, in the west in general. Look at the global number.

But secular people have less kids... so remove themselves from that gene pool. The more religious have more kids and spread their genes...

But this argument is moot... let’s see what happens as liberalism continues its slow death in the world.

So is your argument now that religiosity is part of genetics? Curious question, because you seem to be all over the place with your arguments.

[Mayhem]

I commend Connal on his ability to turn every thread into a "reality is not reality" and/or "the West needs more religion!" thread. It's a decent enough solo act for one half of the comedy duo that are Connal and Theo, I guess, tedious as it is.

What was this thread actually about, again?

That republicans will do fuck all regardless of what happens and we'll see how many seasons this shitshow will get in the end?

[Machismo]

I commend Connal on his ability to turn every thread into a "reality is not reality" and/or "the West needs more religion!" thread. It's a decent enough solo act for one half of the comedy duo that are Connal and Theo, I guess, tedious as it is.

What was this thread actually about, again?

It's a pretty standard practice of the alt-righters these days.

[Thepersona]

Religiosity is falling, yes, in the west in general. Look at the global number.

But secular people have less kids... so remove themselves from that gene pool. The more religious have more kids and spread their genes...

But this argument is moot... let’s see what happens as liberalism continues its slow death in the world.

Connal, This is a lie. Birthrate is falling all across the board, in all countries, mostly because the change of the times: https://ifstudies.org/blog/a-new-nor...ross-the-globe

And religiosity is also falling all across the board. Understand this, Internet exists worldwide, and it did not 30 years ago. Contraception is used even in religious families (i know because i've seen it) and i've not seen a lot of people (5 at most) in my age group wanting to have more than 2 childs in their lifetime. As education increases (and it's doing so, there're more college educated students per capita than ever before, in all countries, you cant deny that), religiosity and birthrate decreases. And even then, a good % of the religious people's offspring will grow to be Atheists or Non-religious (again, because internet exists). Your wishful thinking and dreams of the resurgence of religiosity will not come to pass. Understand this crap again... THE GOOD OLD TIMES WILL NOT COME BACK!

- - - Updated - - -

So is your argument now that religiosity is part of genetics? Curious question, because you seem to be all over the place with your arguments.

And also this. Religiosity is not ingrained in genetics.

[Orbitus]

Everyone? You seem confused.




Hillary was a 90% chance of winning don't you remember?



Trump will win comprehensibly due to the corrupt nature of the 3 years long reeing against him by deluded leftists. What will be your excuse then?

That 90% chance of winning, was like 6 months from the actual election. Not surprising a sock puppet account is lying and saying debunked bullshit.

[Kontinuum]

Connal is like a post-wall slut - desperate for anything meaningful. I guess that's what happens to failed transhumanists.

[Thepersona]

That 90% chance of winning, was like 6 months from the actual election. Not surprising a sock puppet account is lying and saying debunked bullshit.

And even then, a 90% of winning meant that she had a 10% chance of losing. Statistics exists for a reason...

[Orbitus]

Russia collusion was supposed to end of Trump but it ended up being big nothing and noone could prove that Trump colluded with Russians, so yeah failed conspiracy theory.

Funny how Trump and Ukraine president both denied quid pro quo and pressure/bribery/blackmail

Zelensky told reporters: "We had I think good phone call. It was normal. We spoke about many things. So, I think, and you read it, that nobody pushed me."

"The next day, Zelensky said President Trump had not pressured anyone nor made any promises"

Subsequently, at an all-day press conference on October 10, Zelensky said he had learned about the blockage of the military aid only after the July 25 phone call. "We didn't speak about this. There was no blackmail

Yeah, who would lie to get the money they were promised since their country is under attack by Trump's friends that helped him get elected?

And Trump's own words from his own "evidence" of the notes of the transcript prove that Trump bribed Zelensky.

[Mayhem]

Umm... wrong... not all countries...

Israel booms with babies as developed world’s birth rates plummet. Here’s why.
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Midd...et.-Here-s-why

And orthodox jews in the US are against such policies.

It's like your brain has a very special ability to ignore information while reading it.

[Orbitus]

You’d deny it too if you knew there was zero chance of removal and you depend on US aid and weapons.

Yep, if you rely on the Javelins and money for other munitions from a country like the US, then you would do ANYTHING to get that money, even degrading yourself, to beg the guy that bribed you.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

After impeachment we get to see the real side show trail that the jury has already admitted they have made up there minds and are in conclusion with the defense. So we get to see all the Republicans screaming this is all about politics use it to be nothing but politics.