Trump's polling collapse might have created a three-way race in Utah - Polidicks

It seems like a lot of states have candidates that no one has heard about. Here in california we have someone named Gloria Estela La Riva running for president under the "Peace and Freedom" party. I've literally never heard of her until I saw her in my sample ballot.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51193739]Actually the death toll for that war was just over one million with conservative estimates being just under. Just sayin'[/QUOTE] That's still pretty astronomical, tbf. I mean, it's nowhere near the 60m dead in WWII, sure, but we're still talking about a [I]million[/I] people. That is crazy. That's 13+ Superdomes full of people. [img]http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0730/superdome_580.jpg[/img]

[url]http://www.history.com/news/civil-war-deadlier-than-previously-thought[/url] American Civil War was actually an exceptionally bloody war, America has just had a small population compared to modern times and densely populated countries

[QUOTE=Cructo;51194677]If by Nate Silver you mean this Nate Silver [t]http://i.imgur.com/T5JWaoN.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/XzSfifK.png[/t] then I'd say Utah is still a very safe red state.[/QUOTE] Only a handful of those articles are actually wrong. Half of them are essentially 'Trump will do really badly in the general election' (which he is) or 'the GOP is falling apart' (which they are) and most of the rest are 'this is likely to be a problem for Trump' for things that ultimately came to nothing. As for Michigan, [i]everyone[/i] called that wrong, mostly because the 2008 Michigan primary was messed up (Obama wasn't on the ballot) so all the models had nothing to go on. Besides - and this is the point Silver's critics always miss - he's a statistician, not a fortune teller. If he says 'there's only a 10% chance of this happening' and it happens, that doesn't necessarily mean there was anything wrong with the model. 1 in 10 isn't [i]that[/i] unlikely.

[QUOTE=Cructo;51194677]If by Nate Silver you mean this Nate Silver [t]http://i.imgur.com/T5JWaoN.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/XzSfifK.png[/t] then I'd say Utah is still a very safe red state.[/QUOTE] he said himself that he got too wrapped up in the politics and also that his model could only work so well in the early primaries due to limited data

[QUOTE=Cructo;51194677]If by Nate Silver you mean this Nate Silver [t]http://i.imgur.com/T5JWaoN.jpg[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/XzSfifK.png[/t] then I'd say Utah is still a very safe red state.[/QUOTE] "One Weird Trick to Losing the 2016 Election: Alienating Women" Well, he wasn't wrong on that count. Trump has the lowest poll ratings among female voters of any candidate in US history, so far as I'm aware -- which is to say nothing of his support among blacks, latinos, and religious minorities. And, what do you know, he's on track to have one of the biggest landslide defeats [I]ever[/I]. Nate's early primary polls may have been inaccurate (as he himself freely admits -- there isn't a lot of data to go off of), but he sure as hell wasn't wrong about the long game for Trump's campaign.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51192896]libertarians tend to be more socially conservative so it's not much of a surprise gary is doing decent there[/QUOTE] No we don't... We are more socially Liberal if anything.

[QUOTE=AlienCreature;51192991]...what? Libertarians were supporters of marriage equality before it was mainstream, when even the democrats were against it. You won't find a more socially liberal ideology because 'live and let live' is pretty much the motto: do whatever the fuck you want, as long as you are not harming others.[/QUOTE] ya but they also don't care about preventing sexism or discrimination either because the government can't tell people what to do! it doesn't exactly make them socially progressive when they don't support doing anything to actually ensure equality

At least this election will be the one(hopefully) that makes people start forcing their state governments to adopt runoff voting. Maine is looking at it, we just need the Noreaster, Colorado, Washington, Oregon and California and then the rest of the country falls in line. If the possibility of a second Trump and missing out on a second Sanders doesn't scare anybody I don't know what will.

[QUOTE=Sableye;51195651]ya but they also don't care about preventing sexism or discrimination either because the government can't tell people what to do! it doesn't exactly make them socially progressive when they don't support doing anything to actually ensure equality[/QUOTE] Letting others be racist assholes does not equate to supporting or being a racist asshole oneself.

[QUOTE=Sableye;51195651]ya but they also don't care about preventing sexism or discrimination either because the government can't tell people what to do! it doesn't exactly make them socially progressive when they don't support doing anything to actually ensure equality[/QUOTE] The Libertarian creed is "your right to swing your fist ends at my face" - actions that harm others is literally the best reason possible to have a law against it, by their dogma. You're thinking of anarcho-capitalism or something.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51195871]Letting others be racist assholes does not equate to supporting or being a racist asshole oneself.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-person-may-cause-evil-to-others-not-only-by-his-actions-but-by-his-inaction-and-in-john-stuart-mill-19-92-72.jpg[/img]

You don't violate others 1st amendment rights because of how you feel. You can say for them to shut up, but passing laws restricting it is wrong. Much like forcing Christians to bake cakes for gays is wrong, where as any reasonable people would leave them to go to the non bigotted ones, instead they want to force them, and use the government to do it. You can still campaign against racism without using government force.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51196033]You don't violate others 1st amendment rights because of how you feel. You can say for them to shut up, but passing laws restricting it is wrong. Much like forcing Christians to bake cakes for gays is wrong, where as any reasonable people would leave them to go to the non bigotted ones, instead they want to force them, and use the government to do it. You can still campaign against racism without using government force.[/QUOTE] Quite frankly, displace this same logic back in history and you could say how blacks shouldn't complain about segregation, they should just "go to non-bigotted ones."

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51195375]No we don't... We are more socially Liberal if anything.[/QUOTE] It really depends. Many libertarians appeal to social conservatism by having a know-nothing stance towards the issue at hand or siding with social liberals for completely different reasons. For instance, the solution many libertarians proposed for marriage equality was to eliminate government recognition of marriage completely. That solution doesn't align with social liberalism at all or achieve its goals. However, more extreme, "anarcho-capitalist" (there is no such thing, but that's another discussion for another thread) libertarians are often extreme social conservatives, with strong homophobic, misogynistic, and not least of all racist tendencies. See Murray Rothbard and Stefan Molyneux.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51192951]:what:[/QUOTE] Yeah when someone relies on wikipedia and tvtropes to support all their arguments that's pretty much what happens

[QUOTE=Judas;51195950][img]http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-person-may-cause-evil-to-others-not-only-by-his-actions-but-by-his-inaction-and-in-john-stuart-mill-19-92-72.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Truth to be told, I'm not particularly seeing how pulling up a quoted opinion from the 19th century is supposed to automatically invalidate what Emperor Scorpious II thinks.

[QUOTE=Judas;51195950][img]http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-person-may-cause-evil-to-others-not-only-by-his-actions-but-by-his-inaction-and-in-john-stuart-mill-19-92-72.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] You think quoting the guy who basically invented welfare liberalism is going to somehow sway me from my classical liberalism? :v:

[QUOTE=Judas;51195950][img]http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-a-person-may-cause-evil-to-others-not-only-by-his-actions-but-by-his-inaction-and-in-john-stuart-mill-19-92-72.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Other signs you are evil by these standards: You aren't spending every hour of your free time patrolling your city and aiding in the prevention of crime. You aren't spending every excess dollar you have on funding relief for those in need. You haven't donated your extra kidney to someone that needs it. You haven't donated blood and plasma every chance you could.

[URL="http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/utah/#plus"]538 has updated their model to include McMullin now.[/URL]

[QUOTE=Cliff2;51196416]Other signs you are evil by these standards: You aren't spending every hour of your free time patrolling your city and aiding in the prevention of crime. You aren't spending every excess dollar you have on funding relief for those in need. You haven't donated your extra kidney to someone that needs it. You haven't donated blood and plasma every chance you could.[/QUOTE] When you take it to extremes, these principles about inaction don't make sense. However, in most cases they make a lot of sense.

[QUOTE=Pilot1215;51196033]You don't violate others 1st amendment rights because of how you feel. You can say for them to shut up, but passing laws restricting it is wrong. Much like forcing Christians to bake cakes for gays is wrong, where as any reasonable people would leave them to go to the non bigotted ones, instead they want to force them, and use the government to do it. You can still campaign against racism without using government force.[/QUOTE] so what do gay people do if they can't find a baker willing to serve them what do black people do when all of the businesses in a town refuse them service and (here's the important part) the market doesn't fix it because the business owners have enough white clientele who are racist or (much more likely) apathetic about the issue and thus give them enough money to make continued racism possible?

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51197861]so what do gay people do if they can't find a baker willing to serve them what do black people do when all of the businesses in a town refuse them service and (here's the important part) the market doesn't fix it because the business owners have enough white clientele who are racist or (much more likely) apathetic about the issue and thus give them enough money to make continued racism possible?[/QUOTE] This isn't 1820 anymore. There will always be businesses willing to take in anyone's cash over their customer's beliefs. [editline]13th October 2016[/editline] Unless you can provide your "what if" with evidence that it may actually occur and wide-spread?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51197870]This isn't 1820 anymore. There will always be businesses willing to take in anyone's cash over their customer's beliefs. [editline]13th October 2016[/editline] Unless you can provide your "what if" with evidence that it may actually occur and wide-spread?[/QUOTE] You mean 1960?

[QUOTE=Cructo;51194677]then I'd say Utah is still a very safe red state.[/QUOTE] According to 538, it still is. Trump has a 84.9% chance at winning in their Polls-Only model and 75.8% in the Nowcast.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51197870]This isn't 1820 anymore. There will always be businesses willing to take in anyone's cash over their customer's beliefs. [editline]13th October 2016[/editline] Unless you can provide your "what if" with evidence that it may actually occur and wide-spread?[/QUOTE] Why does it have to be widespread??? Should poor people living in small towns without a lot of competing businesses just get fucked?

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;51197870]This isn't 1820 anymore. There will always be businesses willing to take in anyone's cash over their customer's beliefs. [editline]13th October 2016[/editline] Unless you can provide your "what if" with evidence that it may actually occur and wide-spread?[/QUOTE] it being widespread or not is irrelevant. what is a disadvantaged minority to do when they are refused service? i can retool the argument for transgender people who (at this very moment in time) suffer extreme discrimination throughout america and are routinely disparaged by major businesses, large segments of the population, and a considerable number of politicians what is the transgender person to do when they are refused service in many stores where they live? what are they to do when mechanics refuse to fix their cars, doctors to treat their ailments, and access to all other sorts of facilities? abolishing such protective legislation and hoping that the market will fix these problems is utterly foolish because markets do not exist to resolve social issues.