this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
-18 points (23.5% liked)

Conservative

357 readers
74 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

“Acting foolish” in what way exactly? She actually expressed ideas for policy and acted professional while Trump just whined, attacked with lies and moaned in a slovenly way, with a few notable outbursts about bullshit.

As of now, Trump is expected to beat Harris in the election.

Expected by whom? That does not seem to be the consensus in any media I consume or with people I’ve talked to.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

she constantly lied and never really answered a question.

Expected by whom? That does not seem to be the consensus in any media I consume or with people I’ve talked to.

The experts. Nate Silver predicts that Trump's odds are at 65%.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That’s a wild analysis about her lying constantly. It’s so bizarre that someone would hear trumps endless spew of nonsense and then say that about Harris.

Sorry to have to mention reality, but that is not what Silver is saying currently:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2024-election-forecast/

Harris wins 61 times out of 100 in our simulations of the 2024 presidential election. Trump wins 39 times out of 100.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 days ago

Just noticed you cited 538 when I was citing Nate Silver. 538 has nothing to do with Nate Silver. He left some time ago and has called out the bad changes to their model.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's weird that I mentioned Kamala and that you kick in talking about Trump. Are you unable to talk about Kamala?

https://news.yahoo.com/news/nate-silver-slammed-over-trump-174617514.html

No, that is what he has been saying.

Last week, for instance, his forecast gave Trump a 64% chance of winning the Electoral College while giving Vice President Kamala Harris just a 35% chance of victory, even while the same forecast saw Harris as more likely to win the popular vote and his polling averages had her leading in enough swing states to take the election.

You article is from today, so I will have to read that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We can discuss Harris, sure. However, the topic was a debate - so yes, the idea is comparing the two. Trump was slovenly, unhinged and incoherent, but you somehow didn't notice and claim that Harris did a bad job? Your interpretation is so distorted that I'm not sure it's worth addressing.

okay, so Silver is working for Peter Theil now. Good to know.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It is weird how you think it was comparing the two when talking about Harris. It is the TDS the left has. It is weird as hell.

Who cares who Nate works for? He explains his work, it's detailed and has been very accurate. He has also said he is going to vote for Harris, as everyone should.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (1 children)

Yeah bro, TDS, the left!

We were comparing their debate performances as far as I can read it, so pretty sure that's not "TDS" (which is an absurd term, and fuck Charles Krauthammer for introducing that to the lexicon - about Bush, of course). It's worth noting that you made those claims about Harris' performance while either accepting Trump's or just overlooking his frankly insane behavior.

I don't really trust anyone once Theil is involved. Maybe that's just my Theil Derangement Syndrome, since of course criticizing conservatives always means mental illness.

There are other experts who have analyses too, of course. You might check out this one:
https://fortune.com/2024/09/18/trump-vs-harris-election-odds-who-will-win/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Paywalled.

Betting odds are on Trump.

Yeah I get the weird paranoia about theil. That’s completely normal and sane. Instead of looking at the facts and the experience of the person doing the work, I’d point to the baba yaga instead

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

I can read the entire article. You mean you don't use NoScript etc?

There's no "paranoia" about Theil. He's shown himself to be an incredibly horrible person and to do bizarre things like have special assistants for donating blood he is injected with. Imagine how much 'conservatives' would freak out if Obama or someone similar did that, but he's your boy, keep him.