Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

  On 10/31/2016 at 11:59 PM, ignatius said:

2 weeks ago clinton had 88% chance of winning..

 

today... 75% chance of winning.

 

by election day it'll be even closer race.

 

where's the nembutal?

This is gonna sound dumb (like most of what I say), but I think the best way to gauge the "odds" is by watching actual Las Vegas oddsmaking.

The reason I say this is because thousands of people are using all of the information at their disposal, and everyone's financially incentivized to be correct. So there are very strong forces acting upon the betting odds (which are constantly re-handicapping and self-correcting for people finding edges on the house here and there--based on all available information--such that those edges disappear).

So yeah it's like the 'wisdom of crowds' on steroids.

Huma Abedin seems to activate each and every one of my, mostly unexamined, fetishes.

edit - except she's not East Asian

Nah dude not dumb at all, seeing where the money is (on who ppl expect to win, not necessarily want to win) is as close to true probability that you'll ever get.  Are there Vegas odds on the election though?  I thought they can't take bets on shit like that here, but that it's fair game in the UK, like betting on the next England football manager, etc.  Probably moot with online gambling 'n whatnot.

  On 11/1/2016 at 1:56 AM, Bob Dobalina said:

Nah dude not dumb at all, seeing where the money is (on who ppl expect to win, not necessarily want to win) is as close to true probability that you'll ever get. Are there Vegas odds on the election though? I thought they can't take bets on shit like that here, but that it's fair game in the UK, like betting on the next England football manager, etc. Probably moot with online gambling 'n whatnot.

Last I heard it was 9:1 for Clinton or thereabouts

  On 11/1/2016 at 1:45 AM, doublename said:

Huma Abedin seems to activate each and every one of my, mostly unexamined, fetishes.

edit - except she's not East Asian

that's interesting cuz I also feel such erotic triggering by this woman. Also Isabelle Adjani and especially in The Obsession = sexplosion.

wtf dude

So .. what you are telling me .. is that .... you love beautiful women?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3teYvgMsNXk&t=2m20s

  On 11/1/2016 at 2:34 AM, Deer said:

So .. what you are telling me .. is that .... you love beautiful women?

quite!

(derp, The Obsession in previous post is obv Posession)

  On 11/1/2016 at 2:40 AM, roasty said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3teYvgMsNXk&t=2m20s

  On 11/1/2016 at 2:40 AM, roasty said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3teYvgMsNXk&t=2m20s

jesus.  intolerable cruelty to hear that guy speak. jesus. 

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html

http://election.princeton.edu/

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/charts/scorecard

http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

refresh every 5 min for the next 7 days

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump

Whoa

Nice to see Glenn Greenwald in "defend Putin" mode as per usual...

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:23 AM, LimpyLoo said:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump

Whoa

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?referer=https://t.co/xubUldjTqV

Woah indeed

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:33 AM, Alcofribas said:

 

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:23 AM, LimpyLoo said:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump

Whoa

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?referer=https://t.co/xubUldjTqV

 

Woah indeed

 

I assume that was a sarcastic woah, but that article doesn't really answer any questions.

The problem here, when talking about the FBI at least, is one of double standards, why was Comey so eager to inform congress of a non-event in the e-mail investigation, but refused to even admit there was any investigation into Trump's ties with Russia? The FBI shouldn't be taking sides in this, unless there's clear evidence of wrongdoing (on either side), where there's a case to answer in the courts, they need to keep their mouth shut, they have not done this, and even when explaining to congress why there was no case for Clinton to answer in court Comey went on to editorialise, which is completely beyond his remit. All very fishy imho.

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:53 AM, caze said:

 

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:33 AM, Alcofribas said:

 

  On 11/1/2016 at 4:23 AM, LimpyLoo said:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump

Whoa

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?referer=https://t.co/xubUldjTqV

 

Woah indeed

I assume that was a sarcastic woah, but that article doesn't really answer any questions.

 

"Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government. And even the hacking into Democratic emails, F.B.I. and intelligence officials now believe, was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump."

That seems like a sufficient answer to any questions from another "source" about "new" Trump/Putin ties.

No it doesn't, note the part that says 'so far', that implies that there is a continuing investigation. That DNS server sending large amounts of data between a Trump server and a Russian bank is particularly suspicious, that does not sound like the normal operations for a DNS server (the excuse Trump's campaign gave), could easily be some kind of encrypted communication network piggybacking on a seemingly innocuous link. I wouldn't trust the FBIs technical abilities when it comes to this stuff either btw.

Also, the assertion that the hacking "was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump" is not backed up by anything in that article, sounds like pure supposition to me, and it doesn't even make sense based on what they say themselves, because if Russia just wanted to "disrupt the integrity of the political system and undermine America’s standing in the world more broadly", obviously the best way to do that would be to help elect Donald Trump, a man almost universally despised in the western world outside of America.

Even if there were no direct ties though, and there may not have been, that doesn't explain why Comey saw fit to inform Congress about some emails on Wieners laptop that don't appear to show any evidence of anything of interest, but not about their investigations into Russia. 

  Quote

 

Both CNBC and the Huffington Post have reported that Comey privately urged against naming Russia for allegedly meddling in the election and hacking Democratic email accounts.

 

Though this advice has not been confirmed officially, it tallies with the fact the FBI’s name did not appear on a list of US intelligence agencies supporting the allegations.

 

“A foreign power was trying to undermine the election. He believed it to be true but was against putting it out before the election,” one former official told CNBC. Comey’s position, this official reportedly said, was: “If it is said, it shouldn’t come from the FBI, which as you’ll recall it did not.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/31/james-comey-fbi-clinton-trump-email-investigation-russia-hack

it's a fucken soap opera. such political drama. this is what we're getting regardless of the winner. drama. scandals. emails. bill clinton sex stories. if they can impeach her or just drag out some congressional hearings..  they will. because they can. it'll be benghazi all over again.  if/when she wins i hope they up the secret service protection to paranoid levels. 

will be a shitty first 100 days 

yeah, even if the dems manage to retake the senate (which will at least allow them to appoint at least one supreme court judge and lots of other judicial appointments that are currently being blocked), a republican congress means the house oversight committee could well be working overtime to undermine her every action. the one thing that might stop that from happening would be the implosion of the republican party after the election, especially if Trump and his wing refuses to go away after an election they lose badly (maybe the likes of Rob Portman, Kasich and other more sensible people in the party will try and do a deal with Clinton, as long as she concedes on certain issues).

  On 11/1/2016 at 5:24 AM, caze said:

1) No it doesn't, note the part that says 'so far', that implies that there is a continuing investigation.

 

2) That DNS server sending large amounts of data between a Trump server and a Russian bank is particularly suspicious, that does not sound like the normal operations for a DNS server (the excuse Trump's campaign gave), could easily be some kind of encrypted communication network piggybacking on a seemingly innocuous link. I wouldn't trust the FBIs technical abilities when it comes to this stuff either btw.

 

3) Also, the assertion that the hacking "was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump" is not backed up by anything in that article, sounds like pure supposition to me, and it doesn't even make sense based on what they say themselves, because if Russia just wanted to "disrupt the integrity of the political system and undermine America’s standing in the world more broadly", obviously the best way to do that would be to help elect Donald Trump, a man almost universally despised in the western world outside of America.

 

4) Even if there were no direct ties though, and there may not have been, that doesn't explain why Comey saw fit to inform Congress about some emails on Wieners laptop that don't appear to show any evidence of anything of interest, but not about their investigations into Russia.

 

  Quote

Both CNBC and the Huffington Post have reported that Comey privately urged against naming Russia for allegedly meddling in the election and hacking Democratic email accounts.

 

Though this advice has not been confirmed officially, it tallies with the fact the FBI’s name did not appear on a list of US intelligence agencies supporting the allegations.

 

“A foreign power was trying to undermine the election. He believed it to be true but was against putting it out before the election,” one former official told CNBC. Comey’s position, this official reportedly said, was: “If it is said, it shouldn’t come from the FBI, which as you’ll recall it did not.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/31/james-comey-fbi-clinton-trump-email-investigation-russia-hack

1) Yes, the FBI claims so far there's no conclusive or direct link. I posted this in response to a motherjones article published days before the election in which an anonymous source claims to have years of dirt on trump/putin. between the two articles the one you're arguing about seems decidedly more sober and reasonable.

2) server could be something significant but hard to tell atm. something to keep an eye on.

3) Russia's precise motivations and intentions are unknown and thus "supposition" is par for course. Indeed, it's precisely what you resort to when you argue that the best way for Russia to achieve its perceived ends would be to work to elect trump; your "supposition" isn't "backed up" by anything. We went over this recently though and nothing new has been brought to the table here imo and in any case the two interpretations are not mutually exclusive, although I find one more likely.

4) yeah comey's behavior is suspicious af. The guy seems entirely full of shit.

FBI investigating Trump's campaign manager: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-making-inquiry-ex-trump-campaign-manager-s-foreign-ties-n675881

Trump hasn't had a good reputation as a businessman for a while and had to go to a Russian bank to get loans. They probably donated to his campaign too, which he then used to pay for an abortion for an underage prostitute he raped.

Just a prediction. 

no