Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

[Owen Densmore]

What's spooky is, even tho the overall percentage is currently 

    Hillery 67.8% Trump 32.1%

(good as a sure thing, right?) but the details show margins that could easily lead to a Trump win.

There's even an article on the same site: "Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton"

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/

   -- Owen

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

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/poll-florida-republicans-vote-for-hillary-clinton

 

http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 10:45 AM
To: Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

What's spooky is, even tho the overall percentage is currently 

    Hillery 67.8% Trump 32.1%

(good as a sure thing, right?) but the details show margins that could easily lead to a Trump win.

 

There's even an article on the same site: "Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton"

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/

 

   -- Owen

 

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

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Gary Schiltz-4]

Where are you getting 67.8% and 32.1% from?

On Friday, November 4, 2016, Owen Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

What's spooky is, even tho the overall percentage is currently 

    Hillery 67.8% Trump 32.1%

(good as a sure thing, right?) but the details show margins that could easily lead to a Trump win.

There's even an article on the same site: "Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton"

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/

   -- Owen

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

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Gary Schiltz-4]

Never mind, I see it is in the second link - their odds of her winning. 

On Friday, November 4, 2016, Gary Schiltz <[hidden email]> wrote:

Where are you getting 67.8% and 32.1% from?

On Friday, November 4, 2016, Owen Densmore <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;[e-mail]&#39;);" target="_blank">owen@...> wrote:

What's spooky is, even tho the overall percentage is currently 

    Hillery 67.8% Trump 32.1%

(good as a sure thing, right?) but the details show margins that could easily lead to a Trump win.

There's even an article on the same site: "Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton"

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/

   -- Owen

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

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Steve Smith]

I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:

https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

Iowa Electronic Markets Daily Price Graph for the Winner Take All model...



Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

I'm going to go do my early voting today...  while cursing the lack of a Ranked Choice Voting scheme... but voting *for* the concept of 3rd party viability...  

Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

From the FEC website: http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/fund.shtml

PARTY CONVENTION AND GENERAL ELECTION GRANTS

The presidential nominee of each major party may become eligible for a public grant of $20,000,000 plus COLA (over 1974). For 2012, the grant was approximately $91,241,400 for each major party nominee. However, the two major party presidential nominees in 2012 opted out of the public financing program in the general election. Candidates themselves may not raise any other funds to be used for campaigning during the general election period. The general election limit for publicly funded candidates for 2016 is $96,140,600.

Public grants of $18,248,300 went to each of the major parties for their conventions in 2012. On April 3, 2014, President Barack Obama signed legislation to end the public funding of presidential nomination conventions.

Since no third-party candidate received 5% of the vote in the 2008 presidential election, only the Republican and Democratic parties were eligible for 2012 convention grants, and only their nominees were eligible to receive grants for the general election once they were nominated. Third-party candidates could qualify for public funds retroactively if they received 5% or more of the vote in the general election.

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Well, let us not just scoff at analyses about the odds of the end of the republic, let us prevent the end of the republic.   Buses should be running to Canada at least up until the inauguration.

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Steven A Smith
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 11:47 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:

https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

Iowa Electronic Markets Daily Price Graph for the Winner Take All model...



Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

I'm going to go do my early voting today...  while cursing the lack of a Ranked Choice Voting scheme... but voting *for* the concept of 3rd party viability...  

Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

From the FEC website: http://www.fec.gov/press/bkgnd/fund.shtml

PARTY CONVENTION AND GENERAL ELECTION GRANTS

The presidential nominee of each major party may become eligible for a public grant of $20,000,000 plus COLA (over 1974). For 2012, the grant was approximately $91,241,400 for each major party nominee. However, the two major party presidential nominees in 2012 opted out of the public financing program in the general election. Candidates themselves may not raise any other funds to be used for campaigning during the general election period. The general election limit for publicly funded candidates for 2016 is $96,140,600.

Public grants of $18,248,300 went to each of the major parties for their conventions in 2012. On April 3, 2014, President Barack Obama signed legislation to end the public funding of presidential nomination conventions.

Since no third-party candidate received 5% of the vote in the 2008 presidential election, only the Republican and Democratic parties were eligible for 2012 convention grants, and only their nominees were eligible to receive grants for the general election once they were nominated. Third-party candidates could qualify for public funds retroactively if they received 5% or more of the vote in the general election.

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[gepr]

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Roger Critchlow-2]

Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?

-- rec --

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, ┣glen┫ <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

Amusingly, they disagree even within the ticket.  

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-weld-vouches-for-hillary-clinton_us_58195566e4b07c97c1c55168

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:04 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?

 

-- rec --

 

 

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, ┣glen┫ <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Nick Thompson]

Hi Roger,

 

Perhaps my humor and imagination have been totally destroyed by this election (which somebody aptly described as a political dumpster fire), but … I didn’t understand your comment,  AND I want to.

 

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:04 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?

 

-- rec --

 

 

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, ┣glen┫ <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Roger Critchlow-2]

Nick --

Just joking that Libertarians (ie libbies) should refuse to take campaign funding from the government and refuse to participate in government run elections, or they're clearly acting as LINO's (Libertarians In Name Only).  Sorry, it was an old joke the first time.

-- rec --

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Roger,

 

Perhaps my humor and imagination have been totally destroyed by this election (which somebody aptly described as a political dumpster fire), but … I didn’t understand your comment,  AND I want to.

 

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:04 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?

 

-- rec --

 

 

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, ┣glen┫ <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[gepr]

I'll add some context.  Once upon a time (or at least so I thought), big-L Libertarians were actually libertarians.  This was back when truly independent (i.e. crazy) people were welcome and celebrated at Libertarian conventions.  It used to be "the party of principle".  So, in the good old days, it was not a joke at all.  The Libertarians could be counted on to refuse privileges that were obviously "dirty" (like tax money which is "forcibly" extracted from unwilling citizens).  But somewhere along the way, the Libertarian party (and the word "libertarian") was hijacked and infiltrated by standard right wingers who saw an opportunity to make their repugnant views more socially acceptable.  When that happened, the Libertarians lost their principles and became a kind of softer set of right wingers.  And those people are perfectly willing to engage in "dirty" dealings (like accepting federal funding) when it suits them.

On 11/04/2016 01:21 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Just joking that Libertarians (ie libbies) should refuse to take campaign funding from the government and refuse to participate in government run elections, or they're clearly acting as LINO's (Libertarians In Name Only).  Sorry, it was an old joke the first time.

>     __ _
>
>     Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?____


--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

I found the article from the Dalai Lama in the NYT today fairly plausible explanation of why we have the current problem.    But, I would say, no, there will be no brotherhood with the Bundy's.   The redistributionist approach (that Brooks -- libertarian -- objects to elsewhere) arises in order to give the possibility of free enterprise, not to preserve it for those that haven't realized they've simply failed to be sufficiently enterprising.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of glen ?
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:30 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

I'll add some context.  Once upon a time (or at least so I thought), big-L Libertarians were actually libertarians.  This was back when truly independent (i.e. crazy) people were welcome and celebrated at Libertarian conventions.  It used to be "the party of principle".  So, in the good old days, it was not a joke at all.  The Libertarians could be counted on to refuse privileges that were obviously "dirty" (like tax money which is "forcibly" extracted from unwilling citizens).  But somewhere along the way, the Libertarian party (and the word "libertarian") was hijacked and infiltrated by standard right wingers who saw an opportunity to make their repugnant views more socially acceptable.  When that happened, the Libertarians lost their principles and became a kind of softer set of right wingers.  And those people are perfectly willing to engage in "dirty" dealings (like accepting federal funding) when it suits them.

On 11/04/2016 01:21 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Just joking that Libertarians (ie libbies) should refuse to take campaign funding from the government and refuse to participate in government run elections, or they're clearly acting as LINO's (Libertarians In Name Only).  Sorry, it was an old joke the first time.

>     __ _
>
>     Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding
> from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too,
> hold out for victory by acclamation?____


--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[gepr]

Part of the tragedy of the "libertarian" hijacking lies in the (often self-attributed) oversimplified sense of opposition to a horizontal tool (e.g. redistributionist approach).  The libertarians I hung out with when I still was able to call myself that were never for or against any tool.  The tool was supposed to be chosen based on whether it was the right one for the task.  One of the benefits of hanging out with 6σ outliers was that, in order to corral a large enough group to get anything done, you had to _work_ to find and facilitate commonalities (build collections of commonses(?)).  That practical problem helped one decide which tool was right for which task.  The fundamental problem with the new Libertarians is that they don't think differently enough to have any idea when redistribution might be the right tool and when it might be the wrong tool.  They just ham-handedly object to the tool, itself.

Of course, this is nothing more than an anti-essentialist (or anti-idealist) argument.  The answer to every question is always "It depends."

On 11/04/2016 01:51 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I found the article from the Dalai Lama in the NYT today fairly plausible explanation of why we have the current problem.    But, I would say, no, there will be no brotherhood with the Bundy's.   The redistributionist approach (that Brooks -- libertarian -- objects to elsewhere) arises in order to give the possibility of free enterprise, not to preserve it for those that haven't realized they've simply failed to be sufficiently enterprising.

--
☣ glen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Owen Densmore]

Be wary of early voting statistics: they are biased towards demographics that are traditional liberal, thus biased towards Hillary.

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

The Republicans in Florida still have teensy bit more returned.    It depends on the defection rates.

 

https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Be wary of early voting statistics: they are biased towards demographics that are traditional liberal, thus biased towards Hillary.

 

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Marcus G. Daniels]

http://www.ncsbe.gov/absentee-data

 

I grabbed the CSV file from North Carolina, and tabulated some aggregate counts.

 

The registered voter counts are available here:

 http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=10-29-2016

 

Democrats:2,715,039

Republications: 2,067,392            

 

See Amy Schumer’s remarks on the utility of these records.    J

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amy-schumer-has-a-last-ditch-appeal-that-might-actually-get-you-to-vote_us_581c7bc9e4b0aac624839004

 

   party                             race      count

1    DEM                            ASIAN  10738

2    LIB                            ASIAN    134

3    REP                            ASIAN   4172

4    UNA                            ASIAN  14689

5    DEM        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN 506320

6    LIB        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN    571

7    REP        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN   8166

8    UNA        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN  64221

9    DEM INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   6139

10   LIB INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE     42

11   REP INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2291

12   UNA INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2815

13   DEM                            OTHER  20288

14   LIB                            OTHER    272

15   REP                            OTHER   7636

16   UNA                            OTHER  16924

17   DEM                TWO or MORE RACES   6845

18   LIB                TWO or MORE RACES    131

19   REP                TWO or MORE RACES   1723

20   UNA                TWO or MORE RACES   5296

21   DEM                     UNDESIGNATED  26117

22   LIB                     UNDESIGNATED    391

23   REP                     UNDESIGNATED  13778

24   UNA                     UNDESIGNATED  39862

25   REP                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

26   UNA                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

27   DEM                            WHITE 548643

28   LIB                            WHITE   6407

29   REP                            WHITE 823573

30   UNA                            WHITE 546961

 

  party       count

1   DEM 1125090

2   LIB    7948

3   REP  861340

4   UNA  690769

 

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

The Republicans in Florida still have teensy bit more returned.    It depends on the defection rates.

 

https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats

 

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Be wary of early voting statistics: they are biased towards demographics that are traditional liberal, thus biased towards Hillary.

 

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Gillian Densmore]

Their's lies, damned lies, and statistics 

(Attributed to Mark Twain)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

http://www.ncsbe.gov/absentee-data

 

I grabbed the CSV file from North Carolina, and tabulated some aggregate counts.

 

The registered voter counts are available here:

 http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=10-29-2016

 

Democrats:2,715,039

Republications: 2,067,392            

 

See Amy Schumer’s remarks on the utility of these records.    J

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amy-schumer-has-a-last-ditch-appeal-that-might-actually-get-you-to-vote_us_581c7bc9e4b0aac624839004

 

   party                             race      count

1    DEM                            ASIAN  10738

2    LIB                            ASIAN    134

3    REP                            ASIAN   4172

4    UNA                            ASIAN  14689

5    DEM        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN 506320

6    LIB        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN    571

7    REP        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN   8166

8    UNA        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN  64221

9    DEM INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   6139

10   LIB INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE     42

11   REP INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2291

12   UNA INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2815

13   DEM                            OTHER  20288

14   LIB                            OTHER    272

15   REP                            OTHER   7636

16   UNA                            OTHER  16924

17   DEM                TWO or MORE RACES   6845

18   LIB                TWO or MORE RACES    131

19   REP                TWO or MORE RACES   1723

20   UNA                TWO or MORE RACES   5296

21   DEM                     UNDESIGNATED  26117

22   LIB                     UNDESIGNATED    391

23   REP                     UNDESIGNATED  13778

24   UNA                     UNDESIGNATED  39862

25   REP                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

26   UNA                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

27   DEM                            WHITE 548643

28   LIB                            WHITE   6407

29   REP                            WHITE 823573

30   UNA                            WHITE 546961

 

  party       count

1   DEM 1125090

2   LIB    7948

3   REP  861340

4   UNA  690769

 

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

The Republicans in Florida still have teensy bit more returned.    It depends on the defection rates.

 

https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats

 

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Be wary of early voting statistics: they are biased towards demographics that are traditional liberal, thus biased towards Hillary.

 

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Gillian Densmore]

Anecdotally i'm not to surprised.  The people I know don't like either Hillary or Trump all that much.

Hillarly they don't seem thrilled by because of oh great doing things that haven't worked well.

Trump they don't like because he's seen as a giant dick.Among other problems.

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Gillian Densmore <[hidden email]> wrote:

Their's lies, damned lies, and statistics 

(Attributed to Mark Twain)

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Marcus Daniels <[hidden email]> wrote:

http://www.ncsbe.gov/absentee-data

 

I grabbed the CSV file from North Carolina, and tabulated some aggregate counts.

 

The registered voter counts are available here:

 http://enr.ncsbe.gov/voter_stats/results.aspx?date=10-29-2016

 

Democrats:2,715,039

Republications: 2,067,392            

 

See Amy Schumer’s remarks on the utility of these records.    J

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amy-schumer-has-a-last-ditch-appeal-that-might-actually-get-you-to-vote_us_581c7bc9e4b0aac624839004

 

   party                             race      count

1    DEM                            ASIAN  10738

2    LIB                            ASIAN    134

3    REP                            ASIAN   4172

4    UNA                            ASIAN  14689

5    DEM        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN 506320

6    LIB        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN    571

7    REP        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN   8166

8    UNA        BLACK or AFRICAN AMERICAN  64221

9    DEM INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   6139

10   LIB INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE     42

11   REP INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2291

12   UNA INDIAN AMERICAN or ALASKA NATIVE   2815

13   DEM                            OTHER  20288

14   LIB                            OTHER    272

15   REP                            OTHER   7636

16   UNA                            OTHER  16924

17   DEM                TWO or MORE RACES   6845

18   LIB                TWO or MORE RACES    131

19   REP                TWO or MORE RACES   1723

20   UNA                TWO or MORE RACES   5296

21   DEM                     UNDESIGNATED  26117

22   LIB                     UNDESIGNATED    391

23   REP                     UNDESIGNATED  13778

24   UNA                     UNDESIGNATED  39862

25   REP                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

26   UNA                    'UNDESIGNATED      1

27   DEM                            WHITE 548643

28   LIB                            WHITE   6407

29   REP                            WHITE 823573

30   UNA                            WHITE 546961

 

  party       count

1   DEM 1125090

2   LIB    7948

3   REP  861340

4   UNA  690769

 

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marcus Daniels
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:52 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

The Republicans in Florida still have teensy bit more returned.    It depends on the defection rates.

 

https://countyballotfiles.elections.myflorida.com/FVRSCountyBallotReports/AbsenteeEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats

 

From: Friam [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 3:41 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Be wary of early voting statistics: they are biased towards demographics that are traditional liberal, thus biased towards Hillary.

 

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

[Nick Thompson]

Oh.  Ok;  I thought you meant Liberals and I could not make that work.  Thanks for the clarification.

 

n

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 2:21 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Nick --

 

Just joking that Libertarians (ie libbies) should refuse to take campaign funding from the government and refuse to participate in government run elections, or they're clearly acting as LINO's (Libertarians In Name Only).  Sorry, it was an old joke the first time.

 

-- rec --

 

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Nick Thompson <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Roger,

 

Perhaps my humor and imagination have been totally destroyed by this election (which somebody aptly described as a political dumpster fire), but … I didn’t understand your comment,  AND I want to.

 

Nick

 

Nicholas S. Thompson

Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology

Clark University

http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/

 

From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 1:04 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight

 

Aren't the libbies constitutionally required to disdain funding from the government?  Seems like they should disdain elections, too, hold out for victory by acclamation?

 

-- rec --

 

 

On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:28 PM, ┣glen┫ <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 11/04/2016 09:53 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> http://www.slate.com/features/pkremp_forecast/report.html

Very nice presentation.  Thanks, Marcus!

On 11/04/2016 10:46 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I was going to "scoff" at this number and analysis until I checked MY favorite source and saw what people who were putting their money where their mouths are were saying:
>
> https://tippie.biz.uiowa.edu/iem/

That's only 1 market.  Predictwise (which I may have heard about on this list?) aggregates some markets:
http://predictwise.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/PredictWise_November4_ChartPres.png

But, were I to play the market(s), I'd bet on both Clinton and Trump, of course, in various amounts.  So, it's not clear whether these markets are predictive of the winner so much as they're predictive of strategies for benefiting from the winner, who[m]ever it may be.

> Is that chasm recently formed, the FBI's "October Surprise"?   There sure is a lot of volatility!

My hypothesis is that Clinton's drop in the polls is a result of the late-comers digging into the subject.  Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump and Clinton for more than a month or two, will have already formed their opinion.  More emails (or more sex harassment allegations) won't affect that.  But those who only started really paying attention last month may just now be starting to dig in and think about the extent of Clinton's and Trump's foibles and qualities.  The falsifying question would be: What % of pollees answered prematurely back before October? ... didn't answer "undecided", but were likely to change their minds once they started digging?

I'm also fond of PollyVote: https://pollyvote.com/en/ ... though I also forget where I learned about that one. [sigh]

> Gary and Jill only need 5% of the vote to get their party's funding and automatic ballot inclusion next round.

It would be great to see the Green party get the funding.  I wouldn't celebrate the Libertarians getting it, though.

--
␦glen?

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove

 

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove