ButterflyEffect

Yeah I find the "Joe Biden's America" thing hilarious. Bruh, do you not realize who's America this is currently happening in? LOL.

It'd be a damning audio clip in just about every other democratic country in the world. But there is nothing that Trump could do to make Republicans run away from him.

This entire thread aged like a fine milk

An "I'm not Trump" campaign can get you in trouble if you don't provide any substance for the electorate to judge you by. It didn't work for Andrew Scheer vs. Justin Trudeau. Swing voters may be more comfortable with the demon they know (Trump) vs. one they know nothing about (Biden). Give people a reason to vote for you beyond "I'm not Trump" and you stand a much better chance.

"Debunked" by saying it's not true. The difference between the two is that a few people felt comfortable enough to put their name to a statement. I can make statements about anything, and I can put my name on it. It doesn't mean anything. I'm not saying it's true or not. It's one of those things where there is almost no way to prove which side is right without audio evidence. Would it surprise me if Trump made those remarks? No, it does seem par the course for him. However that's sort of where it ends. And like I said before, even if evidence came to light showing that these accusations were true, it really doesn't matter. His brainwashed minions will still suck him off and fondle the balls while doing so. Democrats will continue to not vote for him. It doesn't change a thing. But to argue any position on this is laughable at best. Nothing has been confirmed or debunked, so you're hanging onto the side of the he-said-she-said which you like better, while telling the other side that they're wrong.

I think a lot of governments are holding their breath until they see what happens in New Brunswick next week. If the PC government isn't punished for calling an election in the middle of a pandemic then I could see BC and PEI following suit very shortly after.

You folks are hilarious. "It's been confirmed by a source" "It's been debunked by a source" You're all arguing with each other using the same argument. If something can't be taken at face value as the truth then it goes both ways. Unless y'all trying to be ironic.

https://leantossup.ca/realclearpolitics-needs-to-fix-their-averages/ Commentary on some shady stuff happening at RCP since we were speaking about them just a few days ago. I don't particularly like the guys from Lean Tossup, I think they're brash and arrogant, but this commentary is spot on. You can't exclude polls if they're not showing what you want. This is the kind of stuff that comes back to bite you in the butt when your model ends up being wrong come election night.

Even if it's not fabricated, it doesn't matter. If Trump hates dead and/or injured war veterans, then his brain dead, retarded supporters hate them too. Not really much to gain or lose here.

Yeah, that's the problem with popular vote in any election where popular vote doesn't win you the election. Samples are random, but a few extra calls to California or New York skew democrat. Since California and NY are a large percentage of the countries population it's likely you'll have a large number of responses from there anyway, but at the end of the day it really doesn't matter. State level polling paints a much clearer picture during the presidential election, however since sample sizes are smaller for these polls there is a higher margin of error. Same thing happened in Canada in the last election. Polling showed the Conservatives winning the popular vote, and come election night they did. But they lost the election pretty badly. Turns out having a bunch of extra voters in Alberta and Saskatchewan doesn't matter if your support isn't evenly distributed throughout the country. When you only need 40% of the vote to win a district and you capture 80% those extra 40% of the votes are just like shooting a corpse, absolutely pointless in the grand scheme of the election.

Go with A and B rated pollsters from 538 since they have proven, good track records. A small bias is unavoidable in polling. Some agencies try and correct for bias after an election cycle. Most polling agencies are currently in a slight Democratic bias at the moment, and have been in one for the past two presidential elections. They were mostly slight Republican biased in 2012, which gave a false illusion that Obama could possibly lose. Those new pollsters will be put to the test come election night. I would agree with the second statement if this proved to be true in 2016. While media liked to push the story that there were quiet "shy-Trump" supporters who wouldn't admit it, the polling in 2016 was pretty dang good. State level polling in Michigan was off by quite a bit, but the states which Trump flipped on his way to victory were within the margins of error. No one should have been looking at 1-2% Clinton leads on the state level and been claiming an easy Democrat victory. Yet a lot of people did it anyway.

Yo thanks, just gave the account a follow. I tend to ignore independent Twitter posts pushing polling narratives unless I dive into the polls themselves. People are too partisan and cling to positive polls that push their narrative, no matter how poor the pollsters reputation are. Happens on both sides, of course. I like that 538 has a breakdown for pretty much all polling agencies in the United States, lists their average house bias in terms of percentage points, and also grades the agency based on their past accuracy. House bias is fine if its small, you can just adjust the average to give you a more accurate picture, but agencies flat out sucking is something you can't ignore. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/ Nate Silver? He's an excellent poll aggregator and political modeler. Reminder that while most political analysts were crowning Clinton the victor days before the election in 2016, Nate Solder told everyone that the election was going to be tight and that Trump could easily win. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-dont-ignore-the-polls-clinton-leads-but-its-a-close-race/

Nice. Furey is an unknown at this point.....he's the kind of guy I'm certain the middle aged mom could get behind. He's a lot more charismatic than Conservative leader Ches Crosbie, but with the provincial finances in actual ruin he's sort of damned if he does and damned if he doesn't play tough guy.

Any links to these polls? I don't want to go digging through the countless number of polls that get released in the USA seemingly daily (I'm very happy that there are only a handful of polling companies in Canada, makes it very easy to follow). I'd like to see if any of the good polling agencies which are showing this trend, and not the trash ones like Rasmussen.

I think if an election were to be held today that it would essentially come down to a coin flip, or possibly a dice roll. Always interesting to see how two different aggregates weight polls differently too. I usually follow 538 over RCP, but both have different methods of data analysis: RCP Polling average (includes 3rd party): Biden: 48.9% Trump: 42.5% RCP chances of victory: Biden: 50.2% Trump: 50% 538 Polling average (excludes 3rd party): Biden: 52.3% Trump: 46.3% 528 chances of victory: Biden: 69% Trump: 30%

Never underestimate the desire for some Canadians to want be just like their southern neighbours. A lot of copy cat stuff happens in Canada. Not to say there aren't problems in the Canadian police forces. There is still clear discrimination against Indigenous peoples in Western Canada (and a history of some severe, cruel, and unlawful practices such as "Starlight Tours"), and there is also discrimination against Black people in cities with higher Black populations (Toronto, Halifax). Some of the problems associated with US policing aren't as prevalent here since entrance requirements into policing programs are quite a bit higher (weeding out a lot of those officers who are doing it just out of a desire to have power and authority). Calls for defunding are also a bit silly......in the USA police departments are given huge amounts of money and have been trending towards increasing militarization of departments. While Canadian forces also get sizable budgets, militarization of the police is much less, and there are also sizable budgets for other social programs which can help alleviate a bunch of the societal issues which happen in the USA which lead to all the problems with minorities and police. Does it work? Police shootings per capita in Canada: about 1 per 1.029 million people Police shootings per capita in USA: about 1 per 287,000 people Defunding the police in Canada is just silly copy-cat bullcrap. Better training on how to handle minorities could go a long way, but the same problems don't really exist. Most of the protests in Canada, with the exception of a few nights in Montreal, have been peaceful. Police haven't gone full 'Murrica during the protests....no arrested or assaulted journalists, no one getting fired upon by the police on the step of their house. In fact, the police here helped organize the local BLM protests. They worked traffic control to allow the protests to happen, while also keeping a quiet profile as to not be obtrusive.

There's a pretty rough statue in our city as well which people want taken down, of Portuguese explorer Gaspar Corte-Real. His claim to fame was sailing over here with his father, being one of the first Europeans (but not THE first) to step foot on the island. And then they kidnapped about 50'ish indigenous folks, brought them back to Portugal, and sold them into slavery. Tear it down. He was actual scum.

It depends on the circumstances of the initial homicide/shooting. If that first homicide was not justified under self defense then almost anything which happens after that point, legally speaking, can not be argued as self-defense (that's my understanding anyway). On the surface it appears to be a complex legal case. However since he's a white male in America he will get a slap on the wrist. If he were black the cops would have put 20 bullets in him for even carrying that gun.

Yeah, as it stands right now Trump and the Republicans have about the same likelihood of winning the election as they did on election night in 2016, which is about 30%. 30% is too high for comfort if you're a Democrat.

I think we'll see some polls in the next few weeks. Since O'Toole isn't a very well known commodity I'm not sure if the CPC will see any boost. Liberals are somewhere between their last election result and majority territory. Honestly they may be begging to lose the vote of confidence in the house so they can get to the polls while also blaming the election on the CPC/NDP/BQ/Greens.

Dear god, 'Murrica. Seeing video from Kenosha from last night......y'all are starting to look like every country you've invaded in the past. Get it together, sheesh.

I thought MacKay would have given them a better shot at forming government...the Atlantic Canada boost could have yielded another 10'ish seats there, and then any inroads into the 905 would have set them up well. O'Toole won't be given free seats in Atlantic Canada, though what he can do in the 905 remains to be seen. Quebec voted en masse for O'Toole last night, so that could be something to try and build upon, though I doubt they could honestly break through the Bloc and Liberal fortress there.

Man, what is Andrew going on about here. In the past five minutes he's compared the Liberal Party to the government of the Soviet Union, and has suggested people check out alternate news sources such as the Post Millennial and True North. What on earth.

New leader of the Conservative Party of Canada will be announced tonight. I think it's going to be close. Most people expect MacKay to take it, and I do think he will win, but it'll likely be very close. Most likely on the third ballot. I also expect that O'Toole will win the popular vote but just come up short in points.

Land of the free.....lol. The problem with supporting a candidate based on the hate for the other candidate is that those voters are less motivated to go stand in line come election day. If Democrats loved Biden, they'd stand in line for hours to vote for him. If Democrats hate Trump they're a lot less likely do do the same for Biden. Voter apathy is a dangerous thing. I'm also seeing a lot of young Democrats who are unhappy with the Biden pick calling for voting 3rd party. My god.....are memories that short?