He got 2000 “wrong”… Or did he?

164 points

I want to hear the opinion of the octopus that predicted the world cup results first

permalink
report
reply
69 points

Died. Now they are using a turtle but he always votes Nadar

permalink
report
parent
reply
21 points
*

Let him cook, it’ll get there eventually

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

* stares in confused Mitch McConnell *

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Holy shit this was funny!

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I hear there’s a groundhog in Pennsylvania that’s a pretty good meteorologist.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

How good is it at delegating tasks?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I saw a groundhog this weekend for the first time by my home. In point of order it was not afraid of its shadow.

permalink
report
parent
reply
69 points
*

Meaningless considering he still hasn’t predicted whether or not Biden will win this election. He says he needs another month lol.

Edit: As a bonus he can’t even apply his own rubric to a new potential candidate. So the real questions are: How could he possibly know they’d be worse, and why the fuck is he even saying anything?

permalink
report
reply
40 points

Not meaningless, his prediction system always gives the incumbent an advantage over anyone else in his party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
27 points
*

And yet, he hasn’t predicted yet because there are many other “keys”. Case-in-point: see how incumbency worked for Trump.

Also should be noted other reputable science-based algorithm designers like Nate Silver advises Biden to step down.

Finally, the unprecedented nature of an open convention also means this guy has nothing to go on for extrapolation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Also should be noted other reputable science-based algorithm designers like Nate Silver advises Biden to step down.

Nate’s algorithm is just a poll of polls. And his reasoning is incredibly short term and superficial.

Nate wasn’t suggesting Biden drop out back in January when other candidates could run to replace him. He’s only saying it now, because Biden’s polling is at an all time low.

If Biden recovers (likely, as the memory of the debate fades behind other current events) the pundits will start singing a different tune quickly enough.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

i bet you i could predict it with 100% accuracy if you give me another 4 months

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Yeah you say that and should be right but I’m more worried about January than I am November…

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

First, he didn’t get 2000 wrong, Gore won.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/jan/29/uselections2000.usa

2nd though… 2024 is a lose/lose no matter what the Democrats do at this point.

A weakened Biden can’t win.
A replaced Biden changes the dialog to “See! Even the Democrats know they can’t do the job!” which is a losing strategy.

The only way to pull out a win would be for Biden to die in office and have his successor get the sympathy vote, a la Johnson in '64.

permalink
report
reply
23 points

I disagree 100%. Having Biden step down and put his support behind a solid candidate many can agree on (not just corporate Dems) while saying he has given it thought and realizes it is best for Democrats & America means not only does he get to do so gracefully, but people can emphasize with honesty and not having and old man spend his final days being abused by those around him.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

The problem is he would never put his support behind anyone other than a corporate approved neoliberal. If he does step down, the person he picks is 110% going to be contentious among base Democrat voters especially among the younger voters. We’re not getting Bernie or AOC, full stop.

I also think Democrats are the worst about their purity tests and will turn their noses up at anyone for the slightest reason. When put into that perspective, I’ll take the chances with Biden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

If he stepped down and endorsed Bernie, I have ould say there is a chance. Short of that, you guys are heading for a second Trump.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

The biggest argument the Republicans have against Biden is his age.

Bernie is older than Biden.

It doesn’t matter at this point that he’d be better. The only way to combat the “too old” argument is to nominate someone younger than Trump. And there’s plenty of people younger than 78.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

I wish Jon Stewart would accept endorsement. Bernie isn’t the only candidate though. Trump didn’t start out cause he was well liked. He got popularity cause he was polarizing. He gets infinite free media coverage. The Democrats could pick AOC and the right would have a meltdown. She’d get consistent media coverage. She is good looking and would do good for pressers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

He literally can’t endorse Bernie, because that doesn’t solve the problem unless Bernie were to prove his mental acuity. They’re going with Newsome because he’s like young Biden. It’s an easy swap.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

Win first, hand power to Harris, then step down.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

There’s still plenty of room for a senile fumbling corporate puppet to be retained in office, assuming mass media and the party continue to back him.

But quite a bit of mass media is owned and operated by ultra-conservative ghouls and wanna-be fascist demagogues.

The real fear is that they cash out Biden and start running an endless train of hit pieces, like they did against Hilary and Bernie. Biden’s senility seems to be acceptable to majority of Dem voters, on the grounds that “Trump is worse”. It’s all the low info Indies who are yet to be swayed. And they’re only interested in the news cycle a couple weeks outside the general election.

permalink
report
parent
reply
37 points

Hey math people, if they all selected 1 of the 2 main candidates for every election, and they all selected different candidates, how many historians would it take to cover every combination for 10 years? (bonus points to see how many would take before guaranteeing someone could get 9/10)

permalink
report
reply
27 points
*

1024 historians assuming they all pick different combinations at random. Probability of randomly guessing at least 9 of 10 goes up to 1.075% or 93 historians (on average to get one person with 9/10 predictions right) or like the other commenter mentioned 1024-11= 1013 to guarantee a 9/10 but that’s a little overkill.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Where does the 93 come from? The percentage is almost correct, but it should be 11 (1.074%)

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

93 for 1/0.01075

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Note that many of those elections were easier to guess than just flipping a coin, so you don’t really need to cover every potential combination to cover like 95% of the likely outcomes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
29 points

It’s Biden all the way. Fortunately unfortunately.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 331K

    Comments