patrick.net

joeyjojojunior's comments

« First    « Previous     Comments 2540 - 2579 of 3,104     Next »     Last »

  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 11:02am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Goran_K says

Ha. Said by someone who obviously has never used or proven to be proficient with firearms.

It's far from easy. Yes it's easy to load a round, and fire it off.

It takes a lifetime to be proficient.


And once again Goran changes the subject so he can pretend to be correct.

I said use, not be proficient. Regardless, I like our chances.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 12:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

PaisleyPattern says

This is Silver hedging his bets.Throughout the campaign he constantly interpreted the polling as giving Trump approximately zero chance of winning.


No he didn't. Please go back and read Nate's writing. . He was banging the drum all season saying the models showing Trump with a 95% chance of winning were crap.

Seriously--you are 100% incorrect. Do some research on your own if you don't believe me.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 12:22pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

CIC- again, it's no use having this discussion with you because it's over your head.

If I have a 6 sided die and I say there's only a 16.67% chance it lands on 1, then I roll it and it lands on 1--was I wrong?

Because that's basically what you are saying.

Nate said there's a 30% chance of Trump winning, and he won. Was Nate wrong?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 12:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says

Want to explain his E.C. prediction, because that's the ONLY thing that matters? Was that right or wrong?


He didn't predict anything. He simply averaged the state's polling data and awarded it to the polling leader.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 12:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PaisleyPattern says
Is this enough?
This coming from a pollster doesn’t look good. I guess Trump had an incredible surge and just beat Hillary by a nose at the finish line.


No--I'm saying actually go to 538 and read some of his articles from late Oct. and early Nov. Don't go to conservative hit piece sites--go to the source and judge for yourself.

That's if you really want to learn something.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 1:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
OK, even Nate said he fucked up, but YOU still won't admit it:


How I Acted Like A Pundit And Screwed Up On Donald Trump
Trump’s nomination shows the need for a more rigorous approach.

By Nate Silver

Filed under 2016 Election

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-i-acted-like-a-pundit-and-screwed-up-on-donald-trump


That was the primary. I'm talking general election.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 1:10pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PaisleyPattern says
Those are his quotes aren’t they?


Sure--out of context and very old. Most are 2015 for God's sake.

Look at his writing in Oct and Nov. 2016
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 1:13pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
Hillary had 90% of the media on her side


That's also BS.

https://www.good.is/articles/hillary-clinton-negative-press
"It’s no secret that, from the moment she announced her candidacy back in April 2015, Hillary Clinton has been bludgeoned by negative media coverage. The email server; the Wall Street speaking fees; the attacks from both Trump and Sanders. I’ve debated with people who legitimately fear she will be imprisoned before the election. Some, despite the venomous dismissal of my rolling eyes, have called her a murderer. Others: an old woman, a plutocrat, a crook, abused by her husband, no backbone to speak of. But if you’ve suspected that there’s a reason people are saying these things—perhaps parroting disproportionately negative stories they’ve consumed in the media over the past year-and-a-half—it turns out you’re right.
A new report released this week by Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy found Clinton has received far more negative coverage than any other candidate in the race thus far. The study was based on an analysis of news statements from CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, the New York Times, USA Today, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post."
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 1:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Strategist says


The same people who get scammed by Bernie Sanders BS.


No, the same people who believe that Devin Kelley was Antifa or that the Las Vegas shooter was a liberal or that Hillary Clinton had Seth Rich killed.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 1:59pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

lol--McGee turning into a political hack trying to reduce expectations before the results come in.

Well done.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 3:40pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says

Just how deep do you have to dig to find links that support your bullshit? Couldn't you find one on Mother Jones or Think Progress?


It's a Harvard study, you moron.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 5:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Just called it. Northam

Looks like a big win

Guess all the NRA money wasn't enough
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 5:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joshuatrio says
Bad people are going to do bad things no matter what the laws say.


So why have laws against rape or murder then?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 5:28pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

errc says
Never Leftism...not even once.
But never voted Republican, ever.
But only open to the possibility of criticizing Democrats

It’s either the Politically Conflicted Party, or just Republican as hell but ashamed to own it


Goran is the reason that polls oversample Dems (according to piggy). But pollsters aren't as stupid as him so they know that there are a lot of folks like Goran who pretend to be independent or Libertarian because they think it's cooler than simply saying they vote a straight R ticket every 4 years.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 5:56pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

jvolstad says
Leave it to the liberals to pull the Race card out of their butts in order the win in politics.


What--as opposed to Republicans saying Northam supports pedophiles? Very classy.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 7, 6:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

What's really amazing is the Virginia House--right now it looks like the Dems have a real shot at taking over the House which seemed impossible due to extreme gerrymandering. Very strong showing by Dems tonight.

It shows that the special election results from earlier in the year were pretty good foreshadowing for what was really going on in the electorate.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 5:06am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Sniper says
joeyjojojunior says
Just called it. Northam

Looks like a big win

Guess all the NRA money wasn't enough


Wrong.

The people in VA didn't want a GOPe as a governor


I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, but you agreed with my statement. So that makes me right, not wrong.

Sniper says
NJ just went to the Communists.


So, which is it piggy. Sometimes you post a weird picture stating both parties are the same, but then now you are saying Dems are Communists. Are both parties Communists then?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 5:07am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

komputodo says


Yeah, you seem to be the worrying type.


You need to up your game. That's not even a good troll.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 5:08am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
What NEW laws is your Tribe proposing that would have prevented this guy from buying his guns. This should be a real easy answer for you, if you were really serious, and not just a TROLL.


wtf---there is no law requiring background checks at gun shows. I'm saying let's pass a NEW law requiring them. Is that too hard for you to follow?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 6:00am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joshuatrio says
Sniper says


There are over 300 federal guns laws on the books now (and that doesn't include additional different state laws), if we only had 301 laws, this shooting would never of happened, right, Joey the TROLL?


Good point. LOL


Yes, I'll second that it's not a good point. CIC often falls into the logical trap of if a new law wouldn't 100% stop everything, it's not worth enacting. If a new gun law saves 300 lives/year, I'd say it's worth it. Even if it doesn't stop all gun crime.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 7:14am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
Ahhh, so that would have prevent this guy from buying the guns, if they checked him out before he bought them at a local gun show. Good!


Nope--but it would prevent some people who shouldn't have guns from getting them. Or do you think it's not worth potentially saving hundreds of lives?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 7:22am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Sniper says
Joey the TROLL, I know you're a little bit slow on most topics, but I'll try and explain it to you. VA Repub voters didn't want a NeverTrumper and member of the GOPe as a governor, they wanted CHANGE, like they got with Trump. Gillespie was vocal about NOT supporting Trump, he paid the price for it. He lost by a bigger margin then Trump did in the general.


Perhaps. And that agrees with my statements that Northam won. And the NRA money wasn't enough to help Republicans.

If you persist in disagreeing, please tell me what is wrong with the above statements.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 7:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
No they didn't. They won in areas where they were expected to win. Nothing to see here. There were no "surprises" in any of them.


lol---you must be kidding. The Virginia House turning blue is a HUGE surprise.

The Georgia districts flipping blue was a big surprise. It was a blue wave yesterday.

You know it was a good night for Dems when McGee is silent during election returns. And when Gillespe underperforms even McGee's drastically lowered expectations.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 7:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Sniper says

And your boy Nate was wrong on both counts. STOP posting his bullshit, he's washed up.


Seriously--just shut up and let the adults have a conversation.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 7:30am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says

How's all those STRICT state gun laws working out in your backyard of Shitcago?


Actually, not bad. The problem is that the laws aren't so strict elsewhere so the majority of guns used in Chicago came from out of state.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 8:13am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
The polls had Gillespe ahead all the time? Can you please post those polls, it wasn't what I was seeing


Gillespe didn't run for a House seat. He ran for Governor.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 8:20am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
I would love to save lives, I just keep asking you for sensible laws that would WORK in these cases but not infringe on lawful owners, but all you keep posting is nonsense that has no bearing on reality.


So you think that background checks don't work and infringe on lawful owners?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 8:21am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
I would ban anonymous posting. The only legitimate reason for "anonymous" posting is for people to shit stir with little repercussions.


As opposed to all the repercussions that we have now?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 9:52am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

You guys understand that the union doesn't set their own salaries. You should be mad at the school board, police board, fire board, etc. who signs these deals. Don't get mad at the guys for wanting more money--we all do. Get mad at the guys who allow it to happen.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 9:58am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

lostand confused says
The unions birbe-err campaign contribute- to the people who set the salaries-in a legal way. The guys who allow it to happen mostly are dem politicians.


I doubt that. Look at most school boards and fire boards and police boards. They aren't Dem politicians.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 10:11am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Goran_K says
I honestly don't know what CIC means who that is.


More Goran trolling. This guy should not only no be a moderator, he should be banned along with CIC
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 10:19am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

He knows it. He asked the same question a couple weeks ago and was told then. He's just trolling.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 11:16am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

WookieMan says
You can always bend data whatever way you want, but these elections yesterday have nothing to do with the coming elections for house and senators in 2018. So I'll call it the way I see it. Every single comment on this thread is a complete and utter waste of your time. It's your time, so I don't particularly care, but for some of you it seems like this election yesterday actually matters for future elections. It doesn't.


Actually history has proven they do. You can believe it or not, but data has shown they do.

Now--I agree a year out is a long time and things may change, but if the political environment looks similar to the way it does now, you can be pretty sure that the results will be similar to yesterdays.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 11:17am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Strategist says
Who approved these massive payouts? Don't recall anyone asking me, the taxpayer, if it was OK.
Daylight robbery.


Typically school boards, fire boards, police boards. Local guys.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 11:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

WookieMan says
I'm not being a smart ass, seriously. I've never seen any correlation between a governors race in New Jersey and Virginia being extrapolated to a national level for house members and senators a year in advance. It doesn't make sense. I'd love to see the stats from 4 years ago for these same governors races and how it foreshadowed anything in the 2014 midterms. I'm not certain that history does prove any correlation.


No obviously one governor's race didn't predict a wave in the next year's elections. (although I'd argue that Scott Brown's election as senator from Mass. ~a year after Obama was elected was a pretty good foreshadow for what was to come in the mid-terms) But we've seen a mountain of data showing the country's sentiment has changed. To ignore it all and say it's meaningless is tantamount to sticking one's head in the sand.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 11:44am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Here's another good article with a deeper dive:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-fundamentals-favor-democrats-in-2018/
"But we didn’t need Tuesday night to prove that the national environment was good for Democrats; there was plenty of evidence for it already. In no particular order of importance:
President Trump’s approval rating is only 37.6 percent.
Democrats lead by approximately 10 points on the generic Congressional ballot.
Republican incumbents are retiring at a rapid pace; there were two retirements (from New Jersey Rep. Frank LoBiondo and Texas Rep. Ted Poe) on Tuesday alone.
Democrats are recruiting astonishing numbers of candidates for Congress.
Democrats have performed well overall in special elections to the U.S. Congress, relative to the partisanship of those districts; they’ve also performed well in special elections to state legislatures.
The opposition party almost always gains ground at midterm elections. This is one of the most durable empirical rules of American politics."
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 12:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Strategist says

So nice of them. Model civil servants.


So vote for different ones then. Or run yourself--how about that crazy idea!
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 1:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

WookieMan says
Unless you're really into Virginia and New Jersey state level politics, and understand the nuances and can extrapolate those to a national level, I really don't think the results yesterday mean much.


Yep, I understand your point--I'm just saying that people have looked at it and found that there is a pretty good correlation.
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 2:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Strategist says
I always wanted to be rich, hang out with friends and call it work. Take bribes, attend lavish parties, go on fancy vacations at taxpayer expense. And hire hot secretaries that would even make Rin go insane.


Wait a second. I thought you wanted to be poor so you didn't have to pay any taxes? Which is it?
  joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 8, 3:06pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

I agree. If the trolls are going to win, them I think I'm done as well.

It's too bad-I learned a lot from the likes of Iwog, Bellingham Bill, Bob, and even Nomograph back in the day.