I’m a two time Trump Voter. Never Again. I can’t see how you can be in the military, or even so much as have a daughter and support this guy. I stand by my 2016 vote, but that’s it. My European friends, especially my Ukrainian friends fear not, Trump isn’t going to get it in 2024. I’m feeling historical landslide. I wouldn’t even vote this time around, but Ukraine is so important. I’m sorry, Ukraine WINNING is too important.
@@tomas-qr2el But he doesn't admit he was wrong. He said he stands by his 2016 vote. And he voted for him a second time. it's only now that he's starting to regret it but in no way does he admit he was wrong to vote for him, twice.
Harris has been talking about her policies on small business startups, on tax reduction for working Americans, a child tax credit, on reproductive rights, on immigration reform etc almost daily. Trump was asked on what he would do for child care and he went on a 5 thousand word rant with no meaning.
❌. The magic number needed to achieve victory in the electoral college is 270. Not as you stated, 240. I'll be back when you get your information sorted. 😩😩😩😩😩
Also, technically the states' electoral votes are not solely based on population. Each state gets one vote for every House member which is roughly proportional to population plus the two senators each state has. This means that states with small populations have disproportionately greater representation in the electoral college than states with large populations. For example, Wyoming has per capita 32 times the electoral college representation as California. Given that Republicans are preferred by rural as opposed to Urban voters, states with sparse population generally are solidly Republican. This is why Republicans have a built-in advantage in the electoral college.
Wyoming has 3 electoral college votes while California has 53. And you are actually claiming that the system gives undue weight to Wyoming??? That's just bizarre.
This is what you should be saying She is running a good 👍 Company , Got more Money 💰 than Republican party / Trump , Picked a VICE President. She has not said anything that sounds bad like Baby 🍼 Trump and remember in just less than 2 months , SO My question is how do you know someone is acting be a GOOD 👍 LEADER , So please can ask your panelists ?????
statistical probability works much better on a deck of cards where there's truly randomized variables. It's not like if we did four elections three of them would have gone for Clinton. I'm probably just naive and Nate's supreme intellect is way over my head. Then again, he may agree with me. He is getting paid a lot of money by industries that want him to perform the statistical calculations. I can't blame him!
I mean, that IS how percentages and statistics work (70% chance of yes means 30% chance of no). I followed 538 constantly in the lead up to the 2016 election, and I was not at ALL confident Hillary would win. That's because in the final weeks and days, her lead shrunk to just 3%. The margin of error was plus or minus 4%. Only the media made it seem like she was certain to win, because they just couldn't imagine any other outcome. Nate Silver fell into the same trap. That's selection bias, not proper statistical analysis. His numbers weren't wrong, but his level of confidence was -- because it was based on his own feelings and not the math.
FGS Harris needs to introduce herself first. Then she gets to talk policy. She's NEW to the race. How can you say you don't know much about Harris? There's a huge amount of information out there! But if you're sticking to mainstream media alone of course you're getting less information. Trump has promised huge tax breaks to the rich and the media conglomerates are backing him because of this. So they don't make him accountable.
Nate silver never gets it right and he always builds in a percent chance of being right into his projections.Rather than calling the winner he is a clerk and very rarely correct overrated
Too much fast talking from this guy. He predicts PERCENTAGES (not results) then can claim either result as "I was right, as I said it was a higher % chance than others did". He's like the economists - often wrong, never admit/recant. To be believable, he needs to predict X will WIN. And the test is yes/no. Not "we were all wrong, but my % was closer than someone else's %".
Very important to understand that DT won in 2016 only because of a very strange supreme court decision which ended the vote counting early -mail-in votes from Florida when it was clear that the vote was steadily moving in a blue direction and the democrats would certainly have won if all of the votes were counted - you might remember the discussion of "hanging chads"... referring to incompletely punched cards. This race was finally decided by the supreme court decision... the only time when a USA election was decided by a court rather than the people. Very interestingly this election ruined the perfect record of famous election-predicting professor Allan Lichtman - known for the famous 13-keys method of election prediction. He had predicted that Hillary Clinton would win. Good bit of American history to study a bit if you didn't live through it.
I’m a two time Trump Voter. Never Again. I can’t see how you can be in the military, or even so much as have a daughter and support this guy. I stand by my 2016 vote, but that’s it. My European friends, especially my Ukrainian friends fear not, Trump isn’t going to get it in 2024. I’m feeling historical landslide. I wouldn’t even vote this time around, but Ukraine is so important. I’m sorry, Ukraine WINNING is too important.
I am Russian, I support Ukraine! Many in Russia know the war is lost
I stand by my opinion- that anyone who ever voted for trump is responsible for this monster... that means YOU sweetie, great job 👏👏👏
YOU are the problem. YOU threatened the Republic with your 2016 vote and 2020 vote. And you still can't see the error of your ways.
@@amberowens3244 when people admit they were wrong, react with grace - especially when they promise to right the wrong.
@@tomas-qr2el But he doesn't admit he was wrong. He said he stands by his 2016 vote. And he voted for him a second time. it's only now that he's starting to regret it but in no way does he admit he was wrong to vote for him, twice.
When Stormy, in court, described poor Donald as 'an orange turd', she spoke for tens of millions of people!😂
for at least 81 millions
I enjoy hearing Harris’ economic policy ideas as opposed to the incoherent word salads Trump spins for us. Make Accountability an Expectation Again!!
Harris has been talking about her policies on small business startups, on tax reduction for working Americans, a child tax credit, on reproductive rights, on immigration reform etc almost daily. Trump was asked on what he would do for child care and he went on a 5 thousand word rant with no meaning.
Harris has been talking about policy almost non stop for two weeks. What are you watching??
I didn't watch that far ( 240 electoral college votes error) but I'm not surprised that Times Radio would be so biased against Kamala Harris.
❌. The magic number needed to achieve victory in the electoral college is 270. Not as you stated, 240. I'll be back when you get your information sorted. 😩😩😩😩😩
Also, technically the states' electoral votes are not solely based on population. Each state gets one vote for every House member which is roughly proportional to population plus the two senators each state has. This means that states with small populations have disproportionately greater representation in the electoral college than states with large populations. For example, Wyoming has per capita 32 times the electoral college representation as California. Given that Republicans are preferred by rural as opposed to Urban voters, states with sparse population generally are solidly Republican. This is why Republicans have a built-in advantage in the electoral college.
Wyoming has 3 electoral college votes while California has 53. And you are actually claiming that the system gives undue weight to Wyoming??? That's just bizarre.
Pop CA 39M, WY
“Before Covid that is” Trump bungled the pandemic but everyone gives him a pass.
the most ridiculous electroial system in the world !!
US electric system is bizarre. The popular voting is the most fair and logic, check countries applying it. Electoral college is bs.
The magic number of electoral votes is actually 270, not 240.
Actually, in order to win the electoral college a candidates needs 270 not 2:40.
Since when has the magic Electoral college been 240? As an American this is news to me.
He's incorrect, of course. The magic number is 270.
@@andrewringle7826 yea, that's where I stopped watching.
Yeah I caught that too. That was a foreign error.
It’s just a simple error guy, people do make mistakes from time to time
@@danshowlund yea, well, if the host isn’t going to correct that mistake than it’s not real journalism, is it?
270 electoral college votes wins the election*
YES! Times Radio tells everyone it is 240!
They are spineless! Never let thugs try and silence you......thats what they want!
Funny to think anyone fears the double quarter pounder with eyes.
He has had help in the form of kompromat provided by Russia
ahem, 270 is the magic number
Yes!
This is what you should be saying She is running a good 👍 Company , Got more Money 💰 than Republican party / Trump , Picked a VICE President. She has not said anything that sounds bad like Baby 🍼 Trump and remember in just less than 2 months , SO My question is how do you know someone is acting be a GOOD 👍 LEADER , So please can ask your panelists ?????
Well said!
By entertaining these "conservative" clowns, Times Radio seems amiable to arguing away the basis for rule of law entirely. "Why not fascism?"
Why hasn't there been more said how trumpys dad paid trumpys way out of the draft??????
People can’t prosper when they live in fear.
Nate Silver: "There's a 71.4% chance Clinton wins."
She loses
"I told you - there's a 28.6% chance Trump would win."
🤦♂️
statistical probability works much better on a deck of cards where there's truly randomized variables. It's not like if we did four elections three of them would have gone for Clinton. I'm probably just naive and Nate's supreme intellect is way over my head. Then again, he may agree with me. He is getting paid a lot of money by industries that want him to perform the statistical calculations. I can't blame him!
And you obviously do not unerstand probability. Maths is complicated if one do not listen careful to ones teacher....
I mean, that IS how percentages and statistics work (70% chance of yes means 30% chance of no). I followed 538 constantly in the lead up to the 2016 election, and I was not at ALL confident Hillary would win. That's because in the final weeks and days, her lead shrunk to just 3%. The margin of error was plus or minus 4%. Only the media made it seem like she was certain to win, because they just couldn't imagine any other outcome. Nate Silver fell into the same trap. That's selection bias, not proper statistical analysis. His numbers weren't wrong, but his level of confidence was -- because it was based on his own feelings and not the math.
Actually 270 is the required number for the electoral college.
💙🌊💪🏻💪🏽
270. Not 240.
FGS Harris needs to introduce herself first. Then she gets to talk policy. She's NEW to the race. How can you say you don't know much about Harris? There's a huge amount of information out there! But if you're sticking to mainstream media alone of course you're getting less information. Trump has promised huge tax breaks to the rich and the media conglomerates are backing him because of this. So they don't make him accountable.
"Take on this woman"
I can't take this guy seriously, just due to his haircut.
It's called a Spam head.
Popular with some older Gentlemen.
Who cares? Maybe just me….but I would not care if he had a spiked Mohawk. It’s a political discussion channel.
This was before the debate. Trump was told by his advisers to stick to policy but he couldn't do thaat.
Now I know Rick's day job.
Nate Silver, are you sponsored by Peter Thiel or not? This is how the world speaks.
Harris discussed some detail of economic policy yesterday. Why ignore that?
This video is a compilation from the week's videos. So maybe the interview was conducted just before the policy statement
Nate silver never gets it right and he always builds in a percent chance of being right into his projections.Rather than calling the winner he is a clerk and very rarely correct overrated
Times radio is really kicking the Harris campaigning into overdrive.
Let's vote in the communist another
Nate Silver is weird.
Too much fast talking from this guy. He predicts PERCENTAGES (not results) then can claim either result as "I was right, as I said it was a higher % chance than others did". He's like the economists - often wrong, never admit/recant. To be believable, he needs to predict X will WIN. And the test is yes/no. Not "we were all wrong, but my % was closer than someone else's %".
270
Yes. How COULD they get that wrong?
If they get that elementary basic element wrong how to trust them on anything else?
Very important to understand that DT won in 2016 only because of a very strange supreme court decision which ended the vote counting early -mail-in votes from Florida when it was clear that the vote was steadily moving in a blue direction and the democrats would certainly have won if all of the votes were counted - you might remember the discussion of "hanging chads"... referring to incompletely punched cards. This race was finally decided by the supreme court decision... the only time when a USA election was decided by a court rather than the people. Very interestingly this election ruined the perfect record of famous election-predicting professor Allan Lichtman - known for the famous 13-keys method of election prediction. He had predicted that Hillary Clinton would win. Good bit of American history to study a bit if you didn't live through it.
2000 election was stopped by SC. Not 2016.
Why is Times Radio so biased?
8:49 his policies didn’t bring down migration….that’s flat out wrong.
TRUMP ❤
Interesting. Great commentary.
His hair is so neat ❤
240?
No. 270!
Deep fake presenter
I think so and ignorant as well
Better get ready buttercups...TRUMP 2024!!!
270
270
Yes