Elections Gary Johnson at 12% (3% away from debates), potential game changer

[kenetics]

Point me in the direction of a post I've said that in. I'll take that as "no, I really don't have a point and think it was possible for a dude who only commanded 120 men to have killed 5 million people in an era where warfare still largely consisted of swords". Thanks, got it.

So the dirty diseases they brought didn't cause those deaths as well? Keep it up lol.

 

[kenetics]

Point me in the direction of a post I've said that in. I'll take that as "no, I really don't have a point and think it was possible for a dude who only commanded 120 men to have killed 5 million people in an era where warfare still largely consisted of swords". Thanks, got it.

Dude they had muskets and cannons..

 

[Sycho Sid]

So if Trump backs out of the debates, which he seems to be hedging towards, and Johnson gets 15%, do we just get a Johnson/Clinton debate? Because that would be super boring and awkward.

 

[lfd0311]

So the dirty diseases they brought didn't cause those deaths as well? Keep it up lol.

LOL at you acting like they brought a box of disease with them.

 

[lfd0311]

Dude they had muskets and cannons..

They would have had they very earliest muskets in existence. They were far from effective. Most wars were still fought hand to hand in until about the mid 1600's when Cromwell really incorporated the musket into what he called his "New Model Army" which is why it was called the new model army in the first place.

Cannons in the late 1400s were massive things that were used for sieges. They weren't the type of cannons that were just hauled around battlefields by crews of horses like the were in the 17 and 1800s. They didn't even begin mounting cannons on ships until about a decade later. So again, you could not be more wrong if you tried.

 

[lfd0311]

You were attacking the propriety of the term "extermination".



I have a former college roommate who teaches a literature section based around Columbus' journals. I have no reservations about Howard Zinn, nor any particular historian to be honest.

Estimates of the popular reduction of natives place 5 million in the meaty middle, as pre-Columbus estimates range from 1 million to 8 million. If you have concrete proof that even the most modest estimates are somehow ludicrously exaggerated, I would be welcome to hear it and, while I will not comment on the fact that for some reason defending genocidal rapists is your favorite past time, I'll treat your submission with every bit of respect that I can.




Of course disease was the biggest contributor-- I have not denied that given that it is undeniable. That does not, however, preclude the documented concerted effort to dispose of natives by the European conquest, nor does it disprove witness testimony of those efforts by the men who perpetrated them.

I see I'm not getting an answer to that either. I didn't think so.

 

[Trotsky]

I see I'm not getting an answer to that either. I didn't think so.

?

 

[kenetics]

They would have had they very earliest muskets in existence. They were far from effective. Most wars were still fought hand to hand in until about the mid 1600's when Cromwell really incorporated the musket into what he called his "New Model Army" which is why it was called the new model army in the first place.

Cannons in the late 1400s were massive things that were used for sieges. They weren't the type of cannons that were just hauled around battlefields by crews of horses like the were in the 17 and 1800s. They didn't even begin mounting cannons on ships until about a decade later. So again, you could not be more wrong if you tried.

On his second trip to the New World, Columbus brought cannons and attack dogs. If a native resisted slavery, he would cut off a nose or an ear. If slaves tried to escape, Columbus had them burned alive. Other times, he sent attack dogs to hunt them down, and the dogs would tear off the arms and legs of the screaming natives while they were still alive. If the Spaniards ran short of meat to feed the dogs, Arawak babies were killed for dog food.

They are without arms [weapons], all naked, and without skill at arms and great cowards, a thousand running away from three, and thus they are good to be ordered about, to be made to work, plant, and do whatever is wanted, to build towns and be taught to go clothed and accept our customs.”

This is from columbus himself lol. Stop dude, you are making a fool out of yourself.

 

[Rick Sanchez]

LOL at you acting like they brought a box of disease with them.

dont forget to bring the smallpox blankets!

 

[lfd0311]

dont forget to bring the smallpox blankets!

I'm not really sure what the Siege of Fort Pitt has to do with anything....

 

[lfd0311]

?

I replied to your last post, got nothing in return

 

[lfd0311]

On his second trip to the New World, Columbus brought cannons and attack dogs. If a native resisted slavery, he would cut off a nose or an ear. If slaves tried to escape, Columbus had them burned alive. Other times, he sent attack dogs to hunt them down, and the dogs would tear off the arms and legs of the screaming natives while they were still alive. If the Spaniards ran short of meat to feed the dogs, Arawak babies were killed for dog food.

They are without arms [weapons], all naked, and without skill at arms and great cowards, a thousand running away from three, and thus they are good to be ordered about, to be made to work, plant, and do whatever is wanted, to build towns and be taught to go clothed and accept our customs.”

This is from columbus himself lol. Stop dude, you are making a fool out of yourself.

LOL, so the dude copying and pasting revisionist history is telling me I'm making a fool of myself? The irony is great!! This is exactly what I'm talking about!! HE DIDN'T HAVE CANNONS!! YOU JUST POSTED REVISIONIST HISTORY TO REFUTE MY CLAIM OF YOU BUYING INTO REVISIONIST HISTORY!! THAT WAS PURE, SOLID GOLD!!!

EDIT: What you posted is a total bastardisation of a quote from Columbus. He never said anyting about them being cowards. He did say they were all naked and "knew nothing of weapons". He offered one of them his sword and the man tried to take it by the blade and cut himself. The irony of this is amazing. To refute my claims about Howard Zinn you posted Howard Zinn. I don't even know what to say to someting that boneheaded.

 

[Trotsky]

I replied to your last post, got nothing in return

I didn't see it. I'll reply later today.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Huh?

No idea what you're talking about with interest rates, and you asked a question, I answered, and you asked it again when the answer apparently went over your head.

I keep asking you how you know if interest rates are too high or low, and you have no answer (because you believe they are always too high based on nothing). Ever since you lost our bet, you do nothing but snipe pathetically.

You two had a bet? Now I'm curious.

 

[Toco]

He's clearly the least worse candidate by far (heard about open border policy, not sure if that's actually true), but in a really close race, if I were American, I would vote for the least worst tangible candidate, and that would be Trump

 

[Quipling]

Under the 2016 Criteria, in addition to being Constitutionally eligible, candidates must appear on a sufficient number of state ballots to have a mathematical chance of winning a majority vote in the Electoral College, and have a level of support of at least 15 percent of the national electorate as determined by five selected national public opinion polling organizations, using the average of those organizations’ most recently publicly-reported results at the time of the determination. The polls to be relied upon will be selected based on the quality of the methodology employed, the reputation of the polling organizations and the frequency of the polling conducted. CPD will identify the selected polling organizations well in advance of the time the criteria are applied.

In each election cycle since 2000, CPD has retained Dr. Frank Newport, Editor-in-Chief of Gallup, to assist it in selecting the five national public opinion polls to be used in applying the criteria. Dr. Newport's recommendations have been based on his professional judgment concerning the most suitable polls. In making his recommendations, he has considered the quality of the methodology the polling organizations employed, the size of the sample population polled, the reputation of the polling organizations, and the frequency of the polling conducted. In 2012, the polls relied upon were: ABC News/The Washington Post, NBC News/The Wall Street Journal, CBS News/The New York Times, Fox News and Gallup.

Using this as a guideline, and grabbing polls from RCP:
WSJ/NBC: 10 (July 31-Aug 3)
ABC/Wash: 8 (Aug 1-4)
CBS/NYT: 12 (July 8-12)
Fox: 12 (July 31-Aug 2)
Gallup: (N/A - isn't bothering to run 3rd party polls)

Average: 10.5

So, no, not "just 3% more" more, but closer to 5% more. Still, that's closer than anybody's gotten in a number of cycles.

(For those curious, the first criterion bars parties that didn't register for the ballot in enough states to be able to win, winnowing out everyone but the top 4 parties)

 

[Jack V Savage]

You two had a bet? Now I'm curious.

We initially bet on whether 2015 U.S. GDP growth would be positive. When it looked like I'd win, he pretended to be confused and to think that he was betting simply that the growth rate for Q4 would fall, which made no sense in context. However, he agreed to honor the actual terms, but I released him.

He's then followed with a series of nasty personal attacks and avoiding discussing actual issues, though he has advanced the bizarre claim that we're actually in a recession now, but the gov't is covering it up.

 

[Quipling]

edit delete shit internet

 

[Quipling]

Edit delete shit internet

 

[Greoric]

We initially bet on whether 2015 U.S. GDP growth would be positive. When it looked like I'd win, he pretended to be confused and to think that he was betting simply that the growth rate for Q4 would fall, which made no sense in context. However, he agreed to honor the actual terms, but I released him.

He's then followed with a series of nasty personal attacks and avoiding discussing actual issues, though he has advanced the bizarre claim that we're actually in a recession now, but the gov't is covering it up.

What metric were we using in every conversation prior to the bet? GDP growth or GDP growth rate?

By the way industrial production has been falling since the middle of 2015. We're in a recession now, and they're always declared after the fact.

Another funny thing you mentioned that I didn't catch. If the fed follows the interest rate of the market, why is there any attention in the market to how the fed adjusts its monetary policy? Of what consequence would it be for them to change if they're only doing what the market has already done?