Anthony Weiner allegedly sexted with 15-year-old girl, sent her shirtless pictures: report

Bucky wrote:

Youseff wrote:

azrider wrote:Some of those candidates were just testing the water a bit, but they all knew they would have to overcome Clinton having the DNC in her back pocket. That was a huge obstacle for anyone to overcome. Maybe Biden would've had a chance, kind of a shame regarding that situation, would've voted for him.

What impact did the DNC ultimately have on Hillary winning the nomination?

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... t-primary/

Endorsements aren’t a foolproof predictor. In 2008 , more Democrats initially endorsed Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama (although Obama had some support).

MoBettle wrote:

pacino wrote:We had a primary and she got the most votes. I don't know how else to pick a nominee. You cant require others to run if they don't think it is their time.

You cultivate an environment where more people are in a position to run.

This is literally the diversity argument.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

MoBettle wrote:

pacino wrote:We had a primary and she got the most votes. I don't know how else to pick a nominee. You cant require others to run if they don't think it is their time.

You cultivate an environment where more people are in a position to run.

This is literally the diversity argument.

You think it's that easy when you have a two-term President? Pretty much every party encounters that problem after holding the White House for nearly a decade, especially when they don't hold Congress.

jerseyhoya wrote:

JUburton wrote:Clinton +9 in Monmouth NH, Ayotte +2.

That's 273 if you think CO, VA, WI, MI are quite safe.

272

And Marquette has Wisconsin at Clinton +3 again, so seems unsafe, but until the Clinton people go up on the air there not sure how much reason there is to believe it's unsafe.

Youseff wrote:are comment section people real people? I've read in the past that Fox hired folks to basically spam negative stories about them. I wouldn't put it past either party to do something similar. CNN in particular seems to be filled with commentors with eagle avis and weird stock background pics. they're often commenting in a way that's only partially relevant to the story.

JUburton wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

JUburton wrote:Clinton +9 in Monmouth NH, Ayotte +2.

That's 273 if you think CO, VA, WI, MI are quite safe.

272

And Marquette has Wisconsin at Clinton +3 again, so seems unsafe, but until the Clinton people go up on the air there not sure how much reason there is to believe it's unsafe.

If you're giving him ME-3, yeah, but whatever, point stands.

jerseyhoya wrote:

JUburton wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

JUburton wrote:Clinton +9 in Monmouth NH, Ayotte +2.

That's 273 if you think CO, VA, WI, MI are quite safe.

272

And Marquette has Wisconsin at Clinton +3 again, so seems unsafe, but until the Clinton people go up on the air there not sure how much reason there is to believe it's unsafe.

If you're giving him ME-3, yeah, but whatever, point stands.

Maine 2. Was talking to a buddy today about how amusing it would be if he won Maine, and lost 270-268 based on ME-01. We were reminiscing about the halcyon days when we dreamed about Mitt stealing ME-02 and having that swing the election, and wondering how it had come to this.

Romney states + FL + OH + IA + NV + ME SW and ME-02 would be 268.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

Youseff wrote:are comment section people real people? I've read in the past that Fox hired folks to basically spam negative stories about them. I wouldn't put it past either party to do something similar. CNN in particular seems to be filled with commentors with eagle avis and weird stock background pics. they're often commenting in a way that's only partially relevant to the story.

I'm sure I'll get mocked for this but we know that government security agencies do a ton of trolling and spreading of misinformation in comment sections

A thread titled "Junpeng Jia, your mother asked you to go back home for dinner!" received over 300,000 replies over a two day period.
A PR company later claimed it had employed 800 individuals to run 20,000 separate accounts on the site to help maintain interest in the videogame while it was down for maintenance.

In his new book Murdoch’s World, about the Australian media titan Rupert Murdoch, Folkenflik reports:

Fox PR staffers were expected to counter not just negative and even neutral blog postings but the anti-Fox comments beneath them. One former staffer recalled using twenty different aliases to post pro-Fox rants. Another had one hundred. [...] Old laptops were distributed for these cyber operations.
One of the targeted sites, we are reliably told, was Gawker itself, along with niche industry sites like TVNewser, Inside Cable News, and FishbowlDC. “Even blogs with minor followings were reviewed to ensure no claim went unchecked,” Folkenflik later explains.

Youseff wrote:are comment section people real people? I've read in the past that Fox hired folks to basically spam negative stories about them. I wouldn't put it past either party to do something similar. CNN in particular seems to be filled with commentors with eagle avis and weird stock background pics. they're often commenting in a way that's only partially relevant to the story.

swishnicholson wrote:Wait, are you trying to tell me the rest of you aren't paid to post here?

thephan wrote::dh: Last week MIT Tech Review shuttered it's comments section due to lack of quality and trolling. Now I will have to up my science and technology posting here I guess.

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

Youseff wrote:are comment section people real people? I've read in the past that Fox hired folks to basically spam negative stories about them. I wouldn't put it past either party to do something similar. CNN in particular seems to be filled with commentors with eagle avis and weird stock background pics. they're often commenting in a way that's only partially relevant to the story.

I'd have to search for it but I recall reading that the Koch brothers pay some people to troll political stories in the comments section

NPR recently closed their comments section because they discovered that 90% of the posts are made by a small group of people doing it repeatedly