Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


About thr33

  • Rank
    Political Guru

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    Politics (left-wing economically ; centrist socially ; right-wing on immigration ; non-interventionist), Math & Statistics, Economics, Basketball, Golf

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. thr33

    Massachusetts 1994

    Kind of unrelated, but seeing that graph of polling, I wanted to ask - does putting in CP to upgrade the polling stat help much? Because in primaries, I see support going from like 30 to 0 in one turn in states. Some of that is momentum obviously but that's a huge change.
  2. thr33

    Trump-Putin meeting poll

    Ah okay, makes sense. I thought that there was a marked change recently under Xi, since his thoughts are being added to the constitution (first since Mao), and under him term limits were eliminated. I guess it's possible and perhaps likely that there is a lot more continuity than I am appreciating.
  3. thr33

    Trump-Putin meeting poll

    The current incarnation? iirc that's the reputation it had under Hu, though from my understanding Ji has been more focussed on the Made in China 2025 plan (though I guess 7 years is fairly long term).
  4. thr33

    Trump-Putin meeting poll

    That would be interesting, if there was a party purely built around the long-term. Wonder what kind of platform it would be? I presume it would have a lot of green/sustainable energy policy, as well as nuclear de-proliferation as planks. Probably internet rights/legislation/regulation. A lot of discussion of space/automation/rare earth minerals too. Maybe cryptocurrency.
  5. thr33

    Trump-Putin meeting poll

    The polarization of the electorate is a two-headed sword - on one end, you have a party that is looking out for the interests of the people voting for it. On the other hand, the party is not concerned with the other side at all. It makes for an interesting cycle - build up infrastructure (at the local/state level), get someone in office, hold president/senate/house for two years, burn so much political capital on the first two years that you lose at least one in your first midterm, lose at the state/local levels, govern for the rest of your term (and likely second term) as a lame duck since the other party doesn't want to cooperate, start from square one again. In general though, I would hope that all people are at least hoping for success in terms of economy and foreign policy (since regardless of one's thoughts on legislation and the courts, these affect everybody every day).
  6. thr33

    Trump-Putin meeting poll

    I think it's just the polarization of the electorate, the 24 hour media cycle, and the emergence of social media. Obama received a lot of the same criticism (not exactly the same, but look at the Iran Nuclear Deal). It's pretty dangerous to me (I think reducing tensions with other nuclear powers is without exception a good thing). I think diplomacy is always preferable, and it's a bad thing when half the country (depending on the party in power) is rooting for the president to fail/will decry his/her every move regardless of what occurs.
  7. thr33

    Ranking the Potential Democratic Candidates

    That's a fake phishing link that tries to steal user info: The real link is steamcommunity.com.
  8. thr33

    Your News Sources

    I mostly follow newswires (Reuters, AP, AFP). I prefer to consume my news without editorialization/spin. There are a number of news outlets on the anti-intervention left, center and right (The Nation, The Intercept, Consortium News, Antiwar.com, The American Conservative, Ron Paul Institute), and have a few sources I follow for military updates (Southfront is pretty good and has great maps; I also follow DEFCONWarningSystems - unofficial to be clear - and ELINT News on Twitter). BTW one major outlet omitted from the poll (understandable due to the limit) is WSJ.
  9. thr33

    Odd results

    I don't necessarily have a problem with private rosters/organization or closed primaries, but if that's the case, then primary nominating contests should be funded by the party organizations, and not by taxpayers (as it stands, most if not all states fund contests, so taxpayers foot the bill, even if they can't participate). In several states, such as NY (where I live), you have to affiliate with a party by October of the previous year. In terms of presidential contests, this is before coverage really picks up. In state and local contests, candidates might not even be chosen at that point.
  10. thr33

    Odd results

    BTW I haven't made any scenarios, but the solid/leaning/undecided concept is pretty interesting (and seems like a complicated problem). I'm not sure what the best way to handle it is. Maybe looking at statewide elections and finding the relative ceiling/floor?
  11. thr33

    Odd results

    Party registration state by state is an interesting topic. A lot of states (I think 22?) don't have it, including a couple states mentioned above - AL and MI. Both have open primaries, where anyone can vote. As for the other states, the vast majority were mostly dominated by Dems (I suspect because they dominated Congress in the New Deal Era until Gingrich became speaker, and because presidential primaries were largely insider jobs before the 70s). Over time, this edge has diminished in a lot of places, and in some states the GOP has taken the edge (or in the case of FL, gotten pretty close). I actually put together a spreadsheet with figures for the individual states a few months ago from various sources (state SoS sites, Ballot Access Newsletters, Almanacs of American Politics, in some cases archived newspapers). If anyone is interested, here's a link (I don't know if it's of any use to anyone, but feel free to use the info if it is): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1s1UdD1c7jS76ilFWtYqdTHDuWM7IJcTRpoRopYtTYHw/ I began with 1972 (since that was the first year after the primary reforms of 1968, and also because the 26th amendment kicked in, so it makes things comparable. I might expand it backward at some point, but it could be of limited utility (a lot of states didn't require registration for smaller counties for instance, such as NY and OH in the 70s, and WI until about 10 years ago; ND still doesn't have it).
  12. thr33

    Political compass results

  13. thr33

    NY-14 congressional election 2018

    Wow, great call. Surprising result.