Jump to content
270soft Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

204 profile views

mlcorcoran's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. Using the above examples of JFK and Ted Kennedy as a baseline, I argue that Kanye deserves a low Integrity score but not a 0 or 1. Because in terms of his personal life, he has had some mild scandals but none that would be cause for something like impeachment or indictment. And in terms of government service he has no record to go by, he is untested in this way, but has the potential to improve with time.
  2. A lot of posts on this thread have been blurring the line between Integrity and Moral Virtue / Conscientiousness. For example, criticizing Kanye on the one hand for his repeated outbursts and publicity stunts on the grounds that they are rude, inconsiderate, thoughtless, etc. but on the other hand propping those up as examples of a man who speaks his mind and is true to himself, the opposite of a cold and calculated public speaker who panders based on focus group research. Also I think it's important for game context to clarify what Integrity means. Is this in reference to public service, not flip-flopping, staying consistent on the issues? Or is it about moral virtue, good behavior even when cameras aren't rolling, and an overall avoidance of personal scandal? A politician or public servant may have a great deal of integrity in the way they serve the nation and none in their personal life. Take for example JFK and Ted Kennedy. Each has been lionized by history for serving their nation with "Integrity", but their personal lives were tainted with scandals of immoral behavior that go against the very definition of Integrity. Depending on how the term is being applied - to public service or to personal affairs - each man either has tons of integrity or none at all.
  3. Kanye West: Leadership 3 Blurs line between "bold vision" and delusions of grandeur. Media popularity does not necessarily guarantee ability to lead, unite, work across the aisle etc. Experience 1 No prior government employment or public service Issue Familiarity (and Primaries) 3 Points for involvement in the First Step Act and, one assumes, anecdotal familiarity with domestic policy issues - social and economic Integrity 4 Not known for flip-flopping but has a track record of making wild inflammatory claims Charisma 9 Stamina 7 Debating (and Primaries) 2 Untested in this area but past reputation precedes him. "I'mma let you finish..."
  4. ^ This Food for thought: America does not have a single election for President. We have 51 separate, disjointed elections for President (each state plus District of Columbia). All of which are then aggregated together to figure out a consensus result.
  5. At the close of election night 20 years ago, Al Gore was ahead in Florida. It was not until days later when absentee and mail ballots were counted that George W. Bush pulled ahead. The "hanging chads" controversy notwithstanding, I just want to make it clear that tabulating votes days after Election Day is a normal and legitimate part of the process. It is not stealing votes. To suggest that this process is somehow rigging or stealing the election in either candidates favor is disingenuous at best. At worst, depending on the extent of the statement, could be considered libel.
  6. The biggest victory in American presidential politics since the establishment of our current political party landscape was the election of 1936, where incumbent FDR defeated challenger Alf Landon, 523 electoral votes to Landon's 8. Landon took Maine and Vermont, and the rest of the nation went to Roosevelt. Similarly, Nixon won 520 electoral votes in his reelection, defeating George McGovern who carried 17 electoral votes (Massachusetts and District of Columbia) in the election of 1972. Lastly, there's the election of George HW Bush who won 426 electoral votes over Michael Dukakis' 111 electors in 1988. With those as guideposts, I would define a "landslide" as a victory where the winning side carries over 75% of the vote.
  7. If Biden's camp has such a commanding lead that PA and Florida are no longer linchpins to victory, then that is the opposite of bad news for Biden. I personally am not convinced of their statement and I think PA and Florida are both must-wins for either candidate. And in my prior statement about data points, "unlikely" was not a relative belief statement, it was a summary on the data modeling of an 89% chance of Biden winning, 10% chance of Trump winning, and 1% chance of no clear winner. That is not subjective it is the aggregation of FiveThirtyEight's data models.
  8. Biden's camp is saying they can win the Presidency no matter what happens in PA and Florida. They're pointing to the possibility of a runaway landslide victory, not spinning an impending defeat. It's very bad news for the incumbent. Not phenomenal to anyone rooting for him.
  9. The unlikeliness of Trump winning is an objective fact, a data point. For a podcast dedicated to statistics and data points to "go on and on about it" is very much in line with the purpose of such a podcast. That's like complaining that Marc Maron "goes on and on" about stand-up comedy on his podcast. Snarky tweets are disappointing, much like snarky antagonistic message board posts. However they are not "articles". I did not miss 2016. And this is not the same scenario, for many reasons.
  10. If Joe Biden is ahead in every reliable poll, and ahead in projected vote count, and a statistician reports on those facts, is that a "pro-Biden" article?
  11. I've voted for plenty of Republicans since 2004. Governors, Senators, Congressmen, Mayors, City Councilors, and School Board appointees. No Presidential candidate in the Republican party since 2004 has earned my vote. If the Republican Party hadn't rigged it's primary this year and had permitted Bill Weld a legitimate shot at a primary race against the incumbent, then I'd be voting Republican for President this year because I'd very much prefer Weld over Biden.
  12. I supported George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004 In 2008 I supported Barack Obama - I felt the John McCain of the 2000s failed to live up to the standard of "Maverick John McCain" of the 1990s and I bought into Obama's rhetoric about being tough on lobbyists (which of course turned out to be bogus) In 2012 and 2016 I supported Gary Johnson because of his successful track record as a conservative governor in a liberal state; and his success as a small business owner and entrepreneur demonstrated a real understanding of "Main Street USA" that Romney, Obama, Clinton, and Trump all sorely lack In 2020 I'm voting for Joe Biden because I've had my fill of letting a lunatic run the asylum. I disagree with Biden and Harris on a great many things policy wise, but there is no denying that he is a man of decency and sane, moderate temperament. And right now that sane, moderate temperament is what America needs, not just to roll back the raving madness of Trump but also to keep the raving madness of Bernie and Ocasio-Cortez at bay for a little while longer. In 2024 I will most likely support a 3rd party candidate again. I sincerely hope Jo Jorgensen runs again because I like where she stands on a great many of the issues and I would be happy to support her in an election that isn't an existential referendum on our representative republic
  13. Glad to know we agree both Mark Cuban and Donald Trump are repugnant and gross in their own ways. This is one among the many reasons why, despite having been a Republican for over 30 years and an a center-right Independent for 10, I'm voting for Joe Biden.
  14. Mark Cuban's failure to act, failure to step forward and put a stop to the rampant sexual harassment that was present in the Dallas Mavericks organization is 100% on him. There is no defending that and his cluelessness or obtuseness is no excuse. To compare that to Trump, who has 25 separate allegations of sexual abuse of his own, and say "not even Trump" like he's on some moral high ground? Ridiculous.
  • Create New...