Skip to main content

View Diary: Nate Silver unskews Morning Joe (299 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  How so? MornJoe has been spinning... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Amber6541

    the news daily for years to weaken democrats. Mark JoeScar and frequent guest Jim Vandehei lie and distort polls and events routinely to try to create a sense of MittMentum. What's wrong with unmasking their agenda?

    •  Typo in my 2nd full... (0+ / 0-)

      sentenve. Mark Halperin, JoeScar and Jim Vandehei*

    •  It's so juvenile. And then to say, "Oh yeah? Well (0+ / 0-)

      how about we make it $2,000?!!!" Gack. No win there at all. Morning Joe got to come off sounding like the mature one here.

    •  Honestly, I'm really surprised and disappointed he (0+ / 0-)

      would do this. He's always handled these things well - with data - and this is just weird. A bet? Just dumb.

      •  So you're upset about Silver's... (2+ / 0-)

        Joking offer to bet on Obama's reelection?
        You're not upset on JoeScar's & Halperins routine hack-jobs on Obama?
        I'm glad Nate called him out.

        •  "You're not upset on JoeScar's & Halperins ..."? (0+ / 0-)

          What?

          •  Their "reporting" on the election which... (0+ / 0-)

            frequently amounts to nothing more than naked advocacy for Mitt Romney.
            But you know this, you're upset at the prospect of Obama's reelection and you're pissed Nate Silver exposed their slanted "analysis."

            Right?

            •  Dude. I know about Scar's idiotic comments. (0+ / 0-)

              And they're idiotic. I "care about" insomuch that I know they're idiotic. And Silver didn't expose anything about them. The eighty blog posts here and all over the Lefternet did days ago. This was a juvenile response from Silver. I'm surprised by it. He strikes me as a not juvenile person. There is absolutely nothing to gain from this. It comes across the way Romney's $10,000 bet does. Do you have $1,000 lying around to bet on an election? Most of us don't. I'm not pissed about it. I'm simply noting, in this here DKos post, that it's an idiotic, motherfucking braindead, fucked up, juvenile fuckery of thing to do.

              I'm sure you are convinced now. So let's just leave it at that.

              •  Scarborough can definitely afford it (0+ / 0-)

                and clearly, the way Silver sees it, it's a risk worth taking (hence the double down).

                it's an idiotic, motherfucking braindead, fucked up, juvenile fuckery of thing to do
                No, it isn't.

                Views Differ On Shape Of Planet

                by nota bene on Thu Nov 01, 2012 at 01:57:19 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  I sense great anger in you.. (0+ / 0-)

                Unspeakable rage.

                :/

              •  Don't need money to win a sure bet (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                GoogleBonhoeffer

                All  you need is the confidence you're going to win. IF you put up some ridiculous amount your opponent knows you can't afford, then it sure as hell sends the signal you KNOW you will win. The guy who KNOWS he'll probably will lose will not enter the bet, or stupidly think if he doubles it you'll get shaken.  At which point you match it and say "let's do it". Don't you play poker?
                I've done this schtick a million times with people. We argue about something, then I say let's bet on it, then throw out a crazy amount like $100 or $1G. They might not concede I'm right, but they never take the bet.
                Nate could've bet $50K and easily won without ever having $50K himself. He's not bragging to us he's got a grand to throw away, he's talking in the only terms the RW lunatix understand: winning and money. They don't get involved in anything they don't think will get them one or the other, or both (see Mitt Romney). In effect, he told Scarborough he's a stupid idiot. It has nothing to do with money per se.

                Ash-sha'b yurid isqat an-nizzam!

                by fourthcornerman on Fri Nov 02, 2012 at 03:24:18 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Btw... (0+ / 0-)

            Mitt Romney has ~35%  chance of victory.
            So, there's still hope for ya!

            (-:

      •  so you didn't know he was a poker pro huh? (0+ / 0-)

        This comment is dedicated to my mellow Adept2U and his Uncle Marcus

        by mallyroyal on Thu Nov 01, 2012 at 01:30:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  it's called (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bluezen

        putting one's money where one's mouth is. Scarborough's response (let's just donate money anyway!) was a way to dodge the point (the race isn't tied), which was practically begging for Silver to double down.

        I don't think for a second JS gives a flying fuck about donating to the Red Cross, otherwise he would just go ahead and do it anyway without bothering to involve Silver at all.

        Views Differ On Shape Of Planet

        by nota bene on Thu Nov 01, 2012 at 01:41:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site