• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Official Russian Election Interference Thread

That video is a good example of A. Rubes B. Olds C. Inability to understand the technology you use D. The Reason why Facebook should be destroyed.

The winner is all of the above.
 
No conspiracy. Seth Rich was liquidated

It will be proven that the job was from inside.

It is you who live a cloud of unknowing and a belligerent naïveté- others are not going to wait 40 years till the truth be told.
 
Lectro said:
No conspiracy. Seth Rich was liquidated

It will be proven that the job was from inside.

It is you who live a cloud of unknowing and a belligerent naïveté- others are not going to wait 40 years till the truth be told.
Click to expand...

Was it the vaccines that got him?
 
Louis Gossett Jr said:
That video is a good example of A. Rubes B. Olds C. Inability to understand the technology you use D. The Reason why Facebook should be destroyed.

The winner is all of the above.
Click to expand...

It was Noam Chomsky who first identified the CIA’s duplicitous creation and use of the term “Conspiracy Theory” - and the deliberately ignorant perform the task of repeating the moniker..in essence doing the dirty work of the perpetrators. Is this saying “all conspiracies are borne of fact?”

No,they are not, you fugging dolt.
 
I see there’s a lull in picking up other real men’s trash, nice to stop by to spread Seth rich conspiracy theories
 
It'd be a good time for a lot of these people to read up on how easy it is to hook people on conspiracy and aiding and abetting charges.

Spoiler: you don't have to be involved in the illegal acts carried out by those involved in the conspiracy, you just have to make an overt act in furtherance of said conspiracy
 
birdman said:
How would you have analyzed the polling data differently? What are you criticisms of Silver's modeling approach? Personally, I wish Silver had put confidence intervals on the model projections to better communicate model uncertainty. But, the reality is, of all the predictive models out there, his was the closest to what actually happened. He predicted that Hillary would win the vote share by 3.6% and she actually won the vote share by by 2.1%. The biggest error was that he under estimated the third party vote by about ~1% nationally and in a few key states it was especially problematic. For example, in Wisconsin Silver predicted that Clinton would win and that 3rd parties would 4.9% but they actually 6.3% or Florida where Silver predicted Clinton would win and 3rd parties would get 3.2% but ended up with 4.0%.
Click to expand...

1) People have poor understanding of statistics
2) Nate Silver compiles polling data, he does not conduct his own polls
3) The continued conflation of "you said Hillary would win [the popular vote]" with "Donald won the election suck it pollsters" is so dumb
4) Moonz is either an elite troll or has joined the idiots who don't understand the first three points here
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
1) People have poor understanding of statistics
2) Nate Silver compiles polling data, he does not conduct his own polls
3) The continued conflation of "you said Hillary would win [the popular vote]" with "Donald won the election suck it pollsters" is so dumb
4) Moonz is either an elite troll or has joined the idiots who don't understand the first three points here
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top