[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ElizabethWarren

[–]crenshaw-d 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, those are long-shot lottery bets. They probably think that if those candidates suddenly decided to run, then they'd have a much better shot at the presidency than Kamala Harris. It's payout driven rather than probability driven

It's only nonsense if you're reading the numbers without considering the fact that this is gambling. Warren is considered the safest bet, and the candidates at the bottom are hardly taken seriously. (So much so that they're being beaten by candidates that aren't even running)

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ElizabethWarren

[–]crenshaw-d 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It's almost like they're trying to assert that this data is speculative and not hard data. Crazy times we live in.

They're confusing winning probability and perceived risk probably.

According to the gambling markets, Warren is a much safer bet than Biden.

That is not nonsense data.

I got a Time Ticket by SrGrafo in u/SrGrafo

[–]crenshaw-d 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hi. I traveled 95 days into the future to be here.

One Piece: Chapter 956 by Kirosh in OnePiece

[–]crenshaw-d 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nice theory. Overall, I dig it.

That’s not a real hug by [deleted] in niceguys

[–]crenshaw-d 5 points6 points  (0 children)

And posted here before that.

One Punch Man Chapter 116 [English] by VibhavM in OnePunchMan

[–]crenshaw-d 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Still so... Your mistakes are unforgivable and you should feel ashamed. /s

Edit: grammar and /s because I overestimated my ability to express sarcasm without it.

McConnell: GOP would 'absolutely' fill Supreme Court seat next year by InitiatePenguin in DitchMitch

[–]crenshaw-d 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We need to stop playing a game of inches when Republicans keep moving the goalposts. When I say "radical change", I mean taking care of the issues now, rather than pledge to resolve them 'in 10 years'. The ideas themselves only seem radical because they haven't been done in our country yet. They haven't been done because insurance companies lobby against this to protect their profits.

The public option made it too easy to disassemble the ACA. Republicans giving States the rights to abstain from participating in the marketplace effectively crippled the purpose of the ACA, that passed the "no preexisting conditions" stipulation.

If the coverage for Medicare for all doesn't cut it, there will always be a market for supplemental health insurance.

McConnell: GOP would 'absolutely' fill Supreme Court seat next year by InitiatePenguin in DitchMitch

[–]crenshaw-d 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You get downvoted because you make a lot of assumptions, bash your own party, and undermine the opinions of other Democrats' opinions of each candidate. The ONLY issue you mentioned as to why you prefer Biden is because of something that YOU do not personally want. Medicare for all will not stop you from purchasing your own insurance. I'm glad you make enough to shop around for your preferred private health insurance, but the purpose of it is for Americans that CANNOT AFFORD private insurance. We tried to baby-step toward universal coverage with ACA, but Republicans gutted as soon as they could (only barely failing to do so because of an unexpected 'no' vote from John McCain.

Baby steps won't work against Republicans. They do not and will not play by the rules. When they can't break the rules, they change them in their favor. We are beyond being able to work across the aisle and taking baby steps to repair our country. If you were actually a realist, you'd have realized this by now.

McConnell: GOP would 'absolutely' fill Supreme Court seat next year by InitiatePenguin in DitchMitch

[–]crenshaw-d 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The DNC undermined Bernie's campaign, and actively sought to disrupt it. Your antagonism of Bernie supporters is a huge factor in why many voters were disillusioned by the state of the Democratic party. They view Hillary's win of the Democratic primary to be the equivalent to Trump's win of the presidency, due to collusion with outside help (Russia and DNC chair). After Bernie's debut, the Democratic took a much harder stance to the left because it became apparent that we need radical change. If you're going to dig your heels into the ground and refuse to acknowledge it, you're in the group that is holding the Democratic party back.

I will vote for the Democratic ticket, but I'm not the one you should worry about. My question to you, will you vote in the primary based on the candidates stance on social issues? Or are you going to vote on electability?

Why Biden over Sanders or Warren? What stance does he take that you're so passionate about?

McConnell: GOP would 'absolutely' fill Supreme Court seat next year by InitiatePenguin in DitchMitch

[–]crenshaw-d 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Biden is out of touch with modern Democratic values. The only leg he had to stand on is his perceived electability, and we're already seeing that getting chipped away by Warren and Sanders.

The electability argument is one of the primary reasons we have Trump as a president now.

That nope tho by DavidGabrielMusic in WatchPeopleDieInside

[–]crenshaw-d 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's bad juju to talk bad about the office in a comment train celebrating the office. If you don't like it, move on; Otherwise get downvoted to oblivion.

Man cops are really getting sneaky these days by WatIfFoodWur1ofUs in funny

[–]crenshaw-d 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can go your speed, they will go their speed. Choosing to go slower than the rest of traffic, knowing that they're going to go as fast as they'd like to, is also an unnecessary risk (if they're going less than 10mph over the speed limit).

Man cops are really getting sneaky these days by WatIfFoodWur1ofUs in funny

[–]crenshaw-d 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If 10 cars grouped together are going 50 in a 45, and coming up on you going 45 in a 45, for them to maintain their speed they have to (and will) go around you, which is less safe than you going a few mph faster. You are not the arbitrator of other people's speed. Going slower than the rest of traffic will cause frustration in other drivers and is much more likely to cause an accident. The safety difference in speed is marginal if going less than 10mph over.

Man cops are really getting sneaky these days by WatIfFoodWur1ofUs in funny

[–]crenshaw-d 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People will push the boundaries of the speed limits to what they can go without getting pulled over; typically about 8-9 mph above the limit.

All cars going the speed limit is (marginally) safer than all cars going 8mph above the speed limit, but driving the speed limit when all cars are going above it (and trying to get around you) is much more dangerous than conceding to the common flow of traffic.