He brought up a thread that was dead for weeks just to post “I was right” at a time when everyone is reeling from the damage that was just done to our country. If that wasn’t gloating, what is?
Eh, it was right to remind us of this thread. Some self-serving there, sure, but also helps us reflect on what truths or trends we were missing, dismissing, or overlooking.
Yup, it’s a dick move. Similarly, the Hillary-hating left winger on my Facebook feed who gleefully took the opportunity to exclaim “Warren 2020!” A few of his friends got irate about that one.
He actually picked both, as you can see from post #246.
Indeed. Let’s all stand and slow clap with glistening eyes.
I was not confident. I truly thought that the deplorable things he had done recently would have some impact on the election, and I did think that overall Mrs. Clinton conducted herself with class. From the start I made it clear that I did not want Mr. Trump to win this election, and towards the end there, all the data and all of my personal perceptions (and hopes) had me feeling that Mrs. Clinton was gonna manage to pull out a victory.
Perhaps I had my head in the bubble a bit too much, perhaps I let my hopes color my perceptions.
That doesn’t change the fact that what I wrote way back in March was correct. My analysis was correct, even if later events had me thinking differently.
Actually, when I posted the OP there were more than 10 possible candidates, IIRC. At least 2 Democratic candidates and at least 8 Republican candidates.
Yes, in post #246 I expressed my then-current hopes. Does that change what I wrote in the OP?
Bo, I haven’t read all your posts, nor Michael Moore’s recent output, but it seems to me you both had your ears to the same grindstone: white working-class folks (many of them “union”) in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. You were legitimately part of this important observation, so a bit of self-congratulation is warranted, IMHO.
A bit. 
Thank you. Thanks also to Banquet Bear, JKellyMap, Gukumatz, etc. for the kind words.
And yes, JKelly, it’s been interesting to read thru this again and put things written in March into context with today’s events.
[
](http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_2016_ELECTION_EXIT_POLL?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-11-09-02-43-56)The problem is that they don’t like government because they don’t think government does anything for them… so they elect people who deliberately don’t do anything (Tea Party and GOP) and then get madder that nothing is being done. So they elected Mr. Trump. :smack:
Hi Bo, never saw this post before now (politics is not something I follow for pleasure since it’s work) - but yes, good analysis indeed.
…yeah, I was completely blind to this myself, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the Clinton campaign was blind to it as well.
Well the dope can be convincing. And thinking Trump was going to win went against all the available empirical evidence. But the OP was right. And the reasons why he was right are spelt out in the OP. That he was convinced otherwise over the course of a Great Debate doesn’t make his initial observations any less accurate. I know I was thinking the same thing: but I had faith the the American people would be able to see Trump for who he is and not make him the most powerful person on the planet. Obviously my faith was misplaced.
The OP was right.
The 246P was wrong.
Looks like a wash to me.
mmm
Hey, I had it right too. 
But what if his later observations had been accurate?
Imagine, for a moment, that the opposite had happened: that Trump had lost the election; that his abysmal conduct since the convention, and the past information about how abysmally he conducts himself, made the American electorate come to see him as unfit to serve as POTUS – exactly as Bo had come to expect.
In that case, I figure Bo would’ve been within his rights to post a quick “Well, I’ll be dipped. I was right!” – because, sure, he had some initial thoughts on the matter, and posted 'em back then; but over the course of the thread, Bo came to expect the opposite, and said so. So couldn’t he point to those later observations, and pat himself on the back for having gotten it right, if he had?
That sentence kind of got away from me, there.
Still, my point stands: I can predict right now that Trump will get re-elected; and I can, some time later, announce that I’m no longer confident of that – adding that I now expect that he won’t get re-elected. If he’s re-elected, can I triumphantly point to my initial prediction? If he’s not, can I triumphantly point to my later one?
Exactly. If there are two possibilities, and you predict A, then later B, at most you can take credit for predicting B, since the later prediction is understood to supersede the earlier one. But to grant credit when A comes true after all, is to be very generous…or a sucker.
I lost a $50 bet on this election, BTW. That RL friend, who put his money where his mouth is and never wavered, is the kind of person who deserves credit–the fucker.
Or, you know, me. Who consistently said Trump would win, including in this thread started by you, which you mocked me for, but are not acknowledging now (even though I PM’d you to call your attention to it).
I didn’t want, need, or appreciate the PM. But yes, congratulations. I was wrong to have so much faith in humanity.
Sweet Jesus Jackson, I haven’t seen such a juvenile grab for attention since my toddler drew a picture of a tree that I was slow to acknowledge.
Simmer your beans.
mmm
Why, because you’d rather ignore and forget what you said? You don’t get to get away with shit like that.
Because I’m subscribed to all the threads I post in. You don’t have to also send me a PM when you post. Nor do I want you to.