dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 3, 2016 15:34:31 GMT -5
Brother from another mother!
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 4, 2016 16:18:28 GMT -5
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2016 17:47:28 GMT -5
Yes.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,454
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 4, 2016 18:04:37 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 4, 2016 19:38:54 GMT -5
yep. and this is why Virgil is absolutely wrong when he thinks that i am "freaking out" about Trump winning.
do i hate him? yes will he destroy the GOP? yes is this good for the country in the short term? no is this good for the GOP in the long term? absolutely.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,560
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 4, 2016 20:54:26 GMT -5
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Mar 5, 2016 10:16:26 GMT -5
Since Trump is a loser, can't possible win against any democratic opponent, Why do many here continue to bash him? after all he could not possibly win.
Why don't you tell me the strong points of the candidate that is the best choice?
Unless they do not have any strong points!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,454
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 5, 2016 10:27:12 GMT -5
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,231
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Mar 5, 2016 10:59:50 GMT -5
Trump has shaken up the GOP establishment, which may not be a bad thing.
Trump as president would be a disaster for the country.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2016 13:00:40 GMT -5
Since Trump is a loser, can't possible win against any democratic opponent, Why do many here continue to bash him? after all he could not possibly win. we are doing it for humanitarian reasons. it is unhealthy for people to believe in things that are not true. Why don't you tell me the strong points of the candidate that is the best choice? Unless they do not have any strong points! not prepared to do that yet.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 5, 2016 13:01:15 GMT -5
he has already stated that he "must" vote for him. i asked him why, and he didn't reply.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 10, 2016 13:25:19 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 2, 2024 7:25:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2016 14:17:46 GMT -5
Unfortunately those are places in which polling is not great, and the issue of caucus vs primary (open vs closed) also make a difference, so generalizing is quite difficult.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 10, 2016 14:28:50 GMT -5
Here are my thoughts to this point... I have no freaking clue what's going to happen. I thought I saw something quite significant last week in that I thought I actually saw a significant shift for Ted Cruz- not in the polls, but in defiance of the polls. Take this, for example- the following are the poll numbers vs. the actual election results. Texas: Cruz was +3, won +17 (14 point swing); edit: actually, his polling average was +9, so this was an (8) point swing.Oklahoma: Trump was +13, Cruz won +6 (19 point swing); Kansas: Trump +6, Cruz won +25 (31 point swing) Source: www.glennbeck.com/2016/03/08/election-by-the-numbers-will-march-8-solidify-cruzs-surge/?utm_source=glennbeck&utm_medium=contentcopy_linkThen, we had the elections this Tuesday... the problem is that turnout is off the hook in open primaries, and it is really distorting things. i mentioned this on the nomination thread. in Kansas there was basically no polling- same problem we have in MO right now, which is why I SUSPECT that Trump will lose.
|
|
Sam_2.0
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 15:42:45 GMT -5
Posts: 12,350
|
Post by Sam_2.0 on Mar 10, 2016 16:29:55 GMT -5
MO will probably go to Cruz. This is the Bible Belt, and boy howdy do they love that guy over here. My county is really democratic so it will be interesting to see who gets the D nomination. It's an open primary so I hope that bears well for Bernie.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 10, 2016 20:40:34 GMT -5
MO will probably go to Cruz. This is the Bible Belt, and boy howdy do they love that guy over here. My county is really democratic so it will be interesting to see who gets the D nomination. It's an open primary so I hope that bears well for Bernie. That "Bible Belt" thing hasn't helped Cruz yet. I agreed with Cruz's strategy- and it may be too late, but he was wrong. It was a huge miscalculation and I don't know if there's time to fix it. The basic assumption of Ted Cruz has been my basic assumption for years- that long about Bush 41 in 1992, conservatives and evangelicals in particular got discouraged and just stopped turning out for RINOs. If we got a true blue conservative, that candidate would be, well- where Trump is now. The four to five million voters that abandoned the McCain and Romney campaigns would show up for a conservative. I don't know how else to say it: that's wrong. Evangelicals are going to Trump. Trump has won SC, he won MS, and even in places where Cruz edged out Trump- large numbers of conservatives and evangelicals are going for Trump. I can't say for sure why this is- it's a crazy year- but I suspect that it's not anger per se-- but FEAR. People are correctly terrified of radical islam on the march all over the globe. People know that the market is a bubble made of stimulus, QE, and low interest rates. People know the dollar is on the brink of collapse. T.H.E.Y. can talk all day long about growth and low unemployment, but those 98 million able bodied, working age people not working know different. People know the day of reckoning for 200 to 240 trillion in debt is coming. People know while we've been using up our military assets without replacements, and drawing down forces that China and Russia are building up. People know Iran is about to be a nuclear umbrella for ISIS. People know they're losing real income and purchasing power. They know the middle class is the smallest it's been in decades- and they are being bullied, used, walked on, and forgotten. They know the border is WIDE open with zero enforcement. So, when Cruz talks in abstraction about restoring the Constitution, they just could not give less of a fuck. When Trump talks about 1. Stemming the tide of immigration, 2. Sorting through the muslims from places where they hate us and want to kill us 3. Fair trade practices, and cracking down on currency manipulation and other cheating and 4. Rebuilding the military, and taking our killers off the leash to bomb ths SHIT out of ISIS, seize their assets, and make sure we're a country NOBODY wants to mess with, People are like, "The Constitution? What's that? I like this guy."
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 10, 2016 22:46:41 GMT -5
MO will probably go to Cruz. This is the Bible Belt, and boy howdy do they love that guy over here. My county is really democratic so it will be interesting to see who gets the D nomination. It's an open primary so I hope that bears well for Bernie. That "Bible Belt" thing hasn't helped Cruz yet. I agreed with Cruz's strategy- and it may be too late, but he was wrong. It was a huge miscalculation and I don't know if there's time to fix it. The basic assumption of Ted Cruz has been my basic assumption for years- that long about Bush 41 in 1992, conservatives and evangelicals in particular got discouraged and just stopped turning out for RINOs. If we got a true blue conservative, that candidate would be, well- where Trump is now. The four to five million voters that abandoned the McCain and Romney campaigns would show up for a conservative. I don't know how else to say it: that's wrong. Evangelicals are going to Trump. Trump has won SC, he won MS, and even in places where Cruz edged out Trump- large numbers of conservatives and evangelicals are going for Trump. I can't say for sure why this is- it's a crazy year- but I suspect that it's not anger per se-- but FEAR. People are correctly terrified of radical islam on the march all over the globe. People know that the market is a bubble made of stimulus, QE, and low interest rates. People know the dollar is on the brink of collapse. T.H.E.Y. can talk all day long about growth and low unemployment, but those 98 million able bodied, working age people not working know different. People know the day of reckoning for 200 to 240 trillion in debt is coming. People know while we've been using up our military assets without replacements, and drawing down forces that China and Russia are building up. People know Iran is about to be a nuclear umbrella for ISIS. People know they're losing real income and purchasing power. They know the middle class is the smallest it's been in decades- and they are being bullied, used, walked on, and forgotten. They know the border is WIDE open with zero enforcement. So, when Cruz talks in abstraction about restoring the Constitution, they just could not give less of a fuck. When Trump talks about 1. Stemming the tide of immigration, 2. Sorting through the muslims from places where they hate us and want to kill us 3. Fair trade practices, and cracking down on currency manipulation and other cheating and 4. Rebuilding the military, and taking our killers off the leash to bomb ths SHIT out of ISIS, seize their assets, and make sure we're a country NOBODY wants to mess with, People are like, "The Constitution? What's that? I like this guy." LIV
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Mar 10, 2016 23:36:32 GMT -5
The Republican debate was a humdinger tonight. The knives and pistols were confiscated at the door. A civilized debate broke out. Either everyone knows it all over for them, or Trump will fall off the cliff this Tuesday.
Rubio regained some dignity tonight. Do not know if that will help him.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Mar 10, 2016 23:59:49 GMT -5
MO will probably go to Cruz. This is the Bible Belt, and boy howdy do they love that guy over here. My county is really democratic so it will be interesting to see who gets the D nomination. It's an open primary so I hope that bears well for Bernie. That "Bible Belt" thing hasn't helped Cruz yet. I agreed with Cruz's strategy- and it may be too late, but he was wrong. It was a huge miscalculation and I don't know if there's time to fix it. The basic assumption of Ted Cruz has been my basic assumption for years- that long about Bush 41 in 1992, conservatives and evangelicals in particular got discouraged and just stopped turning out for RINOs. If we got a true blue conservative, that candidate would be, well- where Trump is now. The four to five million voters that abandoned the McCain and Romney campaigns would show up for a conservative. I don't know how else to say it: that's wrong. Evangelicals are going to Trump. Trump has won SC, he won MS, and even in places where Cruz edged out Trump- large numbers of conservatives and evangelicals are going for Trump. I can't say for sure why this is- it's a crazy year- but I suspect that it's not anger per se-- but FEAR. People are correctly terrified of radical islam on the march all over the globe. People know that the market is a bubble made of stimulus, QE, and low interest rates. People know the dollar is on the brink of collapse. T.H.E.Y. can talk all day long about growth and low unemployment, but those 98 million able bodied, working age people not working know different. People know the day of reckoning for 200 to 240 trillion in debt is coming. People know while we've been using up our military assets without replacements, and drawing down forces that China and Russia are building up. People know Iran is about to be a nuclear umbrella for ISIS. People know they're losing real income and purchasing power. They know the middle class is the smallest it's been in decades- and they are being bullied, used, walked on, and forgotten. They know the border is WIDE open with zero enforcement. So, when Cruz talks in abstraction about restoring the Constitution, they just could not give less of a fuck. When Trump talks about 1. Stemming the tide of immigration, 2. Sorting through the muslims from places where they hate us and want to kill us 3. Fair trade practices, and cracking down on currency manipulation and other cheating and 4. Rebuilding the military, and taking our killers off the leash to bomb ths SHIT out of ISIS, seize their assets, and make sure we're a country NOBODY wants to mess with, People are like, "The Constitution? What's that? I like this guy." Fear and bigotry- that is it in a nutshell. Listen to a debate and when the cheers come. These are the most uninformed people in this country- they applaud anytime a candidate talks tough against another group. Mexicans, Muslims, whatever- pure vitriol- that is what is driving Trump voters- and the same thing drove Hitler to power- they applaud beating up protesters. I do not consider Trump anything close to Hitler or other fascists- but I do consider his supporters as such. Dangerous idiots with the power to vote- I fear my neighbor.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 11, 2016 1:14:36 GMT -5
When a poster says 98 million Americans are not working he must be including babies, children, and the over 65 crowd. Otherwise, the UE rate for Americans between 18-65 would be 47%. That's almost as much BS as the Iran will be a nuclear umbrella for ISIS line.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,453
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 11, 2016 1:24:07 GMT -5
this is why i like to nail people down on what they mean by "real unemployment". if they mean UE6, we can look that up. it was worse under Reagan and Bush than it is under Obama right now. if they mean some stupid concoction of population growth, the Age Wave, and kids staying in college longer and saying that is "unemployment", they are picking pepper out of fly shit.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,531
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 11, 2016 12:41:32 GMT -5
You're right that's it's fear, but not for all the reasons you posted.
Trump supporters saw their incomes drop after the big recession and things haven't improved for them since. They are blaming it on illegal immigrants. They see the number of evangelical Christians dropping while the 'everything else' category of religious belief (including Islam) is increasing and that scares them. The sudden leap forward for LGBT rights has also frightened them (although it shouldn't - the LGBT community has been there all along, it was just hidden I the closet).
The GOP song and dance about trickle down economics has failed them, so they are anti GOP establishment, and they see Trump thumb his nose at the GOP core, and they like that, too.
I don't think many of them are thinking about Iraq or China or Russia, or the state of the dollar or the consequences of our national debt levels, though. They're just angry, mostly blue collar folks who feel like they've been getting the short end of the stick for a decade.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 11, 2016 14:39:12 GMT -5
They're just angry, mostly blue collar folks who feel like they've been getting the short end of the stick for a decade. And they have been. For well over a decade. So I guess this is your endorsement for Mr. Trump?
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 11, 2016 14:48:54 GMT -5
this is why i like to nail people down on what they mean by "real unemployment". if they mean UE6, we can look that up. it was worse under Reagan and Bush than it is under Obama right now. if they mean some stupid concoction of population growth, the Age Wave, and kids staying in college longer and saying that is "unemployment", they are picking pepper out of fly shit. We can't even rely on the U6 stat anymore. The BLS considers anyone employed more than 4 hours a week to be "employed" and off the U6 they go. I can't remember when they made that change, but it wasn't long ago. The only two figures of relevance are the LFPR (which is the worst it's been since 1970, when most households could still afford to be single income) and the inflation-adjusted median wage, which has been slowly declining for more than a decade. If you switch to estimates of real inflation for the poor rather than using the CPI, real wages (in terms of purchasing power) have declined drastically since the 2008 crash in particular. Let's just say I'm not surprised Mr. Sanders is getting a lot of support for promising to hand out free money and bennies. ETA: For somebody as passionate as you about the need for accuracy in polling and the evils of fudged data, you seem to be either totally disinterested in or totally permissive of the increasingly drastic ways in which governments are fudging data like employment statistics in order to perpetuate the illusion of financial recovery. I wish you'd treat the BLS and the UST the same way as you'd treat Rasmussen: not just blindly parroting what they say, but actually looking under the hood to determine if their conclusions aren't maybe just a little too good to be true. I must have started at least four or five threads documenting the new ways in which GDP or labour stats are being fudged over the past two years, and you're nowhere to be found in any of them. The threads die quick deaths, which is understandable since most of the board couldn't care less about federal statistics, but your absence in particular is extremely conspicuous. You're the "poll dancer" with the appetite for public statistics. Don't force me to put an anti-Bush, pro-Obama spin on my threads to get you in there.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 2, 2024 7:25:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2016 15:07:53 GMT -5
this is why i like to nail people down on what they mean by "real unemployment". if they mean UE6, we can look that up. it was worse under Reagan and Bush than it is under Obama right now. if they mean some stupid concoction of population growth, the Age Wave, and kids staying in college longer and saying that is "unemployment", they are picking pepper out of fly shit. We can't even rely on the U6 stat anymore. The BLS considers anyone employed more than 4 hours a week to be "employed" and off the U6 they go. I can't remember when they made that change, but it wasn't long ago. The only two figures of relevance are the LFPR (which is the worst it's been since 1970, when most households could still afford to be single income) and the inflation-adjusted median wage, which has been slowly declining for more than a decade. If you switch to estimates of real inflation for the poor rather than using the PCI, real wages (in terms of purchasing power) have declined drastically since the 2008 crash in particular. Let's just say I'm not surprised Mr. Sanders is getting a lot of support for promising to hand out free money and bennies. ETA: For somebody as passionate as you about the need for accuracy in polling and the evils of fudged data, you seem to be either totally disinterested in or totally permissive of the increasingly drastic ways in which governments are fudging data like employment statistics in order to perpetuate the illusion of financial recovery. I wish you'd treat the BLS and the UST the same way as you'd treat Rasmussen: not just blindly parroting what they say, but actually looking under the hood to determine if their conclusions aren't maybe just a little too good to be true. I must have started at least four or five threads documenting the new ways in which GDP or labour stats are being fudged over the past two years, and you're nowhere to be found in any of them. The threads die quick deaths, which is understandable since most of the board couldn't care less about federal statistics, but your absence in particular is extremely conspicuous. You're the "poll dancer" with the appetite for public statistics. Don't force me to put an anti-Bush, pro-Obama spin on my threads to get you in there. There seems to be a little micro-blip upwards in 1-2016 and 2-2016 to 62.9% but hard to tell in the overall if it means anything. I to have noticed a certain lack of interest in the subject from the more learned individuals.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 11, 2016 15:22:54 GMT -5
We can't even rely on the U6 stat anymore. The BLS considers anyone employed more than 4 hours a week to be "employed" and off the U6 they go. I can't remember when they made that change, but it wasn't long ago. The only two figures of relevance are the LFPR (which is the worst it's been since 1970, when most households could still afford to be single income) and the inflation-adjusted median wage, which has been slowly declining for more than a decade. If you switch to estimates of real inflation for the poor rather than using the PCI, real wages (in terms of purchasing power) have declined drastically since the 2008 crash in particular. Let's just say I'm not surprised Mr. Sanders is getting a lot of support for promising to hand out free money and bennies. ETA: For somebody as passionate as you about the need for accuracy in polling and the evils of fudged data, you seem to be either totally disinterested in or totally permissive of the increasingly drastic ways in which governments are fudging data like employment statistics in order to perpetuate the illusion of financial recovery. I wish you'd treat the BLS and the UST the same way as you'd treat Rasmussen: not just blindly parroting what they say, but actually looking under the hood to determine if their conclusions aren't maybe just a little too good to be true. I must have started at least four or five threads documenting the new ways in which GDP or labour stats are being fudged over the past two years, and you're nowhere to be found in any of them. The threads die quick deaths, which is understandable since most of the board couldn't care less about federal statistics, but your absence in particular is extremely conspicuous. You're the "poll dancer" with the appetite for public statistics. Don't force me to put an anti-Bush, pro-Obama spin on my threads to get you in there. There seems to be a little micro-blip upwards in 1-2016 and 2-2016 to 62.9% but hard to tell in the overall if it means anything. I to have noticed a certain lack of interest in the subject from the more learned individuals. There are always blips up and down, just like with global temperatures. The data is noisy. It's the trend that matters.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 11, 2016 15:24:10 GMT -5
I'm surprised no YMAM chatter yet about Dr. Carson's endorsing Mr. Trump.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 2, 2024 7:25:43 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2016 15:29:52 GMT -5
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Mar 11, 2016 15:37:01 GMT -5
Apparently a lot of Hollywood Republicans (they apparently do exist) are also coming out in favour of Mr. Trump since his more civil performance at the recent debate. One of the ZH contributors posted a video of a miles-long lineup of Trump supporters in St. Louis. (I think we should stop now before certain posters inadvertently grind their teeth into powder. )
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,531
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 11, 2016 15:49:10 GMT -5
They're just angry, mostly blue collar folks who feel like they've been getting the short end of the stick for a decade. And they have been. For well over a decade. So I guess this is your endorsement for Mr. Trump? They have gotten the short end of the stick, but it's due more to the fact that the trickle down theory of economics doesn't work.
It's always more fun, though, when faced with problems, to focus on a group of people as the source of those problems, rather than a failed economic theory.
The Nazis knew that when they rallied the Germans against the Jews.
|
|