• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About william.scherk

  • Rank
    William Scott Scherk
  • Birthday 01/24/1958

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    William Scott Scherk
  • Description
    Poet and gadfly, WSS has been: - HR manager of a year-round silviculture company in the great white north - singer. songwriter, frontman - painter - sculptor - reporter - cook - janitor - editor - filmmaker - actor - amateur psychologist - web maven May he be all these things
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  • Yahoo
  • Skype

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
  • Interests
    Fringe beliefs, pseudoscience, pseudophilosophy, fringe psychology, moral panics, cognitive neuroscience, Dusty Springfield, anthropology, evolutionary psychology, satanic ritual abuse/recovered memory therapy controversy, True Believers, cult dynamics, urban planning, 80s music, urban transportation, Grand Guignol, snarkiness . . .

Recent Profile Visitors

17,306 profile views
  1. The number of people at rallies, compared six ways, makes neat data..Rallies are fun in themselves. Beyond fun, rallies can add oomph to all your activities, from getting everybody registered to vote, to taking personal data and email addresses to add to your big data and get out the vote operations. And rallies give 'troops' enthusiasm. Even counting heads is a thrill. Anyone who has been to a big stump speech knows the thrills that can be had in thinking that the huge crowd is a useful rule of thumb. As so many have pointed out, the claim has been made that Rally Numbers 'show'' the state of the race. Candidate with the bigger turnout gets a bigger turnout, and wins. .Dang the polls (until November 3). I think it out as if the rally numbers are facets of the bigger story, facts in themselves. They are evidence of X-axis things within a Trump orbit. Separately, the 'corporate polls' indicate Z-axis things across orbits of both parties and independents -- and do not amount to strong evidence. However, rally-goers are a subset of a larger, likely-voter bloc for the candidate on the stage and are a sort of 'poll' in its sense of head-count. Numbers measure not only the get-a-crowd-out ability of the 'Star,' but can be taken to indicate some things about the larger cohort of allied supporters who weren't able to get to a rally, yet. Here then, to measure against each other, you do the demographic board -- you try to scientifically 'sample' the rallying folks to segment them out -- and then you resort to your internal polling to compare. You might be getting out a big, self-selected gang of Trump supporters, but the gangs might not always match the complete demographic of the hoped-for Trump voter. So, if I were a Trump campaign, I would make sure I was going to make my rallies in 'soft' or swinging states. I would use my pollsters' advice on where to bring out my crowds and adjust my other efforts. So, Mr Trump is in Maine today, seeing some weakness in the Clinton numbers there. He is getting up to three and four appearances a day and with Pence along or not, the campaign will be wielding Mr Trump like a rock star giving free shows to folks lucky enough to be able to make time, five times a day, in a pattern around OH, FL, NH, ME,FL,PA. I wonder when he finds the time to read. But anyway, follow the rallies over the next ten days. Those states and their regions are where the election will probably be won. Note that second-order appearances will also be taking place: Eric and Donald Jr and Ivanka are in Arizona and Utah. The Clinton corps, including the First Family and old Bill Penis will be stumping in their own sad way. Now, I tried to make these proceeding humourous but failed. This will have to do ... Or this: EMAIL CLINTON WEINER FBI BOMBSHELL SEX CONGRESS PENIS WATERGATE HUMA ABEDIN LOCK HER UP NOW BREATHE BREATHE INTO THE BAG BREATHE BREATHE
  2. This belongs in the Garbage Pile.
  3. From Bloomberg Business ... emphasis added.
  4. Trump jokes about cancelling the election ...
  5. I once redefined my interest in Objectivism regarding evil. Rather than altruism, emotionalism, to think or not to think, etc., being the source of all social evil, I began to see bullying as even deeper. Bullying underlies all main social evils. Once bullying is acknowledged, we can talk about the other stuff. btw - Even though I am having some fun talking about The Ruling Class, I equally despise Christian bullies, Objectivist bullies, science bullies, business bullies, social justice warrior bullies, etc. I remember my first bully, and my last. It seemed to me that my bullies always 'picked' someone 'beneath them.' Somebody weaker, lacking, lesser. So, I will agree that we can do some good psychological work figuring out and getting in the way of bullying behaviour. My point here is that bullying behaviour is associated with individual psychology and sociology. I do not believe that bullying or a psychological class of Bully stays within the boundary of Ruling Class. Bullies and bullying behaviour are found in all social classes, all economic, and all education classes. This makes me think of the instances where Donald Trump has used his power position to bully contractors, to suggest they take his discounted payment, because it will cost them more to litigate. Meaning, he had the money to overpower them with legal maneuvers, so they should take what he deigns to give them, if anything at all. That is the kind of thing that stuck with me. I mean, was it that every single one of these instances had a lower-class Bully, a blue-collar bully demanding something not normally due them? Were they bullies to Trump to demand payment for services rendered? That's nice. Some folks see him as a bully incarnate. Who don't want a bully as their Leader. William, No he won't. That's what you hear. The message Trump supporters hear is different: Of course. That is the best part. Trump supporters couldn't give a shit about 'taking care' of the vets. They hear that the assholes will be taken out so the vets can take care of themselves -- by taking their problems to their choice of doctor, and paid in full by Uncle Sam. Same with taking care of the economy. Trump supporters hear that jobs will begin to flow back from Foreign Adversaries. They hear that Mr Trump is smarter than all the generals, a real world-class military strategist, thus he can take care of ISIS. They hear he is going to take care of the African Americans. They hear he is going to take care of the Inner Cities. They hear he is going to take care of the illegals and the refugees from Syria. He is going to take care of people who are sick in the streets. He is going to take care of Social Security. They hear a lot of things ...
  6. Wasn't there a bit more in that paragraph? Who cares? It was a surprise to him that the polls were 'right' and that Romney lost. William, You cared. That's why you made that claim. I meant who cares what we speculate on without evidence. I gave evidence from Rush's mouth that he was fooled by the polls showing a Romney victory. My remaining point, before I head up the rigging -- it is possible that Trump supporters will be disappointed/fooled by expectations. It is of course possible that the polls will have tightened as I return to cite them on October 28 to November 3. They may tighten enough to make what were exciting races even more exciting: Florida, Ohio, Nevada, Utah ... and it is indeed possible that Trump swings into a lead where he needs it. It is however still also possible that Trump supporters will be disappointed that the polls do not show a reversal of fortune on the eve of the election. Especially when this will be when almost everyone agrees (even Rush) that the polling will be at its best. If those last polls show a swing back to Donald Trump on top where his campaign needs it ... and he subsequently wins, then we can dish out the crowmeat. It is possible. Many things are possible. Hail the victor! Hail the one who predicted the outcome best! Hail the Crow. In this case it was pro-Trump Ann freaking Coulter pushing the hoax, linking to the stupid post at GP. And it was pro-Trump Michael who posted it here. Back with data on the swinging or uncertain states, and the state of probably 'rigging' in the jurisdictions.
  7. I hate that. What is so shitty about Canadian-style mixed socialism is Lesser Life Subhumans are classed as 'dangerous offenders.' They are put away for permanent, under a special rule of law. For those who are better than them but still 'lesser,' well, our danged system keeps putting ramps up for the feeble and blows big money keeping lessers alive. If the ruling class were up for systemic cleansing, they have found a much less direct means. Universal education and universal health care and universal child benefits tend to allow all manner of unfit cattle or commoners to erupt beyond their station. Why, I remember a great man from my youth, a high school French teacher who went on to become a popular mayor. He 'ruled' Coquitlam with a sunny optimism and an inclusive community-development process. He was a nobody from a Caribbean island. I see the marks he made in the community not as scars or shackles, but as bones for development. He is dead, but the bones he laid down in concert with his community are being built up into a city. Insert pointless Traboulay landscape here. He was gifted in the classroom. French was the most deadly of 'electives' for most people. The thought of learning it was associated with hell and damnation and long lines in the rain. But somehow he brought his class up to a functional level. He was definitely destined to rise higher in the ruling clique had he not died. He would have gone to Ottawa as an MP and ended up as Deputy Minister of Sterilizing Your Dreams. But I digress. Superior One guiding humankind to perfection. Sounds like it could get godly. Or eggy. I see a candidate on the horizon that promises the world. Eggs must be whipped. The worst thing about the American political system is the Two Party System. It is too officialized, institutionalized (why the fuck should the government 'register' my party affiliation? Why is the government organizing and overseeing primary elections?) How can such elaborate constructions as each party has built be dislodged or made more responsive? Your rates of incumbency are fouled by the incredible amount of money spent to contest a race. The big reefs of power just get more cemented in place, it seems. No fixing that by November 8, and no prospect of a new party. It seems so shitty that America can't elect a third party to congress. turf a lot more grey carbuncles from their posts. After each election you always seem to add one ratchet to the size or reach of government. Well, luckily there is an "Only I Can Fix" kind of guy with the best education, the best words, the best company, the best wife, the best hands, the best relations with women, the best deals. He has ruled the roost at Trump Inc without compere, without shackles, without a care for the critics of the world, the slings and arrows. He is of the Ruling Class, ready to take power and wield it responsibly. He was destined to rule his entire life, since he first punched out a teacher. He governs himself the way he would govern America ... Hail Trump, you weaklings, you losers. Hail Trump! He will take care of you.
  8. I hope Mr Gateway Pundit does not mind me republishing his entire post. The forensic examiner in me got very excited. Oh wait, don't put the whole thing up, just the evidence, ma'am. So, tie up my hands behind me and I can still nose my way to Tin-Eye and get a link to a story that includes these images, before the Gate of way punditry opened his email. Verily. Alex Jones's punditry is spoiled for me already. Do I have to give up Jim Hoff and crew as a credible source? Oh noes, as they say. The captain is sending me up the riggings. I may not be back in a while. If you hear a mighty kersplash, that is me falling off.
  9. I quote him predicting what will happen shortly with Da Polls. He say Da Polls are presently jiggered for Clinton, but they will 'true themselves' five or so days out. That is what I am talking about. About 2012, I quoted, " And I was telling everybody in 2012 not to believe the polls, because I didn't. I thought they were jigged. I thought they were jigged up, rigged up, whatever, and they weren't." Who cares? It was a surprise to him that the polls were 'right' and that Romney lost. What is more interesting to me are your opinions and the prediction you share or attribute to Rush: the pollsters will remove the thumbs and polling will begin to be 'right' (ie, favouring Trump as a winner, state by state). Starting in about seven days. Anyhow, the race is rigged or not, rigged where it counts, in the knife-edge states where a criminal conspiracy to toss the election would coalesce. What the hell is the plan to deal with this expected wave of criminality? The bizarre corps being assembled by Roger Stone are not going to do anything but be stupid. There is zilch direction from either the GOP or the Trump campaign on just what a fearful voter can do to help avert a massive, interstate fraud. It shouldn't be so easy for The Fraudster Class to bring it off. But, okay, I can set aside the polls as "all polls are wrong." The most use they were to me was when me and Adam were scoring out the GOP Primaries. We each relied on 'Da Polls' to guesstimate just when Mr Trump would get the magic number. I long held that if Mr Trump could stay at or above 33%, then he was assured the nomination. I called it early. I was right. Insert dancing crow, crowing. So, even if Rush's prediction is wrong, I can easily set aside the entire preceding proceedings. And remark upon polls in a week's time only. Fair enough? So, polls are shit until the last days, even William McGotcha agrees. Now what? Back to 'rigging.' I want to add a few more remarks about the swing states. The only problem is that without cognitions about Da Polls, I am designating swingers without much data. But say, the list includes Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida, and adds Colorado, Nevada, Arizona, North Carolina. I want to dig down finally into the vulnerabilities in the places where rigging would make a difference. Any other states wanting analysis, O Olers?
  10. Quoting Michael: My list included, what -- political office-holder, commanders of industry, the bar/justice, elected/appointed, civil services, parliamentary neophytes in cabinet, Canucki Wall Street and their sway, governors of bank, regulators, foundations, think tanks, universities ... and more (Leaders over time, large and small, those who commanded industry, who presided at the bar, who were elected and who appointed, who had climbed their way up through the mandarinate of the civil service, who had vaulted from a power-pole into the House, who had been put in charge of reform in this or that department, who was the Bay Street-approved finance minister, who regulated the banks, who was at the vaults at the Bank of Canada, who was promulgating the 'missions' of various large and wealthy institutions from foundations to think tanks to University chancellors. And more, and more.) I more or less overlap with the bones of Codevilla, and not exactly with Michael's 'mind-set' of "power-luster" vs non-power-luster and the urge to kill. I do think the Ruling Class is a good prism for projecting and assessing all the kinds of 'power point' in a society, in a nation, in an alliance of nations. The 'networks' of rule, so to speak. And I think -- on reasonable evidence -- that every heart can hold a dark urge or two, never brought forward, but lurking. (I twice read a neat book from twenty years ago that looked into normal everyday fantasies and impulses of the murderous kind. I will edit that link here if I find it) So, to make it a class sorting doesn't work for me in the same way. I would use an associative frame -- where urge to dominate, to kill, to 'cleanse,' to over-rule, to impose, to crimp or close down independence, to interfere with another's personal freedoms -- all are attributes, behaviours, aspects of personality that cross the usual class boundaries. I am sure that everyone on the forum has some direct experience of those who rule or seek to rule in such a way that you judge their character badly -- like a particularly authoritarian parent, a 'controlling' personality, one who not only wishes to rule, but to dominate psychologically, to use shame, belittlement, threats, force, and so on -- in a family or other relationship. I am not so quick to place all those folks I have known in the Ruling Class. They seem more of kind of Bully Class ... and such a thing isn't always a useful category for me. Yours sincerely, William Scott 'Gotcha McNitpicker' Scherk
  11. Are you insinuating Rush made a prediction back then? No, but that shouldn't matter. He is making a prediction right now, and so are some other folks who follow the Rigged Polls Narrative. The prediction is that the 'pollsters' will take their 'thumbs' off their products in the final week of the election campaign. The prediction is that either seven days out or five days out the real goods on public opinion (ie, what's really happenning in Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, North Carolina, etc) will be made public. Since Rush believes that the 'real' state of the race will be unskewed or unjiggered or de-biased on or about November 3, and if the jiggered sprawl of malarkey shows a Clinton ahead, then it stands to reason that Rush believes the 'real' polls will show Trump ahead, and that five days later the results will be in Trump's favour. I should say that Rush is not the only person of note predicting the 'swing back to reality' in public polling. I myself do not believe that the polls are any more awful and biased and cooked and jiggered than in 2012. Rush warned against repeating the wishful thinking of 2012. Rush sort of warned about not getting fooled again, and yet ... the polls are fooling with everybody still. No. I mean, if you want to provide a rough date for the 'polls back then' and define the 'exact behaviour' as Rush said, which "Rush said" does this mean? I will happily research this with you if I get some pointers or dated quotes or something. Back in 2012 he bought the 'polls are wrong' narrative, and expected a Romney victory. Right?
  12. This is an incorrect assumption. Damn right; That is why I wrote the rest of the paragraph, and extended the scope. Truncquoating is deprecated, but hey. William, Incorrect? Incorrect for whom? Yah. It seems that The Corrector has stepped into discussion. I look at it this way: there are abundant points of view on 'The Ruling Class.' I have one, which I sketched above beyond the truncquoat. Other people use the term and understand the term with a scope all their own. That is good. That is what makes discussion ripe. If we all thought the same or bullied each other into pseudo-compliance with the sole Politically-Correct usage and definition, then this place would become a boring echo chamber. So, a chunk of everyone has a view of the Ruling Class, and a few fewer have strong views on what comprises the Ruling Class. Do I believe a Ruling Class conspire to dominate the Country Class ... or the Freedom Class? No, not exactly. I think of the abstract Ruling Class as containing all manner of human motivations, and I differentiate it from the non-Ruling classes in a different way. That is a good thing. I don't seek to impose my opinion on anyone else. To return to Korben's theme, I will next mention a few conspiracy theories that (I feel) are pretty much debunked. But first I have to find the ones that impinge on this election/ordeal my OL friends are going through.
  13. I looked back in the Rush archives. This is his most recent 'explanation,' from two weeks ago. Strangely, or not so strangely, Rush was saying the same thing four years ago ... and we know how that worked out. Then again, a guy can say just about anything to cover his ass ... not that there's anything wrong with that. Here's Rush back in August. Is he trying to have it both ways? I don't listen to him, so I may have missed some other declamations of wisdom. Context for "The Pollsters" or the 'corporate pollsters' or what have you -- each separately calculating how to carry out the auto-suggestion, rigging the output with thumbs on the scales. Think of how many pollsters there are active this round. See how many are listed, for example, in the 538 tables of pollsters. Dig in a little bit to the swings/variance in the last month at Real Clear Politics.** The thumb-on-scale is varied, if there is thumb on scale. For example, the most Trump-friendly pollsters this round just lately, the outfits at LA Times and the outfit at IBT and the outfit at Rasmussen. They are pollsters, they may fit on the shelf labeled 'corporate polsters,' and they may be biased towards the GOP. So, how will they fit the final two weeks into the framework of bias? Have they been right all along, and will this show on election night? How do we rate the various houses on the day after? (and on which day ahead do we start taking in 'real' numbers from them?) Let a hundred hypotheses bloom. __________________ ** -- see also the hexplainer at 538 (unless you are a H8ter), "State of the Polls 2016." I helps you get a grasp of the full arc of polling this election, including the primaries, and gives you a leg up on interpreting the rolling RCP polling average by understanding the variation. Cliff's Notes version: look to variance between polls taken at the same time on the same race -- and hold against their track records of prediction. Make up your own mind which individual houses might be 'trusted,' and which are bent.
  14. If you want to see where the meme came from, it might be this 2010 book: The Ruling Class My first connotation was the 1972 Peter O'Toole film. The phrase and the meaning of was not fixed by Codevilla after a long history of incorrect usage. But there is certainly something congenial to a Red Hat in Codevilla's thoughts about the ruling class. From Powerline ... July 27 2015: “In the land of the blind,” so goes the saying, “the one-eyed man is king.” Donald Trump leapt atop other contenders for the Republican presidential nomination when he acted on the primordial fact in American public life today, from which most of the others hide their eyes, namely: most Americans distrust, fear, are sick and tired of, the elected, appointed, and bureaucratic officials who rule over us, as well as their cronies in the corporate, media, and academic world. Trump’s attraction lies less in his words’ grace or even precision than in the extent to which Americans are searching for someone, anyone, to lead against this ruling class, that is making America less prosperous, less free, and more dangerous.