Donald Trump

[Roger Bissell]

pretty cocky post pal considering for months you have refused to even call a winner for the nominee , now on the eve of you realizing that I am right - you decided to go into the archives here to find me stating that SA will support Rubio . Your best evidence though is that he gave Cruz $2700 ?

That was in my e-mail today...there were no archives...if you wish, I will forward the e-mail to you backstage.

Also Marc, you are too smart to offer an "after this, therefore because of this" argument which is a fallacy.

I posted it just to poke you. His donation meant nothing, however it did seem to piss you off lol.

A...

Not really too pissed off , my boy just won the election .

Congrats, Marc. I had it figured way wrong, with Cruz coming in third. I didn't account for the "values voters" and Cruz's ground game.

I thought Rubio's speech was very good, while Cruz's was a snooze. But his wife Penelope was lovely, and his dad Tom was quite chipper.

REB

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Judge Jeanine Pirro formally endorsed Donald Trump for president earlier today (see here).

I listened to part of her podcast and, oddly enough, I don't think the timing of her announcement had anything to do with the Iowa caucus.

Seriously.

It seems to be in response to certain people accusing her of having a longstanding relationship with Trump (friendly, not romantic).

So she fessed up once again (she has mentioned the personal stuff before)--25 years of friendship with Trump, her ex-hubby used to work on a Trump project, and she wants Trump to be prez.

An odd way to do it, but glad she's on board.

Michael

[william.scherk]

 

Trump does not win - Then yeah , NH falls that fast . [..] Custards last stand . [...] 1812 

 

I know , I know !!!!!!!  Who is so freaking narcissistic to even quote his own post ? [...]

Marco Rubio , and they said Iowa was not important 

 

We have a winner. Someone tell the crow to sing the song of victory.

 

 

 

 

Hmmmmph...

 

Rubio did impress me today.

 

I hope he's not a sore loser for the rest of the primaries...

 

 

You were literally the only one in the world to even predict Trump getting this far . You called it , and its documented right here .

 

 

CAW

 

"Winning Iowa" in this sense is mostly symbolic. As is third place (Rubio). In terms of delegates, Cruz has one more delegate that Trump. [...]

 

I expect Cruz to fall drastically during the rest of the primaries 

 

A couple notions seem correct.

 

Forget Rubio for a moment and consider your first sentence. It reflects the wisdom of the wonks, and underlines one of my points -- that the puny amount of delegates at stake mean almost all of the Iowa process is and was Grand Hoopla -- and leads to my points about polls ... 

 

You are also in the ballpark with the note of 'symbolism.'  The Trump defeat in and of itself is meaningless in the context of delegate selection, or even as a reliable barometer of GOP druthers in similar states. And it has not predictive content in re New Hampshire.  The symbolism is that Trump did not deliver.   He poured his all into Iowa, his way, hired the best, did his stump speech over and over and over -- and yes, brought in  yuge flocks of new voters.

 

But something happened betwixt cup and lip. They did not stick with him where it counted. Those masses of new voters did not give Trump a plurality. Somewhere in the process, a voter Jane Doe was encouraged by Trump to caucus. But once there, Jane switched.  There were enough Janes to make a big difference.

 

It was not the scenario I predicted, because of over-reliance on polling, and over-accepting the word of people who are paid to talk positive. That is pretty much the full explanation for why I was wrong. I blame the Trump Machine for failing to do the job they promised. Losers.

 

 

The crow's on Michael's plate, but he won't bite.

 

The first crow-becue happens with the nomination, not the first state primary.

 

I'm just letting Marc crow for a bit.

 

Poor thing, he's got no idea what's coming down the pike at him.

 

I am eating crow. I was wildly off, and so were you. 

 

At root, the big gap between Iowa polling and Iowa votes. The Trumpeting Trumpets are chewing the same gamy stringy fowl as I, metaphorically.  Another gristly morsel is the awful fact that the Trump phenomena did indeed recruit a huge number of new caucus-attendees. But those drawn to precincts by the machine let Trump down and switched before casting their ballots. Shitty Janes.

 

Compounding the shitty ground game, the shitty polls, and the shitty turncoat Trump-recruits -- of those who had caucused before, only 19% voted for Trump. The advantage of record-breaking new voters ... offset entirely by the failure to get those returnee votes.  Double shitty.

 

Anyway, hope this MP3 cheers up those feeling a little bit blue about polls, polls, polls.

 

 

http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/sndz/Ravenbirdcall.mp3

Edited February 2, 2016 by william.scherk

[Brant Gaede]

Won't play. You're now one out of five on these things.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

William,

I ain't too worried.

Expect to see a recalibration in a few Trump tactics.

The static invincible media story is no more (and I blame Trump just as much as the media for that story), but the winner that Trump is happens to be swimming around the other states like a shark circling meat.

Michael

[PDS]

If I weren't so funadmentally kind, I would be make a joke about crows this morning. But that's not me.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

If I weren't so funadmentally kind, I would be make a joke about crows this morning. But that's not me.

David,

Let 'er fly. Seriously. I won't get offended.

One does not get into crow bets without the stuff to take it.

However...

This will make it all the more sweet when, in the end, you have to say "President Trump."

(I wish we had a devil emoticon because I would use it right here. Maybe I will try to fix that crap on the server end if I can figure it out.)

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

A few Trump tweets:

 

My experience in Iowa was a great one. I started out with all of the experts saying I couldn't do well there and ended up in 2nd place. Nice

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

February 2, 2016

 

And this:

 

Because I was told I could not do well in Iowa, I spent very little there - a fraction of Cruz & Rubio. Came in a strong second. Great honor

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

February 2, 2016

 

And this:

 

The media has not covered my long-shot great finish in Iowa fairly. Brought in record voters and got second highest vote total in history!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

February 2, 2016

 

So the second round begins with a good solid frame.

 

It will take a bit for the frame to cut through the mocking in the mainstream, but it will cut through.

 

Go Trump!

 

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's something that should give the anti-Trump revelers a pause.

CAIR did a survey of which candidate Muslim Americans will support in the primaries.

Some Muslim-Americans Are Actually Supporting Donald Trump. Here’s Why.

by Justin Salhani

Feb. 1, 2016

Think Progress

Hillary and Bernie took the top two spots since Muslims lean Democrat, but guess who came in third?

Donald Trump.

He's the top Republican candidate preferred by Muslim Americans.

According to CAIR.

Really.

Go figure.

Michael

[PDS]

A few Trump tweets:

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

And this:

Because I was told I could not do well in Iowa, I spent very little there - a fraction of Cruz & Rubio. Came in a strong second. Great honor

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

February 2, 2016

And this:

The media has not covered my long-shot great finish in Iowa fairly. Brought in record voters and got second highest vote total in history!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump)

February 2, 2016

So the second round begins with a good solid frame.

It will take a bit for the frame to cut through the mocking in the mainstream, but it will cut through.

Go Trump!

Michael

Trump is a very fine contortionist. Just like most politicians.

On a different note, it is remarkable how often Trump is "told" things by unnamed people that support his current narrative.

These unnamed people who are constantly calling him and telling him things like, for instance, how he was not going to do well in Iowa (see above), or how wonderful a ban on "the Muslims" would be, and etc., etc.,sure must have tiny little shriveled-up stones.

[PDS]

If I weren't so funadmentally kind, I would be make a joke about crows this morning. But that's not me.

David,

Let 'er fly. Seriously. I won't get offended.

One does not get into crow bets without the stuff to take it.

However...

This will make it all the more sweet when, in the end, you have to say "President Trump."

(I wish we had a devil emoticon because I would use it right here. Maybe I will try to fix that crap on the server end if I can figure it out.)

Michael

The next week is going to be interesting to see how The Donald responds.

This is the first election he has ever run and he kinda got punked by Cruz.

I don't think he's going to respond very well to getting actually punked by Cruz and de facto punked by Rubio.

I think we're going to see a mean streak that makes the past dozen or so insults look like child's play.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

On a different note, it is remarkable how often Trump is "told" things by unnamed people that support his current narrative.

These unnamed people who are constantly calling him and telling him things like, for instance, how he was not going to do well in Iowa (see above), or how wonderful a ban on "the Muslims" would be, and etc., etc.,sure must have tiny little shriveled-up stones.

David,

Even unnamed, these are not implausible things. If I were Trump, I certainly would think twice before throwing a friend into a media feeding frenzy.

It was common wisdom that Trump's appeal did not fit the typical Iowa profile of caucus voter, so why is it suspect that someone would privately tell him it was not his target public and to spend his efforts elsewhere? Also, look at my post on the CAIR survey. Lots of Muslims seem to support Trump. Right in CAIR's face. So why is it suspect that a few of them would thank Trump in private for his stances regarding Muslim immigration and terrorism?

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I think we're going to see a mean streak that makes the past dozen or so insults look like child's play.

David,

I, too, will be interested.

Were you surprised that Trump was gracious in his acknowledgment speech? There are a lot of articles right now where those in the media are expressing surprise.

I, for one, expect to see more of that side of Trump come out. People who know him say that's the way he is in private.

Michael

[Selene]

Not really too pissed off , my boy just won the election .

Here you go Marc...

A forecasting project led by economist David Rothschild shows how people who are wiling to bet cold, hard cash on the Republican race are placing their bets on Rubio after his third-place showing in the Iowa caucus. Trump’s was given a 59 percent chance of winning the nomination as recently as yesterday, but fresh predictions in the cold light of the post-Iowa dawn showed that the billionaire has taken a nosedive, and that dark horse Marco Rubio has surged ahead of the pack, from the punters’ perspective.

The project is called Predictwise, and it aggregates betting markets like Betfair and other online spaces where people place bets with each other on sporting and political events. The massive overnight shift in Marco Rubio’s odds can be attributed to Monday night’s Iowa caucus, in which Ted Cruz confounded the pollsters to take the lead, Donald Trump was named the ironic loser, and Marco Rubio came in a close third place. Since then, Trump took a massive hit of 26 percentage points, boosting Rubio’s standing by nearly as much.

http://www.vocativ.com/news/278772/after-iowa-caucus-rubio-is-best-bet/

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Here's more news to give anti-Trumpers a touch of indigestion during their gloating phase.

Donald Trump receives Nobel Peace Prize nomination for ‘vigorous peace through strength ideology’
By Kellan Howell
The Washington Times
February 2, 2016

From the article:

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump is reportedly in the running to receive the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize.

Mr. Trump, who has attracted international backlash over his controversial rhetoric and call to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., has reportedly earned a nod for the award thanks to his tough talk on terrorism and other security threats from around the world, according to Nobel watcher Kristian Berg Harpviken, the director of the Peace Research Institute of Oslo.

This is a serious news site, not a spoof.

Maybe the Nobel committee is trying to undo the way they crapped on themselves with Obama.



Michael

[Roger Bissell]

Here's more news to give anti-Trumpers a touch of indigestion during their gloating phase.

Donald Trump receives Nobel Peace Prize nomination for ‘vigorous peace through strength ideology’

By Kellan Howell

The Washington Times

February 2, 2016

From the article:

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump is reportedly in the running to receive the 2016 Nobel Peace Prize.

Mr. Trump, who has attracted international backlash over his controversial rhetoric and call to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., has reportedly earned a nod for the award thanks to his tough talk on terrorism and other security threats from around the world, according to Nobel watcher Kristian Berg Harpviken, the director of the Peace Research Institute of Oslo.

This is a serious news site, not a spoof.

Maybe the Nobel committee is trying to undo the way they crapped on themselves with Obama.

Michael

If I understand this correctly, Trump believes that if we have a strength ideology, then we can have a vigorous peace. Sounds good! Both Nobel-worthy and quite noble, I'd say.

REB

[Roger Bissell]

William,

I ain't too worried.

Expect to see a recalibration in a few Trump tactics.

The static invincible media story is no more (and I blame Trump just as much as the media for that story), but the winner that Trump is happens to be swimming around the other states like a shark circling meat.

Michael

Well, if Trump expects to get more than 1/3 of the meat, he's going to have to stop circling so much and start actually landing more often. He could have done lots better in Iowa, if he'd treated it less like fly-over country and spent a little of his moolah to set up a real ground-game.

It's good that the inevitability myth has been put to rest, and that we are looking at a real three-way race. I think the reliability of the polls is also thoroughly in question, and that people are keeping the salt shaker close at hand.

The professional betters (who said Hillary vs. Trump by wide margins just two days ago) are probably in a real tizzy, too, and feeling rather chagrined at this point.

The real world is *so* much more interesting and fun than all these preconceived notions of how things are going to turn out. No guarantee we'll *like* the result, but at least the whole process now has less of a feeling of being "rigged" than it did several days ago.

REB

[Selene]

Scott Brown just introduced The Donald with a fine rousing speech...

the link is on Drudge.

By the way, he endorsed The Donald.

A...

[william.scherk]

:flowers:

I wish we had a devil emoticon because I would use it right here. Maybe I will try to fix that crap on the server end if I can figure it out.)

I figured out why my HTML audio link (zzzz.com/ftz.MP3) does not play for some people. It is a combo of client-side browser and server-side 'gates.' When I posted four plain links ending with .mp3, you, Michael reported three would not play for you. I tested the plain link ...

http://wsscherk.hostingmyself.com/sndz/IowaIowaIowa.mp3

.. in four up-to-date browsers: Internet Explorer/Edge, Firefox, Chrome and a stripped-down HTML5-compliant browser. Every plain link worked perfectly fine -- except for some sound files that had been uploaded in ASCII code instead of binary code. These files are ephemera, so I will delete the entire folder except for 'greatest hits' from time to time, and sound projects that I am working on to share. More on that later, back to the problem of William's sound links not working.

If you do not have an HTML5 compliant browser, you will have problems. If you can hear one but not all, the binary issue aside, the problem can only be in bandwidth. My server prefers not to serve the MP3 file to more than two customers at the same time. I tested this out on three running computers here ... and sure enough, the third download window could not be served. I will be updating my servers in the summer-time to clear away this obstacle. Thank you Brant and Michael for being diligent with my links. I appreciate it.

To the smilies issue, I hate smilies so I didn't know what the issue was. I will check and see what different browsers show and don't show. If the issue is missing images in the folders they are supposed to be in, that can be fixed with simply uploading the pics to the proper folder. If it is a code issue -- meaning the images are rendered from a programmatic URL (eg, .com?imagefile=555wi&fileformatblah ...) then the chances are plenty of people are having or have had the same problem. If you want some help in tracking down the missing smilies, I am happy to help, Michael.

:cheer: :clover: :cat: :bye: :brr: :aww: :baby: :devil: :frantics: :geek: :flowers: :sheep: :thumbsup: :yawn: :ahappy: :alien: :zorro: :sick: :yes: :rofl: :hairy: :puppeh: :nuke: :no: :phone: :nuke: :pinch: :w00t: :sweat: :alien:

______________________________

Added: it looks like the issue is related to an update of the forum software. In a previous version, many of the now-missing smilies were actually animated GIF files; in updating, the 'old' gifs were processed by internal image-sampling scripts to the new installation. In so doing, the new PNG files were corrupt enough to not be saved in the folder they were supposed to be in. They just aren't there.

Here is one link for MSK to follow should he prefer to brave the FTP/HTML/PHP/XML/Ajax/forum software nexus alone. I will remind him that I designed and built an online database that ran our New Recruits hiring webpages inside our company website, which I also designed and maintained for five years. It was a robust 24/7 system that worked hands-free to hire over five hundred people each summer season without fail. I am no rookie or player. I know my shit. I like solutions. I like problems because they can lead to solutions.

Anyhow, the link and an excerpt from the linked page:

The standard emoticons as provided on a fresh installation.

Use this xml to replace them if you have accidentally or otherwise deleted them.

The file is necessary as the ones created on a fresh installation have their entries inserted into the database via the installer rather than the usual xml file which you could re-import.

Extract the .zip and follow the simple instructions provided in the readme file.

Edited February 3, 2016 by william.scherk

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

If you do not have an HTML5 compliant browser, you will have problems.

William,

The latest version of Chrome is HTML5 compliant. And that's the one I use.

What is buggy is the encryption system the forum software uses. It is proprietary encryption and is used to keep people from hacking the forum, ripping off the entire forum, and so on. So long as I stay with IPB, I can't do anything about that.

This encryption causes bugs with media files at times. At least we don't get hacked like we did a few years ago.

On the emoticons, let me put in a support ticket. It's been upgrade time for a while anyway. The forum software is supposed to come with them (I think ).

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Good Lord!

That's mah mayann!

Michael

[Jules Troy]

?

[william.scherk]

If you do not have an HTML5 compliant browser, you will have problems.

The latest version of Chrome is HTML5 compliant. And that's the one I use.

I am keeping your WSS support ticket open. I cannot edit that old defective post, but I can make sure the files it points to are ready and willing at the server end. It is all ephemera, the sound files, unlike OL.

I have been contracted to lead an audio-internet/podcasting unit at the library, and it is part of my homework to fuss with sound. I have long thought that the excellent podcasts are only for excellent public speakers and thinkers, but sometimes people have such loads of specialized knowledge that people are happy to listen ... another reason for an antipathy to the oral/aural on my end all these years is that video is so much more fun.

But then, there is video and there is video.

I gave the example of Stefan Molyneux. He is excellent in his niche-delivery system via Youtube videos, because his earlier marketing already delivered him people who got hooked on him, the way he spoke in his cash-for-counselling main racket with his wife. You will remember it was delivered orally. As were the so many ARI and Rand-held collections, speeches, appearances. I got it all mixed up. I don't dislike Molyneux for oral or oral with headshot and charts delivery. I dislike him for his irrationality. I mixed up the taint to the medium, rather than to the mind and the salesman. But that wasn't my only mix-up.

I found it so awful to consider a 17-hour long Peikoff lecture series that it put me off all but the most sophisticated podcasts. Diana's video casts were sort of almost there in the mix of spontaneity and interactive opportunities needed to engage me easily (ie, Facebook feed, Twitter, live blog comments on her software), but the delivery was as hideous as the Peikoff croak on his hellish oral website. Hideously boring to all but the initiate, kind of. A sinkhole for all but the surefooted or cultish.

So, please excuse my aural incursions at OL. I am trying to figure out how best to present the most modern possibilities to my prospective workshoppers. The first step is to record voice. which anyone with a 2016 laptop should be able to do. I'd love to have a sample of some of the voices, the real voices, of OL. After all these years of loathing the Objectivist aural tradition, I might be embracing it. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

-- the reason why an Aural OL or OL for the Blind might work is that the lively minds here, who are almost to a man/woman exceptional writers, will also be lively minds in live conversation.

At some point I will ask an OL friend or two to let me record their voice. Not to embarrass or demean or mock them, since they are friends, but to understand how to synthesize a distinctive voice for an arcane piece of software I acquired (it lets you fine-tune the output of my Text-to-speech engines). In other words, Reb would record his voice, and I would apply a synthetic Reb to a 'reading' for podcast. And Reb would reap a royalty.

It will all probably sound like NPR on Rohypnol if I am not lucky. And I am not lucky, despite having listened to hours and fucking hours of Diana, who wrote the book on luck.

On the emoticons, let me put in a support ticket. It's been upgrade time for a while anyway. The forum software is supposed to come with them (I think ).

Their new installations should be fresh and clean, as they are the world leader in reliable forum software. I will not wish you good luck, since it might curse your ticket. Oceans of smilies await.

Edited February 3, 2016 by william.scherk

[KorbenDallas]

Mark Cuban, who I like to think is an Objectivist fundamentally, as he has a yacht named The Fountainhead named after Rand's novel, talks about how he hates Cruz and likes the Donald:

 

 

[william.scherk]

Good Lord!

...

 

 

It is just a burp. I hope.

I want the Trump Machine to live up to its potential. But this factoid crowing below from Twitter is kind of telling, if true. It turns some national polls sampling evangelical support for Trump into the schmutz column, to a degree. As Reb! and I discussed at Post 32, the polling gap is the next Trump challenge before Iowa. What do our resident wonks think of this, should it be true?

 

I could care less about Trump's potty-mouth. I have been known to utter a frikk and a schmutz when provoked (though never a Whizzer White).

 

Amen to this by @DavidAFrench: "What Mattered to Iowa Evangelicals:" https://t.co/lzOfxwU9HP pic.twitter.com/HVIEhSF4FN

— Andrew T. Walker (@andrewtwalk)

February 2, 2016

 

Another burp?