Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 I'm still thinking about Karl Rove and Dick Morris showing their polling expertise during the last few hours of the last presidential election.Right in front of the entire Fox audience.Clowns...Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 (and in a weird twist today, the Liberal left-ish government of Canada finds itself disappointed that the Obama administration has put the kibosh on KeystoneXL completion.)William,Obama knows there will be no retaliation from a fellow leftie.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 Trump will probably do something with the Keystone pipeline after he's elected: So sad that Obama rejected Keystone Pipeline. Thousands of jobs, good for the environment, no downside!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2015 After all, there are all those eminent domain lawsuits, all those pipes already laying around, all that work already started. But it will cost. Look at this from about a week ago: Trump: US needs 'better deal' before approving Keystone pipeline With Obama's decision, Trump has even more leverage than before. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 (edited) I am waiting for an argument to be made that helps differentiate mischief and mistake, malice and error. Given that polling is subject to error and limits of reliability, how can you tell a mistake from a deliberate act of deception or worse? Here I am being schooled by Adam. Or rather, told that I will fail to understand some rather categorical utterances.William:I know you are not going to understand this. Romney's consultants were loyal to their pocketbooks and they skewered the analysis to assume a higher turn out for the guy paying the bills.The "poll" is now a political weapon to shape and "nudge" the electorate, public opinion and the candidate writing the checks.The two sentences are claims, not arguments. Just saying that Romney's internal pollsters made mistakes (mis-estimating turnout in key states) is one thing. Judging their guilt in 'skewering' analysis by assuming a single motive (money) needs evidence, not intuition. In the absence of evidence we have opinion.My opinion is that the Romney internals were 'skewered' by cognitive biases, a form of self-fooling not as strong as delusion. Where there was an opportunity to believe-their-own-bull, by assuming a particular turnout, could their motives have been more mixed? I think so; in the feedback loop of candidate and advisors, who knows how much argument occurred over what turned out to be mistaken estimations? Who knows the details enough to be categorical in judging malfeasance, mischief, other than 'put the best light possible on our numbers'?Adam, I know you are not going to understand this.The last of your lines suggests all polling is of a type, all weaponized, all meant to 'nudge.' It's a cynical opinion, but I understand it. A poll of a type that reaffirms a particular bias serves its consumers ill on grounds of 'scientific sampling' of opinion. If all polls are suspect, then no poll may be free of suspicion. This leads to odd situations. How can one trumpet polls of any kind, any individual sampling, a particularly favourable poll for one's preferred candidate or policy? Fair play means even that happy poll is suspect on the same categorical grounds as any other.For me, this leaves out any differentiation, any ability to judge particular polling as relatively accurate. As an analytic heuristic, it has no specificity, no independently-testable metrics, no filters, criteria or rank-order abilities. I mean, if all polls are shit, why pay attention to any of them?I want to preserve a mental distinction between 'bad' polling and 'good' polling, and analyze in terms of error and design fault, rather than murky motivational whoopee. I'll do some research to see what configuration of wrong thinking led to inaccurate polling for the Romney campaign's latter-days. "He paid us to make him look good. What else could we do but (unconsciously) bias our resulting numbers to please him? He paid our salaries." I'm still thinking about Karl Rove and Dick Morris showing their polling expertise during the last few hours of the last presidential election.Right in front of the entire Fox audience.Clowns...I remember this as poignant wishful thinking married to error. It wasn't so much their polling inexpertise (neither being a pollster in themselves) as their inability to integrate information that did not support their expectations. It was hard spin spinners getting shown up by unbiased reality, in real timeWere their dubious expectations on election night a result of 'bad' polls that never saw the light of day? Were they based on hopes and biased prognostications? Were they not just wrong but deluded? Were they too partisan to take off blinders as results rolled in?If anyone wants to agree with me that all polls should be subject to rational scrutiny, using rigorous standards of evaluation, then I am happy. Error-ridden polls -- in error by design, malice, bias, deception -- should be given least weight in analysis and prognostication. But the hard work is in the figuring out which are subject to which errors and which are worse and better than the norm. Edited November 7, 2015 by william.scherk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Marc wrote: Zero chance way back at the start of this thread, zero chance today, zero chance for the nomination.end quoteMarc reminds me of Earnest Shackleton’s recruitment ad for “Shackleton’s 1914 Antarctic Expedition:” Officers wanted for hazardous journey. Small wages. Constant danger. Safe return doubtful. Honor and recognition in case of success.end quoteZero? Zero? Zero? There will never be a woman President. There will never be a black President. There will never be a Hispanic President. Someone asserted that there was already a gay (but in the closet) President, but I forget which President. You can’t be taken seriously if you say zero chance, Marc. It’s about 50-50 right now.Remember Ronald Reagan, our 40th President? He was an actor then twice elected as President of the Screen Actor’s Guild, Governor of California in 1966 during a time of great protest, and he was reelected in 1970, and then elected twice to the Presidency in 1980 and 1984. An actor might be less of a resume builder than being a CEO and billionaire.I yearn to be free and Trump might do as well as Ronald Reagan. I liked Donald's Iowa radio ad.PeterMy goal is to be taken seriously here once y"all see that DT aint the nominee . Not now . Zero .Regardless how many examples of the past re a black President or woman or hispanic you give me it makes no difference here . The day that DT leaves the race , I am expecting very few comments anyway . ZERO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Trump is going after Carson a little too hard in this interview with O'Reilly, but, in my view, Trump's hungry. So long as nothing loopy was going on with Carson, he was a bud. But Carson's polling has begun to rival Trump's and some loopy things did come out, so suddenly it has become time for Trump to try out some "linguistic kill shots." I don't think "pathological disease" will stick, though. Confucius say (to Ben Carson): If you swim with sharks, do not prick your finger. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 So far I can't really get a hard-on for any presidential candidate. Maybe Carly. Maybe not. Cruz seems the most likely to start a big war, but I sure could be wrong, and some others to blunder their way into one.I'm not going to buy any Viagara for any of these guys. Not at $10 a pop. I'd need immediate medical intervention--never mind four hours.--BrantCialis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 Michael:I thought he should have not attacked him.However, ass The Donald just said about Carson, "If it is in your stream....."The attack persona is in The Donald's stream...Hell, it practically surfs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 That was the worst opening I have seen in years!Not even The Donald could save it...At least he pulled the teeth of the $5, 000.00 crap...Finally, a good joke on the wall...The Tweet sketch is adequate.A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Well, I just saw SNL.Trump did OK, but the sketches were generally mediocre. I wish they were better. Politically, however, I believe this will result in a lot of new Trump adherents from the young.Why?Because instead of getting the "eww" narrative like they normally do from some of their celebrities, they just saw Trump in the middle of their pop peeps being treated like one of the cool guys.It's going to take a lot of hammering to reverse that and I don't think the lefties in the media have the chops to do it. They would have to take on the very people who sustain them.As for establishment Republicans reversing this effect in this context? Fuggedaboutit. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 I'm looking at some of the early reports and I can't believe the spin.Larry Davis (of Seinfeld fame) interrupted Trump's monologue from offstage by yelling out he's a racist. This was obviously staged. Trump asked him what he was doing and he said, "I heard if I yelled that, they'd give me $5,000." Then Trump replied as a businessman, he fully understands.There are some reports coming out treating this as if Davis heckled Trump for real.Good Lord!Dorks!Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Michael:I thought The Donald should have matched it and given his match to one of the Veterans funds...Then other cast members should have lined up behind him and The Donald could have done a quick count as they all yelled at once and match theirs.Then turn and say to the slime that offered it that he would have his attorney Mr. Cohen pick up their check on Monday morning...Of course the cast would donate to the Veterans also.A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Adam,I was hoping the following would happen.Since the bounty was $5k, if Trump, or maybe Larry or some other, had invited the entire audience to yell it out, even giving the cue, and if there were 200 people in the audience (which is reasonable to assume), the Deport Racism PAC would have been on the hook for a cool million right in front of all America. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 But even with one arm tied behind his back:Donald Trump gives SNL its biggest ratings in yearsMichael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 Most of the clips of The Donald from SNL are in this article:Then came Trump’s monologue, which brought out the most predictable but still enjoyable sight gag of the night, with the show’s host standing next to Taran Killam as Trump and Darrell Hammond as Trump. But David stuck around for the monologue as well, crying out “Trump’s a racist” from the side of the stage because, as he explains, he was offered $5,000 to do it. (The moment, of course, is not about David really going rogue but instead an addressing of the real-life protesters outside 30 Rock so the show could move on from the worry of actual hecklers.)The reviewer accurately describes how badly SNL has become and why I do not watch it anymore.The less said, however, about the sketch that followed (focusing on a would-be wondrous Trump presidency in 2018), the better. The politics of the sketch aside, the lack of jokes, Trump fumbling through his lines, and Ivanka Trump walking out to no applause but expecting something says just about everything you need to know about how it played out. The meta sketch about Trump live-tweeting the sketch and the cast members also noticeably suffered, not just failing to do the bare minimum and match Trump’s on-screen Twitter profile to his real life one but for being awkwardly unfunny to watch.But with the night’s least encouraging sketches out of the way, here are three more, aside from the opening, to watch:The Ausie singer was visually "unique."However, she has a really good voice, unless they lip synced it.http://www.ew.com/recap/saturday-night-live-season-41-episode-4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Now I begin to understand why Trump is going against Carson. See here on Real Clear Politics Video: Structure," "You Don't Put Grain In A Pyramid, It Is All Solid" Trump said a pyramid is almost solid rock, so there would be nowhere to store grain as Carson opined (and still believes). ... a pyramid is a solid structure essentially, with a little area for the Pharaoh. And you don't put grain in a pyramid because it's all solid. You didn't have large structural beams in those days. According to the article above, Trump's observation checks out. I think Trump is beginning to believe that, despite Carson's many laudable achievements, his loopy religious interpretations of facts are an election liability over the long haul, so Trump might as well get out in front and let Carson have it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Michael:One of the announcers of Red Eye Radio - [1AM to 5 AM ... great shows.] said The Donald should have yelled Trump is a racist!And look in the camera and say you owe me $5,000.00 and I will collect it.A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 This is already becoming routine: Loved doing the debate...won Drudge and all on-line polls! Amazing evening, moderators did an outstanding job.— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 11, 2015 Trump is doing really well with his supporters, poll numbers, rallies, TV and media exposure, etc. I'm beginning to worry he might be overexposing himself. A long-term story--to stay successful--needs a captivating unanswered question as the motor. That means some kind of danger. And it cannot be answered until the end. "Will he be elected?" is no longer as captivating to the public as it once was since, barring a few diehards (for instance, guess which future crow-eater? ), nobody is saying there is zero chance Trump can get the nomination. The immigration thing still has a few unanswered questions (How do you get that many people to leave?, How will Mexico pay for the wall?, etc.), but they are starting to become diluted. Why? Just look at the candidates who called them loopy in the debate: Bush and Kasich. Those gentlemen committed political suicide by telling the story of amnesty and calling deportation childish, etc. The indifference and dismissal took center stage when they opened their mouths about this. I have little doubt the polling numbers this week will reflect it. In other words, what was once outrageous and suspenseful is now becoming the wisdom of the crowd. I think Trump needs some creative input, like find a prominent illegal immigrant supporter who is a hidden bad guy and expose him. Something like that. I do like how he was disciplined, though, and mostly kept his remarks to the issues that made his support surge in the first place. But I only like that discipline in a business setting where everyone is on a business vibe. I also happen to like the other settings where someone attacks Trump and he mercilessly puts them down with linguistic kill shots. But then, I'm a hopeless gossip, I like train wrecks and I get neck-aches when passing accidents on the highway. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Ha! A little schadenfreude to perk up the spirits: Macy’s was very disloyal to me bc of my strong stance on illegal immigration. Their stock has crashed! #BoycottMacys pic.twitter.com/WsvZtwZbBf— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 12, 2015 I'm glad this happened because Kat was able to get me a few Trump neckties at liquidation price soon after Macy's decided to be a political organization instead of a business. Otherwise I never used to shop at Macy's. If things keep going the way they are, I may never get the chance. I might be wrong, though. Maybe enough illegal immigrants will start shopping at Macy's that it will stop losing all that money. Dorks! Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 ... Nothing has happened at this point to dislodge Trump or Carson.”According to other Republicans, some in the party establishment are so desperate to change the dynamic that they are talking anew about drafting Romney — despite his insistence that he will not run again. Friends have mapped out a strategy for a late entry to pick up delegates and vie for the nomination in a convention fight, according to the Republicans who were briefed on the talks, though Romney has shown no indication of reviving his interest.https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/time-for-gop-panic-establishment-worried-carson-and-trump-might-win/2015/11/12/38ea88a6-895b-11e5-be8b-1ae2e4f50f76_story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 I worked at Gimbels 1970-71. There was a great stamp department on the ground floor.--BrantI purchased some foreign stamps there that Ayn Rand especially loved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 Macys is now down to 800 stores.--BrantAmazon is increasing its retail dominanceAlibaba might be enough of a fraud to implode, not to extinction but to an even grossly lower market capitalization respecting its IPO price Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backlighting Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 While in my final semester at college, I was majoring in Retail Buying & Merchandising.After an interview by Macy's at the college I was offered and accepted a position with them first in their executive development program and subsequently as a department(s) sales manager and then an assistant buyer. I spent a total of 4 yrs. with them. Much of what I learned from them was later applied in businesses I started and operated yrs later... with success. I will say, it was time well spent.-J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 David Limbaugh wrote today: In the two most recent debates, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio have nudged themselves up, both being extremely articulate and full of fight and energy. Though neither has moved into the Trump/Carson level, many observers believe that the race will eventually be between these two, once the inevitable implosion of Trump and Carson has occurred.end quoteAnd also today, I saw four conservative commentators including Robert Tracinski still predicting the implosion of Carson and Trump and the rise of Rubio and Cruz. Rubio is the more likely winner of that two way contest and he has the gambler's odds as of now, and Fiorina is his most likely VP. The odds makers are betting on Marco and Carly even without one primary vote yet cast. What do they know? Carson and Trump have 50 percent of the vote . . . but they are both getting frayed around the edges, and historically the outsider never wins unless they are a general. That Marco and Carly ticket sounds good demographically especially if Marco gives his woman VP some good decision making opportunities, beyond speaking at places the President does not want to attend. It could work and I would not be surprised if Rubio picks her. That would guarantee the Latino, half the female vote, the state of Florida and the republican states. I think Kasich would support the ticket in Ohio. Rubio is very personable, liked by the establishment and will get a lot of dough to advertise. I could vote for him. He would shake things up in DC and still get things done, whereas Cruz would rub people the wrong way. Hillary will get the NY and other blue state, liberal, progressive, socialist vote but with Carly on the ticket her lock on the women’s vote is less secure. I don’t see a run away contest for either party but I think the odds are in the Republicans favor.Trump looked and sounded tired at some rally he went to. He seems determined to trash Carson just so that he could win the first primary vote in Iowa. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 For the first time I fear for The Donald.He is on a public campaign to paint Ben Carson as pathological, without cure, because he tried to stab his mother as a child. He even compared Carson's "pathology" to the incurable pathology of a child molester.Not good...Not even I can condone that one, and I love Trump.Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now