EAllusion wrote: Your main argument to justify this stance is that polling in the 2016 election was, on aggregate, off by 1.8% give or take a few 10ths of a percent.
you have not summarized my contention at all. the accuracy of the election polls is just one data point, and hardly my biggest issue.
- polls have bias - polls are not a solid foundation or base for decision making - polls are misleading - polls are often a garbage in/out model - conclusions from polls are subjective - data from the entire population are more relevant than data from a sample (election beats polls, for example) - figures lie and liars figure - polls are dildoic. they are often created for self-serving intentions, like a dildo.
"Rocks don't speak for themselves" is an unfortunate phrase to use in defense of a book produced by a rock actually 'speaking' for itself... (I have a Question, 5.15.15)
EAllusion wrote:As a result, he's lost the benefit of the doubt when he says he will do something positive, then whoops!, he's no longer gonna do that thing. If the museum visit example was sincere, maybe Trump shouldn't have cried wolf so many times. Another recent example is that Trump said he was got to cut inauguration ceremonies short, not because his team is having a hell of a time finding big-name people to participate in it, but because he needs to get to work right away. Then, Trump said he's gonna take the weekend off right away. Sincere schedule change? Maybe. But why trust a serial liar?
i do not like trump, but good lord EA, those twisted panties are going to cut off the circulation. no wonder your butt hurts.
"Rocks don't speak for themselves" is an unfortunate phrase to use in defense of a book produced by a rock actually 'speaking' for itself... (I have a Question, 5.15.15)
Jersey Girl wrote:This is the crap I'm talking about with the press and might I add, celebrities who don't know crap. I am NOT Trump's biggest fan, trust me, I'm not. But this divisive crap jerks around the public and detracts with how this guy is attempting to address major issues.
Not only that, the press is simply fixated on Trump being on Twitter. Granted, the man needs to get the hell off Twitter, but why harp on "how much time" he spends on Twitter when it takes scant seconds to tweet out a couple of lines? Read the comments section of Twitter reports, people are obsessed with how much time he spends on Twitter. How much time has he spent meeting with experts in their respective fields?
Do you think you're being manipulated by the media? Because I sure as hell think we are and I find it offensive to the max.
yep.
good luck there, jersey.
it is a lonely island being one who doesn't so much like trump but finds the media hysteria, celebrity back-slapping, and trump-voter slamming a bit beyond the pale. polls will show that you are not sufficiently polled so your opinion must be just the result of your stupidity and head injuries.
"Rocks don't speak for themselves" is an unfortunate phrase to use in defense of a book produced by a rock actually 'speaking' for itself... (I have a Question, 5.15.15)
Jersey Girl wrote:This is the crap I'm talking about with the press and might I add, celebrities who don't know crap. I am NOT Trump's biggest fan, trust me, I'm not. But this divisive crap jerks around the public and detracts with how this guy is attempting to address major issues.
Not only that, the press is simply fixated on Trump being on Twitter. Granted, the man needs to get the hell off Twitter, but why harp on "how much time" he spends on Twitter when it takes scant seconds to tweet out a couple of lines? Read the comments section of Twitter reports, people are obsessed with how much time he spends on Twitter. How much time has he spent meeting with experts in their respective fields?
Do you think you're being manipulated by the media? Because I sure as hell think we are and I find it offensive to the max.
yep.
good luck there, jersey.
it is a lonely island being one who doesn't so much like trump but finds the media hysteria, celebrity back-slapping, and trump-voter slamming a bit beyond the pale. polls will show that you are not sufficiently polled so your opinion must be just the result of your stupidity and head injuries.
There is no doubt in my mind anymore that the public is being set up for clickbait money. No doubt whatsoever. The polls are yet another set up. I come from a time when journalists really did their job. We all might as well be going to the National Enquirer for our so-called news and instead of examining polls, we might as well be tossing coins up in the air.
WE have become the objects of the coin toss.
Did you follow the story about Steve Harvey, John Lewis and the African American museum cancellation for MLK day? Yep, Trumps a racist, Harvey's a coon, and yet how does Trump spend his time on MLK Day?
Meeting with MLK the third. Give me a break. The media as a whole these days are nothing but a bunch of overpaid street walkers.
That is to say, whores.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Search online or on youtube, for the words, "Steve Harvey coon" and watch how many hits you get. Notice how many African American's are up Harvey's butt for meeting with Trump. Notice how many are saying they would NEVER meet with Trump.
First off, they're unwilling to meet with the man who has the power to influence their lives? AYFKM? So what, they're content to NOT meet with him and suffer the guy whom they think is as racist POS for FOUR YEARS? Again, AYFKM? Four years, why? So they have four years to bitch about stuff?
They basically criticize Steve Harvey for going when invited to discuss improvements in urban areas. Steve Harvey is branded a coon.
So on MLK Day, Trump meets with MLK 3. Is MLK 3 a coon also?
Open your eyes, folks. Open your eyes.
And John Lewis refuses to show up at the inauguration as well as 40+ Dems? People are going to stage protests?
Where in the bloody hell is the peaceful transition of power that the Dems were harping on when Trump implied that he might contest the election results?
FFS, the hypocrisy is so thick you couldn't cut through it with a chain saw and a coupla sticks of dynamite!
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote:Search online or on youtube, for the words, "Steve Harvey coon" and watch how many hits you get. Notice how many African American's are up Harvey's butt for meeting with Trump. Notice how many are saying they would NEVER meet with Trump.
First off, they're unwilling to meet with the man who has the power to influence their lives? AYFKM? So what, they're content to NOT meet with him and suffer the guy whom they think is as racist POS for FOUR YEARS? Again, AYFKM? Four years, why? So they have four years to bitch about stuff?
They basically criticize Steve Harvey for going when invited to discuss improvements in urban areas. Steve Harvey is branded a coon.
So on MLK Day, Trump meets with MLK 3. Is MLK 3 a coon also?
Open your eyes, folks. Open your eyes.
And John Lewis refuses to show up at the inauguration as well as 40+ Dems? People are going to stage protests?
Where in the bloody hell is the peaceful transition of power that the Dems were harping on when Trump implied that he might contest the election results?
FFS, the hypocrisy is so thick you couldn't cut through it with a chain saw and a coupla sticks of dynamite!
nice.
along those lines. this behavior from the democrats is not new. poor behavior is not unique to the democrats, certainly. see mcconnell et al. now those are some assholes. but this stuff from the democrats did not just pop up yesterday. the shmug nature of it along with cohorts in the press has been cooking for a while. but, that is not why we have trump, we have trump because of comey, lol. polls say, lol.
"Rocks don't speak for themselves" is an unfortunate phrase to use in defense of a book produced by a rock actually 'speaking' for itself... (I have a Question, 5.15.15)
EAllusion wrote: Your main argument to justify this stance is that polling in the 2016 election was, on aggregate, off by 1.8% give or take a few 10ths of a percent.
you have not summarized my contention at all. the accuracy of the election polls is just one data point, and hardly my biggest issue.
- polls have bias - polls are not a solid foundation or base for decision making - polls are misleading - polls are often a garbage in/out model - conclusions from polls are subjective - data from the entire population are more relevant than data from a sample (election beats polls, for example) - figures lie and liars figure - polls are dildoic. they are often created for self-serving intentions, like a dildo.
You provided zero reason to think that an exit poll showing virtually every self-described Trump voter finds Trump to be trustworthy and honest would not be indicative of a substantial number of Trump voters finding him to be honest. Dismissing polls generally does not do this. You did not explain how flaws in polling methodology could plausibly produce such a mistake such that we shouldn't trust that this is an accurate summation of voter feelings.
Moreover, since you dismissed the primary means political scientists can gauge public opinion on subjects like this, does this mean you think one must remain frustratingly in the dark on understanding public opinion? No, as it turns out, you have rather strident opinions on what people think on a large scale that you think are so clear that you viciously attack others for not accepting them. So what superior method do you offer to scientific surveys? It looks like your semi-educated hunches based on your own anecdotal experience and prejudices. Sweet.
This is almost a mirror equivalent of a Mormon dismissing archaeology as too uncertain and flawed to weigh in on historicity of the Book of Mormon, but also insisting the results of their spiritual experiences gives rock solid evidence in favor of it.
EAllusion wrote:As a result, he's lost the benefit of the doubt when he says he will do something positive, then whoops!, he's no longer gonna do that thing. If the museum visit example was sincere, maybe Trump shouldn't have cried wolf so many times. Another recent example is that Trump said he was got to cut inauguration ceremonies short, not because his team is having a hell of a time finding big-name people to participate in it, but because he needs to get to work right away. Then, Trump said he's gonna take the weekend off right away. Sincere schedule change? Maybe. But why trust a serial liar?
i do not like trump, but good lord EA, those twisted panties are going to cut off the circulation. no wonder your butt hurts.
I don't care about this specific story. Let me shorten the exchange for you:
Jersey Girl: Why don't people believe Trump on this?
EA: Trump lies constantly about this sort of thing. That's why.
EAllusion wrote:Moreover, since you dismissed the primary means political scientists can gauge public opinion on subjects like this, does this mean you think one must remain frustratingly in the dark on understanding public opinion? No, as it turns out, you have rather strident opinions on what people think on a large scale that you think are so clear that you viciously attack others for not accepting them. So what superior method do you offer to scientific surveys? It looks like your semi-educated hunches based on your own anecdotal experience and prejudices. Sweet.
Funny you should mention this. I was just thinking the same basic thing.
So, Mr. Elephant? What say you? How do we know your information is correct? What are your superior sources? You doing the Holy Ghost again these days?
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Some Schmo wrote: So, Mr. Elephant? What say you? How do we know your information is correct? What are your superior sources? You doing the Holy Ghost again these days?
i gave you the dildo explanation. obviously i am washed in the blood of the lamb and filled with the holy ghost.
"Rocks don't speak for themselves" is an unfortunate phrase to use in defense of a book produced by a rock actually 'speaking' for itself... (I have a Question, 5.15.15)