Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

04-25-2017 , 02:21 PM
Surprised he didn't drop a huge tariff on Mexican products and use that money to build the wall. That way, he could actually say that Mexico paid for the wall.
04-25-2017 , 02:21 PM

https://twitter.com/W7VOA/status/856933469452201986
04-25-2017 , 02:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalledDownLight
if you're covered by a work plan (like a 401k) then you can't deduct your contributions past certain income levels. You can still contribute, but you don't get the up front tax benefit.
Traditional 401(k) is always excluded. Traditional IRA is only deductible if you are under a certain income threshold. Roth contributions can only be made up to a certain income level, but no deductible IRA contributions can be moved over to a Roth with no tax in many cases.
04-25-2017 , 02:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
i was thinking about why we don't need to secure the northern border too, and remembered the wall is essentially a multi-billion-dollar confederate monument
Hopefully today is the day they start the process of moving the wall to the Canadian border. In Mexico you don't find poker players who think magnetic bracelets actually work or Phds who think Rachel Maddow is better at math than me, or that all Republicans should die painfully. There is something in the water up there.
04-25-2017 , 02:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperUberBob
Surprised he didn't drop a huge tariff on Mexican products and use that money to build the wall. That way, he could actually say that Mexico paid for the wall.
They tried to float that balloon in Jan and everyone freaked out so they slowly backed away.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/26/politi...x-border-wall/
04-25-2017 , 02:26 PM
Quote:
A graduate of Castro Valley High School,[18] she attended Stanford University. While a freshman, she was outed by the college newspaper when an interview with her was published before she could tell her parents.[14] Maddow earned a degree in public policy at Stanford in 1994.[19] At graduation, she was awarded the John Gardner Fellowship.[20] She was also the recipient of a Rhodes Scholarship and began her postgraduate study in 1995 at Lincoln College, Oxford. This made her the first openly gay or lesbian American to win an international Rhodes Scholarship.[21] In 2001, she earned a Doctor of Philosophy (DPhil) in politics at the University of Oxford.[22] Her thesis is titled HIV/AIDS and Health Care Reform in British and American Prisons, and her supervisor was Lucia Zedner.

[...]


Emmy Award in the Outstanding News Discussion and Analysis category for The Rachel Maddow Show episode "Good Morning Landlocked Central Asia!"
Maddow was named in Out magazine's "Out 100" list of the "gay men and women who moved culture" in 2008.[59]
Maddow was voted "Lesbian/Bi Woman of the Year (American)" in AfterEllen's 2008 Visibility Awards.[60]
Maddow won a Gracie Award in 2009, presented by the American Women in Radio and Television.[61]
In 2009, Maddow was nominated for GLAAD's 20th Annual Media Awards for a segment of her MSNBC show, "Rick Warren, Change To Believe In?", in the Outstanding TV Journalism Segment category.[62]
On March 28, 2009, Maddow received a Proclamation of Honor from the California State Senate, presented in San Francisco by California State Senator Mark Leno.[63]
In April 2009, she was listed at number four in Out magazine's Annual Power 50 List.[64]
Maddow placed sixth in the "2009 AfterEllen.com Hot 100" list (May 11, 2009)[65] and third in its "2009 Hot 100: Out Women" version.[66]
Maddow was included on a list of openly gay media professionals in The Advocate's "Forty under 40" issue of June/July 2009.[67]
In 1994, Maddow was an Honorable Mention in the Elie Wiesel Foundation for Humanity Prize in Ethics.[68]
In June 2009, Maddow's MSNBC show was the only cable news show nominated for a Television Critics Association award in the Outstanding Achievement in News and Information category.[69]
In March 2010, Maddow won at the 21st Annual GLAAD Media Awards in the category of Outstanding TV Journalism- Newsmagazine for her segment, "Uganda Be Kidding Me".[70]
Maddow was the 2010 commencement speaker and was given an honorary Doctor of Laws (LLD) degree at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts, in May 2010.[71]
In July 2010, Maddow was presented with a Maggie Award for her ongoing reporting of healthcare reform, the murder of Dr. George Tiller, and the anti-abortion movement.[72]
In August 2010, Maddow won the Walter Cronkite Faith & Freedom Award, which was presented by the Interfaith Alliance.[44] Past honorees included Larry King, Tom Brokaw, and the late Peter Jennings.[44]
In February 2012, Maddow was presented the John Steinbeck Award by the Martha Heasley Cox Center for Steinbeck Studies at San Jose State University.[73]
Outstanding Host at the 2012 Gracie Allen Awards[74]
In December 2012, the audio book version of Maddow's Drift was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Maddow
04-25-2017 , 02:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Hopefully today is the day they start the process of moving the wall to the Canadian border. In Mexico you don't find poker players who think magnetic bracelets actually work or Phds who think Rachel Maddow is better at math than me, or that all Republicans should die painfully. There is something in the water up there.
i don't know about Maddow, but as someone with an actual math phd your strutting around pretending to be good at "math" based on you enjoying elementary logic puzzles is pretty hilarious.
04-25-2017 , 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Hopefully today is the day they start the process of moving the wall to the Canadian border. In Mexico you don't find poker players who think magnetic bracelets actually work or Phds who think Rachel Maddow is better at math than me, or that all Republicans should die painfully. There is something in the water up there.
rachel maddow has a phd in public policy so it's fair to assume she has a better grasp of how government works than a math phd. you could probably calculate the volume of cones way faster than her tho so take pride in that
04-25-2017 , 02:36 PM
It was posted a couple pages ago but that piece on Trump at the apprentice is amazing. That's exactly how he governs. And then is press sec and cabinet are forced to talk and circles and go to bat for him.
04-25-2017 , 02:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Hopefully today is the day they start the process of moving the wall to the Canadian border. In Mexico you don't find poker players who think magnetic bracelets actually work or Phds who think Rachel Maddow is better at math than me, or that all Republicans should die painfully. There is something in the water up there.
The something in the water is called logic, progressives politics and rational social policy.
04-25-2017 , 02:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
The something in the water is turning the frogs gay
fyp
04-25-2017 , 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
rachel maddow has a phd in public policy so it's fair to assume she has a better grasp of how government works than a math phd. you could probably calculate the volume of cones way faster than her tho so take pride in that
DS wasn't comparing maddow to a math phd. He was comparing maddow to himself. World of difference there. Like he likes to pretend he is part of that club, but it isn't remotely true.
04-25-2017 , 02:51 PM
What is your subfield uke?

Last edited by AllTheCheese; 04-25-2017 at 02:52 PM. Reason: Or was, if you no longer do math research.
04-25-2017 , 03:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
in rare news, here's a bit about a republican displaying true character and integrity.



http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/repu...n-the-way-out/
This is awesome. State judiciary seems to be the only branch of government with any ****ing integrity nowadays
04-25-2017 , 03:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Something I bitched about a ton in the campaign is that once the media figured out Palin and Johnson were dumb they constantly tried to stump them because it was good for clicks and lols, but inexplicably Trump(who is much, much dumber) avoided that.

Like someone on Twitter said during the health care thing, the best question to ask Trump about health care is not some weird tangential bull**** about the Freedom Caucus or Democratic support, but instead:

"Can you briefly explain how your health care plan works?"
I think this has been tried but Trump has perfected his bull**** incoherent babble spiel game that he's basically unpenetrable. Wasn't GJ's primary failing that he stopped to ask what Aleppo was? Trump is expert in that he never does that. He'll just say his health care plan works because it covers everyone, no cost, it's tremendous. Ask him the details, he'll point to his dealmaking skills, how it's someone elses responsibility to know any of the details but he's a winner and his plan will be great, you'll see, he's got the best people on it. He's not going to be tripped up by that. Obviously to normal people it's complete bull**** gibberish but he's not going to suffer appreciably for it.

Better than asking him to explain how his health care plan work is to actually ask him obvious trivia questions. He should have Russerted, basically. Russert used to love those "and can you tell me the prime minister of the UK?" questions after he would let them riff on some policy about British/American relations. They were tedious but it's like the one form of question you can trip Trump up on because he can't simply answer it by telling you how great he'll make everything. It's unfortunate no one has done that with him: what's the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, how many representatives are in the House, what's the capital of Florida, etc.
04-25-2017 , 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
What is your subfield uke?
Algebraic topology (sepcifically equivariant K-theory and applications in symplectic geometry). I moved into a teaching stream assistant professor position after PhD, so I consider myself more of an educator than a mathematician these days.
04-25-2017 , 03:14 PM
It's easy enough to brush off trivia questions as improper for an interview, and you would basically be guaranteeing that your outlet loses all future access.
04-25-2017 , 03:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
Better than asking him to explain how his health care plan work is to actually ask him obvious trivia questions. He should have Russerted, basically. Russert used to love those "and can you tell me the prime minister of the UK?" questions after he would let them riff on some policy about British/American relations. They were tedious but it's like the one form of question you can trip Trump up on because he can't simply answer it by telling you how great he'll make everything. It's unfortunate no one has done that with him: what's the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, how many representatives are in the House, what's the capital of Florida, etc.
this was the nuclear triad thing. but it didn't matter because the average american couldn't answer it either
04-25-2017 , 03:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllTheCheese
It's easy enough to brush off trivia questions as improper for an interview, and you would basically be guaranteeing that your outlet loses all future access.
Probably. And it is generally improper and not useful. But I'm confident it's probably the only way to really trip up Trump. Because I don't think "tell us the details of your health care plan?" are kryptonite for Trump. He's simply too skilled at bull**** gibberish to embarrass himself ala GJ. One of the obvious Trumpian skills is being media savvy and having 30 years of yuking it up with people about topics he probably knows less than nothing about, often on camera or in a big room full of people. He just spits out a bunch of verbal diarrhea, hand-waving allusions to how great he is or the outcome will be, and it often includes a tacit admission he doesn't know anything but has employed some experts to tell him or whatever. When pressed he just repeats the self-promote-y salesman word salad stuff. I don't think he can be shaken like that.

Last edited by DVaut1; 04-25-2017 at 03:43 PM.
04-25-2017 , 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
i don't know about Maddow, but as someone with an actual math phd your strutting around pretending to be good at "math" based on you enjoying elementary logic puzzles is pretty hilarious.
Actuary exams at 19 tho.
04-25-2017 , 03:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
this was the nuclear triad thing. but it didn't matter because the average american couldn't answer it either
Exactly. But it's emblematic of why you can't stump him like that. It's not just because most people don't know how we deliver nukes. I don't remember exactly what he said but IIRC it was just self-promotion ("I'll handle it great") and trite truisms and populist jargon that are actual valid words and phrases but mean nothing in context ("nuclear is dangerous, that's the whole game!") and then literally just gave up and said the devastation was the most important thing to him (???). It's not just that people don't know about how we shoot nuclear missiles off but it's also that any question which allows for subjectivity and doesn't have a singular correct answer can simply be babbled through with some trite nonsense and the interviewer is not going to be equipped to combat it without violating standards and unwritten rules about editorializing ("lolol wtf, you're a moron?!") like ATC noted.
04-25-2017 , 03:40 PM
uke-sklansky math olympiad for rolls
04-25-2017 , 03:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by uke_master
Algebraic topology (sepcifically equivariant K-theory and applications in symplectic geometry). I moved into a teaching stream assistant professor position after PhD, so I consider myself more of an educator than a mathematician these days.
Cool. I do mostly algebraic geometry, but some stuff in my work has analogues in K-Theory I believe. I also studied a very simple sounding problem called the Horn problem, maybe you know it, (given three hermitian matrices A, B, C, when do A and B have conjugates that sum to C?), which has a symplectic geometric approach involving moment maps. Interesting that several 2p2 politards can have such similar paths, but I guess poker + politics attracts only certain kinds of people.

I'll probably end up not doing research also. Not that I dislike it, but the postdoc period is just too long and miserable ime.
04-25-2017 , 03:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
Traditional 401(k) is always excluded. Traditional IRA is only deductible if you are under a certain income threshold. Roth contributions can only be made up to a certain income level, but no deductible IRA contributions can be moved over to a Roth with no tax in many cases.
Oh right - I was mixing up 401(k) and IRA.
04-25-2017 , 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrollyWantACracker
Actuary exams at 19 tho.
17. 11th grade.

      
m