The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. - Page 1849 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

...

Page 1849 of 5382

849 1349 1649 1749 1799 1829 1839 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1859 1869 1899 1949 2049 2349 2849

Last

Page 1849 of 5382

First

849 1349 1649 1749 1799 1829 1839 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1859 1869 1899 1949 2049 2349 2849

Last

07-18-2017 , 07:36 PM

#46201

Clovis8

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 16,503

The republicans are meeting with trump tomorrow on healthcare. Given he knows nothing about congress, healthcare policy or politics he would definitely be the go to guy on this.

Everyone please for the love of God stop talking about McConnell as some kind of genius. He is an incompetent idiot unable to pass legislation when he has a majority.

07-18-2017 , 07:47 PM

#46202

dinopoker

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 9,437

Quote:

Originally Posted by Our House

Nothing makes sense unless our POTUS is owned to high hell by Russia. Then, everything fits.

Except for GOP. Unless a whole bunch of them are owned too. Then, everything fits again.

This 2nd Putin thing may be bothering me more than it should. I'm pretty shook. I mean, I called for immediate Mueller interviews with Tillerson after the non-secret meeting went almost 2 hours into overtime. But this hidden meeting? Wow!

I'm sure they just talked about pierogies and snow and ****, so whatever. Nothing to do but move on.

This is looking more and more likely at this point. The Steele dossier is true, Trumpo is compromised, and Putin reminded him of that at the G20 to get him to play ball on [insert nefarious thing].

Then Trump tried to weasel out of the trap and the Russians sent the Don Jr. email to the NYT as a shot across the bow.

07-18-2017 , 07:48 PM

#46203

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay89

I am or at least was a trump supporter. Everything I said in the past few pages is something that maybe 1% or less of trump supporters talk about.

So you know you are wrong to cast me as a typical trump supporter. Your typical trump supporter touts the stock market going higher under trump being a result of trump, and I just told you that the market is going higher only because of cheap money and suppressed interest rates. Trump is a phony for latching into this to gain politically and your typical trump supporter doesn't know why the market is going up.

You are not special around here, and you are not unique.

07-18-2017 , 07:50 PM

#46204

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 37,834

So we're really letting silverman come back. Wonderful.

07-18-2017 , 07:58 PM

#46205

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

lol, Nate Silver was right. He was the only one who was right.

Last edited by AllTheCheese; 07-18-2017 at 08:00 PM. Reason: Right for the correct reasons, that is.

07-18-2017 , 07:58 PM

#46206

Clovis8

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 16,503

The best was to tell someone who knows little about economics is they keep calling it "real economics".

07-18-2017 , 07:59 PM

#46207

sportsjefe

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 13,693

For one, Silver gave Trump the best odds of anybody.

For two... got any better ideas?

07-18-2017 , 07:59 PM

#46208

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

So we're really letting silverman come back. Wonderful.

Very unlikely this is Silverman himself, just another crank who hasn't (yet) gone full racist.

07-18-2017 , 08:10 PM

#46209

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clovis8

I hate McConnell, but he's not incompetent. Given how this played out, I doubt anyone could've succeeded in his position. His max is 51 Senators, because it is literally impossible to satisfy Rand Paul and Susan Collins simultaneously. And he has to make the bill draconian on a large scale because that's what the GOP donors pay him for. He maybe could have got it through if Trump were competent and well-liked and really sold the bill to the American public, but none of that being the case, he kinda just had to push and pray.

07-18-2017 , 08:16 PM

#46210

All-In Flynn

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 10,923

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay89

Economists are to economics what witch doctors are to medicine.

The experts have yet to be right in my lifetime, imo.

07-18-2017 , 08:17 PM

#46211

zoltan

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 21,499

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay89

Nate silver said trump had a 2% chance of winning the nomination!

If Clinton got disbarred from practicing law this silver kid should be disbarred from practicing statistics immediately.

So you DO understand statistics? Good to know.

07-18-2017 , 08:17 PM

#46212

jjhender

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 6,640

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrWookie

Very unlikely this is Silverman himself, just another crank who hasn't (yet) gone full racist.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

What are your thoughts about silver?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay89

Haha fu

Trolly is the smartest

It's up to you of course, but he's already confirmed who he is. I wouldn't have figured it out until some reference to buying someone drinks in Chicago following his nutbaggery.

Normally I would have stuck to lurking, but chimed in for reasons that would probably get me temped for personal attacks.

07-18-2017 , 08:19 PM

#46213

wheatrich

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 21,405

07-18-2017 , 08:24 PM

#46214

MrWookie

Don't Call Me Meredith

Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 94,159

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjhender

Huh, he did make plenty of references to hanging out in Chicago that I'd forgotten about. Alright, my bad.

07-18-2017 , 08:25 PM

#46215

PartyGirlUK

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 23,530

From a Machiavellian perspective should Senate GOP vote to repeal Obamacare so they can shift blame onto the House GOP?

07-18-2017 , 08:28 PM

#46216

jmakin

banned

Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 30,120

I love how people trot out the 1-2% thing like it's some sort of impossible event

07-18-2017 , 08:32 PM

#46217

AllTheCheese

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 11,898

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clay89

Nate silver said trump had a 2% chance of winning the nomination!

If Clinton got disbarred from practicing law this silver kid should be disbarred from practicing statistics immediately.

lol @ this disingenuous argument. The 2% figure is from August 2015, him speaking as a pundit using some data and historical evidence as a guide. He had no model at the time. Once he had a model, it always gave Trump a good chance.

Quote:

Usually when you see a probability listed at FiveThirtyEight — for example, that Hillary Clinton has a 93 percent chance to win the New Jersey primary — the percentage reflects the output from a statistical model. To be more precise, it’s the output from a computer program that takes inputs (e.g., poll results), runs them through a bunch of computer code, and produces a series of statistics (such as each candidate’s probability of winning and her projected share of the vote), which are then published to our website. The process is, more or less, fully automated: Any time a staffer enters new poll results into our database, the program runs itself and publishes a new set of forecasts.4 There’s a lot of judgment involved when we build the model, but once the campaign begins, we’re just pressing the “go” button and not making judgment calls or tweaking the numbers in individual states.

Anyway, that’s how things usually work at FiveThirtyEight. But it’s not how it worked for those skeptical forecasts about Trump’s chance of becoming the Republican nominee. Despite the lack of a model, we put his chances in percentage terms on a number of occasions. In order of appearance — I may be missing a couple of instances — we put them at 2 percent (in August), 5 percent (in September), 6 percent (in November), around 7 percent (in early December), and 12 percent to 13 percent (in early January). Then, in mid-January, a couple of things swayed us toward a significantly less skeptical position on Trump.

First, it was becoming clearer that Republican “party elites” either didn’t have a plan to stop Trump or had a stupid plan. Also, that was about when we launched our state-by-state forecast models, which showed Trump competitive with Cruz in Iowa and favored in New Hampshire. From that point onward, we were reasonably in line with the consensus view about Trump, although the consensus view shifted around quite a lot. By mid-February, after his win in New Hampshire, we put Trump’s chances of winning the nomination at 45 percent to 50 percent, about where betting markets had him. By late February, after he’d won South Carolina and Nevada, we said, at about the same time as most others, that Trump would “probably be the GOP nominee.”

07-18-2017 , 08:37 PM

#46218

zikzak

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 22,198

Nate's final model on election day had Trump at 28.6%.

07-18-2017 , 08:54 PM

#46219

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

https://twitter.com/Neubadah/status/887470956939182081

07-18-2017 , 08:55 PM

#46220

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 37,834

Most of us were lol'ing because we thought Nate was grossly overestimating Trump's chances.

Any poll aggregation model is going to be garbage in / garbage out. Given that the polls were all systematically off, there's no way any model that worked for previous elections would get it right. *Why* the polling data sucked is an interesting and useful question, but lol'ing at Silver because he couldn't foresee a black swan event seems dumb.

07-18-2017 , 08:58 PM

#46221

uDevil

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 6,941

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...75373981696000

07-18-2017 , 08:58 PM

#46222

fxwacgesvrhdtf

Guest

Posts: n/a

Quote:

Originally Posted by iron81

A reminder that we were all celebrating the death of Trumpcare after the first House push blew up.

This is different. The main reason moderates came on board in the end in the house was because "moderates in the senate would fix it." They can't, because it doesn't work, and they know it.