patrick.net

The bitch is going down quick!

zzyzzx says

I ought to show that to my Bass player he isn't voting but believes every thing CNN says. .
I know it's just a meme but he wouldn't. He is the definition of low information. If I showed him that said I saw it on CNN last night. He would be convinced that CNN declared him the winner already.

this video from the comment above by freespeechforever really sums up the true cause of trump's support. brilliant!

www.youtube.com/embed/wwmOkaKh3-s

Tenpoundbass says

He is the definition of low information.

But you set a high bar for an informed polity.

You can't expect everyone to know that Clinton ordered the killings at Ruby Ridge, or that Obama ordered the narrowing of airline seats.

+17

rando says

this video from the comment above by freespeechforever really sums up the true cause of trump's support. brilliant!

Did you listen to the entire argument ?

Of course he's right about the big picture, of not chasing (only) economic growth. And automation is going to force us face up to some of these issues fairly soon anyway. But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

Tenpoundbass says

+17

That was comment 666.

And on the night of Pantsuit Pazuzu's acceptance speech before the Demonic Orcs!

[shudders ...]

But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

------------

Is anyone suggesting economic isolation?

I'm curious as to why you suggest that our politicians make trade deals that sacrifice our Labor class, for the benefit of the the Corporate Ownership class, out of necessity. Care to explain?

I would think that a government of the people would make trade deals that benefit The People. Out of necessity.

errc says

I'm curious as to why you suggest that our politicians make trade deals that sacrifice our Labor class, for the benefit of the the Corporate Ownership class, out of necessity. Care to explain?

I wasn't suggesting the American labor getting screwed was anyone's intention. And I also wasn't advocating any specific deal past or present. SImply observing the obvious big picture.

WE as a country have argued and fought against communism and for global capitalism. Many of our corporations are multinational players in a global economy. IT isn't surprising that a natural effect of their growth and the continuing globalization is that cheap labor in other countries is taken advantage of by american corporations (including Trump in a huuuuge way). If we refused to have that occur, or insisted that it not occur this would mean essentially isolating ourselves, and allowing global competing corporations of other countries to take advantage of that labor to their competitive advantage in the global market place.

That should give you a hint as to what I was referring to. But it's not that simple. As things work now, at least iphones are made by an american company.

By the way, if you watch that video, a compelling argument is made that the offshoring of manufacturing was happening regardless of those trade deals. Those deals just tried to optimize trade to benefit american interests. Yes - american corporate interests.

IT's a global economy. It's not that hard to understand. WE have to find ways to do better for our workers. But preventing trade deals that our corporations think are good for them in terms of how they compete (IN THAT GLOBAL ECONOMY), is not the answer. At least I can't see how it is.

I think our focus should be on automation - because that wave is going to be upon us before long, and the potential displacement of labor that comes with that is far greater than the one that comes from manufacturing being offshored. Possibly the latter problem is a blessing, forcing us to face up to some needed pro worker related policies that are going to come from government investing in things like infrastructure, clean energy, and science and technology.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/nevada-general-election-polls-donald-trump-rnc-bump-hillary-clinton-las-vegas-who-is-leading-in/

Trump ahead in Nevada

The June GQR Research poll sampled just 300 likely voters. It found Trump led, 47-45 percent over Clinton, with a 5.7 percent margin of error. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson received 9 percent support when he is included, with Trump and Clinton receiving 44 percent each.
Candidate %
Trump 47
Clinton 45
Other 8

errc says

But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

Nobody is seeking ecconomic issolation. Our trade deals are made by self serving politicians who are weaving their golden parachute. We make trade deals that are made and signed based on optimal conditions for a few potlicians and their fincial backers, that serves their best intersts but kicks the rest of us in the can.

Nobody is saying ecconomic issolation. Just getting a good deal, we never get a good deal. The Clintons got a good deal, GW Bush got a great deal, Cheny got excelent deals, every motherfucker in Congress got a cherry sweet heart of a deal, when they bailed out the banks that were too big to fail. They knew who were going to turn a 40% profit in three months, and invested accordingly. Had you and I done that, we would have been in prison for insider trading.

Tenpoundbass says

Just getting a good deal, we never get a good deal. The Clintons got a good deal, GW Bush got a great deal, Cheny got excelent deals, every motherfucker in Congress got a cherry sweet heart of a deal, when they bailed out the banks that were too big to fail. They knew who were going to turn a 40% profit in three months, and invested accordingly. Had you and I done that, we would have been in prison for insider trading.

Absolutely correct! Being endorsed by criminals like Pelosi who made their fortunes with insider trading is a disgrace. Or isolating Russia which we could make excellent trade deals with to favor middle-eastern oil states is completely fucked up. That's where Trump's appeal comes in, people are starting to wake up that Russia is not the enemy anymore, and hasn't been in a long while. The enemy are globalists bailing out the 1% and legalizing insider trading for themselves while gladly laundering the money of terrorists.

Okay, well I said I would give it a few days after the DNC to update you, but here's an early example for you.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN1092M5

"Clinton leads Trump by 6 points after Democratic confab: Reuters/Ipsos poll"

WE need a few days for the dust to settle after the DNC, but here's Nate Silvers "now cast" which had Trump ahead the other day:

I'm guessing by the middle of next week things will be back to where they were ? The only difference being that more and more of that small number of true independents are making up their minds as time goes by.

I'm still fascinated by the coincidence of Roger AIlles stepping down at the same time that TRump's nomination became official. Someone's head had to roll.

That chart is more Liberal Propaganda Bullshit! Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary, your chart shows HIllary over 50, That's a LIE!
shows Hitlery with a 5 or 7 point lead over Trump another lie.

Even Hillary is using the phrase now:

Tenpoundbass says

That chart is more Liberal Propaganda Bullshit! Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary, your chart shows HIllary over 50, That's a LIE!

shows Hitlery with a 5 or 7 point lead over Trump another lie.

That chart is from Nate SIlver's 538, probably the best go to site for this kind of analysis.

You might want to consider the difference between probability (that why the title uses the word "odds.") versus polls. Hillary having a 56% percent chance of winning is actually a very small lead. Not long ago she was considered by SIlver, and everyone betting actual money a 4:1 favorite, in other words about 80% likely to win. She might be back to that next week. Stay tuned.

Tenpoundbass says

Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary

Maybe before the DNC. You go ahead and hang on to that old data as long as you can. Here, I'll show you a lagging graphic from REal CLear Politics. This one lags a lot because its averaging in polls from several days ago.

Again. That's a lagging graph and hasn't hardly begun to show the DNC bounce.

I know who it's from it's from this Idiot

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/04/7-times-nate-silver-was-hilariously-wrong-about-donald-trump/

1. June 16, 2015: Why Donald Trump Isn’t A Real Candidate, In One Chart

2. July 16, 2015: Two Good Reasons Not To Take The Donald Trump ‘Surge’ Seriously

3. July 20, 2015: Donald Trump Is The World’s Greatest Troll

4. Aug. 6, 2015: Donald Trump’s Six Stages of Doom

5. Aug. 11, 2015: Donald Trump Is Winning The Polls, And Losing The Nomination

6. Nov. 23, 2015: Dear Media, Stop Freaking Out About Donald Trump’s Polls

7. Donald Trump Comes Out Of Iowa Looking Like Pat Buchanan

His analysis has always been about probability, something you don't understand.

If an analysis indicates something has a 60% chance of happening, and then the opposite (40% chance of happening) happens, it doesn't make the guy an idiot. But I'm not going to bother explaining that to you. Most readers that care, are very capable of understanding this.

WAnt to explode your mind ? Go here and see that Silver currently has 3 different probabilistic analyses of the expected results. The one I posted last night, the "now cast" has actually flipped back toward Trump for some reason.

Go here and try the three radio buttons on the upper right hand side.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Correct.
However, it does make the data he posts useless...

marcus says

If an analysis indicates something has a 60% chance of happening, and then the opposite (40% chance of happening) happens, it doesn't make the guy an idiot.

marcus says

If we refused to have that occur, or insisted that it not occur this would mean essentially isolating ourselves, and allowing global competing corporations of other countries to take advantage of that labor to their competitive advantage in the global market place.

Bullshit! There is NO reason why stuff sold in USA can't be made in USA. For consumption outside the US, you can have a separate factory somewhere else for that. The US market for most products is big enough to warrant a separate manufacturing location in the US. That, and a lot of things are made in more facility anyway.

I think I almost decoded what you're trying to say. But it still makes no sense. Not if you understand the most basic economics. People tolerate paying more for drugs than people outside the U.S pay, but that has nothing to do with where they are manufactured.

Answer this. SAy we make the Nike shoes here and sell them for $250, and we have a plant in China that sells them there and in a few other countries for $60 (US). Which ones do we sell in Austria, France, Iceland, New Zealand and England (to name only a few) ? Are we going to sell the Chinese Nike shoes made in China by an Amercian firm to everyone except ourselves ? Really ?

If you explore the logic and the example it sets, yes, you're talking about isolationism. Does everyone need to be totally isolationist for your thoughts on this to make sense ?

marcus says

I think I almost decoded what you're trying to say. But it still makes no sense. Not if you understand the most basic economics.

You are the one who is too strip to understand that today many, if not most things are made in more than one facility, and it would be easy enough to have one of pretty much everything made in USA, like it used to be.

That and made in USA shoes won't cost $250 either. Probably closer to $80 which is what nicer New Balance shoes used to cost. I don't know if Kswiss still makes them here, but if I could find them online I could get more accurate pricing.

Yes it's possible to have factories just for the US market, and a factory in Thailand to. Export everywhere else. Perhaps you aren't old enough to remember, but I do remember when pretty much everything in the stores was made in USA.

marcus says

Are we going to sell the Chinese Nike shoes made in China by an Amercian firm to everyone except ourselves ?

Yes. Why not? But shoes are a poor example. We could create more and better paying US jobs with domestic requirements for things like cars, car parts, and some basic materials. We can make our own TV's , air conditioning systems, etc. Just like we used to

marcus says

People tolerate paying more for drugs than people outside the U.S pay, but that has nothing to do with where they are manufactured.

The made in China Craftsman tools I see in the stores is priced exactly the same as the previous made in USA ones were. I also see a LOT of others thugs where the price never changed when the factory moved to China or Mexico, so I have no reason to necessarily expect price increases when stuff is made in USA again. Have also noticed that cars made in Korea and Mexico cost about the same as similar cars Made in USA

Chinese man works for 10c/hour. None of you can compete your labor with that unless you fine starving to death, while making global elites rich.

Booger says

Probably closer to $80 which is what nicer New Balance shoes used to cost.

THat's in the 1980s. A price of $80 in 1988 is like paying $160 now. Clothing and shoes are way cheaper now than they were 30 years ago if you adjust for inflation.

YOu should listen to the Goldsmith video above and listen to the debate a ways into it. The trade deals aren't even the reason manufacturing is done overseas. THat was happening anyway. The trade deals are about helping our exports and protecting so called intellectual capital.

What you are advocating makes no sense to me. How do you make it happen ? Is it just for selected products ? I don't know whether you just haven't thought this through, or whether you are unable to.

https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/759620538113273856

Trump up by 4 points in VA

zzyzzx says

Trump up by 4 points in VA

I've been practicing my gloat face. I'm going to want to force stunning tears.

Maybe you should be practicing your nostalgia face, fondly thinking back and daydreaming about that special week back in late July '16.

If it gets back above 75% on Nate's "now-cast," then I can breathe again and sleep well again.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

Come on man. All hands on deck! You need to make up some compelling propaganda RIGHT NOW. This bounce might be taking TRump back to 4:1 dog.

Look at the bright side. You and zzyzzx are gonna have years of whining about Hillary and making up nonsensical crap about how everything is her fault. It will be fun !

But they erased their data and reworked the Hillary trend, the Polls are shit now. You're going to have to open your Trump present on November 8th and cry.

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/08/01/donald-trump-tops-every-poll-on-sanders-for-america-twitter-account/

Hillary really needed every Bernie voter to pull this off.

From today:

he he he

I think there is a non-zero chance that Trump drops out in the next month. And Paul Ryan is the next President.

Tenpoundbass says

There's just no way Trump would be polling at 15% cut it out.

Do you not understand what that graphic is saying? It's the probability that either candidate wins the White House based on state polling data. It's not saying that Trump is polling at 15%, it's saying that Trump is behind (3-7%) in most swing state polls and therefore has a small chance of winning enough states to become President.

This one kind of lags.

Remember last week when Trump was winning ? Sigh...those were the days...

dont forget assange says he still has emails that will put Clinton behind bars.