President Trump Tweets Support for Women's March

I am not prison. That is as far as innocent until proven guilty gets you. We won't throw you in jail until we prove you guilty. It was not meant to avoid social consequences for being a dick.

 

It reminds me of what a disgusting hypocrite he is: an abuser of women, having sexually and verbally assaulted them, calling them ugly, fat and pieces of ass and bragging about how he assaults them. Any woman with sense won't accept the idea he is on their side.

 

Macroeconomics is subjective, but I will be clear for the Economic Record: Even when Trump points this out, he's lying. At that point, the highest for U-6 was 11.3%(IE: Double of the rate of the Obama Administration: 5.5% ish.) To accept the public rate now, is definitely propaganda on his part. But unemployment has also certainly decreased in real-time too. But not necessarily by a lot.

According to most modern economists though, a 4% unemployment is around the norm. Now it's a matter of increasing those wages.

 

A) Lying - by definition - requires an intent do deceive. Unless the person in question admits to the deception, it is impossible to know someone is lying. Trump may have been inaccurate, but you cannot know if he was 'lying' or not.

B) The numbers he quoted were way out there. But the basis of his point was and is 100% valid. He was basically referrring to 'discouraged workers'. The U-3 (the official' unemployment rate) does not count people who want a job and are ready and willing to work immediately - but have stopped looking for work for one reason or another ('discouraged workers'). This is nonsense and dishonest. It was created during the Clinton administration to make the numbers look better then they really are.

Here is a speech made by his son (and echoed by his father) in 2016 as to what Trump meant.

'Trump was making a point frequently made by his father — that the official unemployment rate is lower than it should be because it doesn't take into account the people who would like a job but have stopped looking.

"The way we actually measure unemployment is after x number of months if someone can't find a job, congratulations, they're miraculously off," he said. "That doesn't count" in the calculation.

"These are artificial numbers," Trump continued. "These are numbers that are massaged to make the existing economy look good, to make this administration look good when, in fact, it's a total disaster. ... Those are the people we want to put to work"'

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-trump-jr-says-unemployment-rates-are-manipu/

And the way the bls calculates the U-3 has not changed one tiny bit since Trump Jr. made that speech. The U-3 is still a hoax. The U-6 is a far, FAR more accurate measurement of the unemployment situation AND was - more or less - the method used prior to the 1990's.

It's just that, when Trump took office, he conveniently (like most politicians) stopped mentioning the above and decided to start taking full credit for the now 'legitimate' U-3 numbers.

 

there is a large contingent of women that are also tired of this hysteria. they found humor in his statement a well.

 

Why do sh!thole's bum kissers desperately and ineffectually try to contrive their diversions?

He's relentlessly unpopular with Americans across a wide range of polls, and directing attention elsewhere does nothing to alter that enduring reality.

 

yeah, you guys are making the lines of consent awfully blurry these days. a woman let's something go down, but she was secretly uncomfortable about it while not seeming to oppose the action, but it was still sexual assault because he should have known. yes, the movement is getting that ridiculous. back in the 90s, women would let you know in a common form of communication, language.

 

lol? what? this has to be as joke, right?

 

as long as the women who trade their body for things they want are consenting adults, then who are you to judge. this is a timeless agreement.

 

so many Trump supporters have TDS, I hope someday they can be cured

 

some would say the recent discourse of America was a de-evolution from previous times. i would contend that trump is an effect of that degradation of freedom of communication and openness of thought and not a cause of anything yet. our economic and bureaucratic progression is age old and is following the trend of previous successful societies which eventually collapsed under their own weight.

 

I am fine with that, but then don't come around saying how that is a bad thing later if you are not going to hold trump to a higher moral standard. Bill Clinton may have cheated on Hillary, but if you don't care what consenting adults do then you cannot cast stones on him for that. Monika certainly was old enough and knew what she was doing when she had relations with him, and under your judgment that would appear to be fine.

 

I agree that trump is being dishonest with the u3 especially considering he knows the u6 is more accurate. I also understand why he uses the u3 given the absolute lynching he would receive from a dishonest media of he were to try to return to the u6. not many times, but several, I have approved of trumps actions to return power to congress, stop using agencies as weapons or to reduce a meaningless regulation. each time, the media blasts him for not continuing a previous admins abuse of power

 

Demographics of Trump supporter they are close to expiration............. not enough time left to change....... Oh well ..........

 

he was prior to being elected. the polls have lost a lot of credibility since that point.

 

I think bill's consensual exploits were his business. they didn't seem to effect his leadership. I did think there is a bit more proof that he had some questionable run ins with women that maybe weren't so consensual. I think he and trump both aren't gentlemen with the ladies, but I believe bill is considerably worse. as far as trump, I believe he is a pig, but I think it will not affect his ability to lead. too many are looking at the man instead of his results.

 

Trump lost the popular vote too..... not just the polls

 

Why does anyone need to pretend that "the polls have lost a lot of credibility"? If the consensus indicated a surge in trumpery fans, the majority that consistently disapproves of his antics would then be insisting that "the polls have lost a lot of credibility."

The polls would still be the same polls (whose self-serving priority is success in accurately assessing public opinion) regardless of whether anyone liked their findings.

 

your argument is that national polls are more accurate than the vastly smaller population size state polls? or, are you saying they got lucky in that the final result matched while their magnitude was way off?

 

out of this post, I disagree with the contention that the polls priority is success in accurately assessing public opinion. most often, their goal is to sway or affect public opinion. the amount of statistical dishonesty in political polls is a greater total than the amount of honesty. how else can anyone explain the constant variation in polling without margin of error overlap?

 

Paranoia concerning polling most often derives from disagreement with the specific findings.

If polls were generally falsified to "to sway or affect public opinion" as you claim without any evidence, why? Pollsters rely on accuracy for their existence. The more bias in a poll, the less legitimate it is regarded and the less profitable it becomes.

Reputable polls only thrive because they aspire to accuracy, and polls that amount to vapid flattery would not be retained by any serious politician. Winning support demands that they identify areas where they are weak, and fat cats who allocate boodles to campaigns demand accurate assessments of where to put it.

What hardcore Trump zealot would note that there is a consistent consensus of public disapproval of Trump and say, "Oh, I should oppose Trump!"? - Or vice versa.

Polls are attempted assessments of public sentiment regarding a particular subject at a particular time. Of course, they would be suspect if they were all precisely synchronized, because that degree of accuracy is unattainable, and would suggest a massive conspiracy if that were the case.

The fact that it is those whose opinions differ with what is the consistent majority as established by a multiplicity of polls who need to pretend that all such polls must be invalid is revelatory. It is self-centered conceit that amounts to self-serving denial.

 

no, I make my findings with a background in statistics. I admit that I'm overtly paranoid about information that I am fed. I stopped reading your post at around the trump zealot remark, but your assertion that a poll's value comes from its reputation as accurate is not completely accurate. most often, the highest value a poll can muster comes from its value in marketing. additionally, fact checking websites have sprung up everywhere providing as a secondary mastering technique providing false validation for any given study or poll that supports the agenda of those running the site. this opinion of polling and statistical data has been an evolution. in the past, I've taken data at face value only to determine through further research that it's false. now, I simply look at many indicators to quickly determine validity. sample size, sample demographics, scale, delta scale, control variables, etc. most often, at least one of these things is modified to tell a specific story.

 

When will they ever learn?

“After projecting a relatively easy victory for Hillary Clinton with all the certainty of a calculus solution, news outlets like The New York Times, The Huffington Post and the major networks scrambled to provide candid answers.
With a new administration about to take shape in Washington, news executives tried to take stock of their mistakes and fix them on the fly, lest the fast-moving story leave them behind again.”
THE NEW YORK TIMES, News Outlets Wonder Where the Predictions Went Wrong, Jim Rutenberg, MEDIATOR NOV. 9, 2016.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/...er-where-the-predictions-went-wrong.html?_r=0

 

You dismiss the consensus of public surveys because they confirm the low opinion of your Trump held by most Americans.

If partisanship were the driving force in polling, there would be a rival cadre of pro-Trump polls.

There aren't.

 

Not interesting at all. Just prefer to keep to the current administration. Hes almost done dismantling the last one.