Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Sun Sep 27 12:34:46 2020

Utopia Talk / Politics / VINDICATION 2 - CANT STOP WINNING
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:00:41
NOT GETTING TIRED YET!

----

Appeals court tosses Democrats' emoluments lawsuit against Trump

By Katelyn Polantz, CNN

Updated 12:19 PM EST, Fri February 07, 2020

Washington(CNN)A federal appeals court on Friday dismissed a lawsuit by congressional Democrats alleging President Donald Trump violated the emoluments clause of the Constitution by refusing to allow lawmakers to review and approve his financial interests.

The ruling is a major triumph for the President, who's intensely sought to keep his business affairs in private, just days after the Republican-held Senate voted to acquit him on impeachment charges for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. The case's dismissal effectively kneecaps one of several attempts Democrats have made to dig up more information about Trump's business holdings.

Before Friday's ruling the lawsuit was paused just as Democrats began subpoenaing the Trump Organization.

Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:35:24
Jergul, "
I don't care who wins the election for as long as the candidates compete on a level playing field."

The DNC literally got caught trying to undermine Sanders and said they do not owe anyone a fair election... I truly believe they are at it again.

At least Buttigieg isnt as bad as Hillary.

"
Theiving, contemptible Trump stole money from veterans and from our soldiers."

"Our"?

Trumps approval is at an all time high,much higher than Congress. The republican party is viewed more favorable than the dems and this was before he was acquitted and they humbled a vote comparable in size to a small mayoral election and to top it off Trumps approval rating on the economy is the highest in 20 years and that was GWB immediately following 9/11.....keep on winning.

But you keep your ripped paper if that's all you have to count as a win I won't take it from you.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:38:33
http://www...ir-primary-process%3f_amp=true

Just in case you were wondering.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:42:12
That is why Bernie supporters said they wouldn't support non Bernie candidates....they dont trust the DNC.

They are the little finger of US political parties. As they hold a knife to your throat saying " I did warn you not to trust me"
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 07 13:43:52
the case was tossed over 'standing' issues not on its merit... so no vindication (again)

(ruled that the plaintiffs not the appropriate ones to bring suit)
TJ
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:44:28
jergul:

"TJ
Indeed. Mirroring Trump would soon lead one into the rabbithole of fake news generation."

It sounds like it's too late for you so full steam ahead.

Teflon Don! The Art of War turned into the Art of the Deal.
TJ
Member
Fri Feb 07 13:53:46
Impeached for life acquitted for life on those two articles. Trump will also be President for life.

Warning: Intent of language on the latter.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:01:22
This could be his best week ever.

http://www...ir-primary-process%3f_amp=true

KEY POINTS
Nonfarm payrolls surged 225,000 for the month, well above Wall Street estimates for a 158,000 gain.
The unemployment rate ticked higher to 3.6%, but for the right reason as the labor force participation rate increased 0.2 percentage points to 63.4%, matching its highest level since June 2013.
Average hourly earnings rose 3.1% over a year ago to $28.44, ahead of estimates for 3% growth.

And that's cnbc...hahaha

Also he won two other court cases against the dems., they ruled he doesn't have to show his taxes and that they had no standing to sue him over business payments.

It must suck to be Pelosi, but its ok she can rip up paper.
TJ
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:03:41
This cracks me up. lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3VTbjeb2-4
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:07:04
Vindman is officially out. The purge has begun!
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:08:13
Tw,

Why must you constantly try to rain on this parade? It's been a fantastic week for America.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:19:21
As for Romney R-UT.... Trumps approval rating in Utah is at an all tome high with majority*** support.
jergul
large member
Fri Feb 07 14:20:41
Habebe
I honestly don't care who wins now. The Democrats have cracked the code. If they use it or not is up to the presidential candidate and his team.

3.1% wage inceases is nothing btw. 1920s Germany managed to pull off 10 000%.

TJ
Fun as it is to emulate Trump's twitter style, I would not say it is particularly addictive.

I merely wanted to illustrate how easy it is to do.
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:28:50
Cracked the code?
Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:36:32
Oh also, Trump had another big wig terrorist killed.... The man is on a role.
jergul
large member
Fri Feb 07 14:42:17
Just assign a few negative adjectives to Trump's given name.

http://en....nicknames_used_by_Donald_Trump
Rugian
Member
Fri Feb 07 14:45:56
Deranged commie jergul,

3.1% is good wage growth in THIS country (not spectacular, but also overly inflationary). Forgive me if I didnt fine the Weimer Republic comparison to be particularly apt.
jergul
large member
Fri Feb 07 14:57:33
Ruggy
The characterisation technique does not apply in this environment. People who cared about being subject to slurs have left long ago.
TJ
Member
Fri Feb 07 15:00:18
With all those wins there are equal numbers of losers.

Habebe:

The Trump code: Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. ;)



jergul
large member
Fri Feb 07 15:08:06
TJ
Now lets see you combine that theory with Trump's extreme use of NDAs.
Forwyn
Member
Fri Feb 07 15:12:42
Lol, I like the progression of Ted names as he came back into the fold.

Lyin' Ted
Texas Ted
Beautiful Ted
TJ
Member
Fri Feb 07 15:13:48
I take it you didn't see the wink. chuckle

I know sarcasm is difficult sometimes, thus the wink.

Legality is no different than checks and balances, eh?
kargen
Member
Fri Feb 07 15:28:50
"Fun as it is to emulate Trump's twitter style, I would not say it is particularly addictive.

I merely wanted to illustrate how easy it is to do."

Now see that is the attitude. While you are explaining that other thing I suggested to Tumbleweed could you also explain how tweets are not anything to be taken serious?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Fri Feb 07 15:47:01
and could someone explain to the crazy person that what Trump puts in a tweet is identical to him saying it out loud...

nowhere is there a disclaimer that everything posted is nonsense

and:
"The President is the President of the United States, so they're considered official statements by the President of the United States"
~ the first piece of shit press secretary from the podium that the current piece of shit press secretary has never held a briefing from... & from which no piece of shit press secretary has held a briefing in nearly a year... with one reason cited being Trump gets his message out -ON TWITTER-

Habebe
Member
Fri Feb 07 17:05:22
Tw, Jergul, Dukhat right now and right after Trump gets re elected all look like this.

http://lov...c9153bab47499d9651aa1fde6fee08
Dukhat
Member
Fri Feb 07 21:21:38
I didn't realize that having to suck Trump's cock was a new requirement of being "conservative" but then you dumbasses always try to collapse everything into black-and-white thinking just like your fuhrer.
Dukhat
Member
Fri Feb 07 21:22:34
Lots of stupid shit hidden in your factoids too. Trump's best approval rating "ever" is basically one cherry-picked poll. Average is still in the low 40's with plenty of other polls showing him down there.
kargen
Member
Fri Feb 07 21:59:31
"and could someone explain to the crazy person that what Trump puts in a tweet is identical to him saying it out loud..."

and President Trump gets to speak his mind as he wishes just like the rest of us. He can opine without it being official doctrine.

A tweet is like a sticky note stuck on a fridge. Only difference is more people looking at the fridge.
obaminated
Member
Fri Feb 07 23:01:25
it has been a rough couple weeks for tw and cuckhat.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sat Feb 08 02:14:13
"He can opine"

oh right, i forgot now literally everything is 'opinion', facts no longer exist... that's why he can lie his ass off w/ no expectation of him ever correcting it, & no complaints by his crazed cultists

a great new world
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 02:32:52
Dukhat, Gallup and Rasmussen both have his approval rating at or around 49-50%...nothing spectacular but his highest.

These are two well knows pollsters who have been around a while, this is not cherry picking. Im sure some I sure polls no one has ever heard of has him lower.
Dukhat
Member
Sat Feb 08 02:39:13
LoL. Rasmussen. Fucking idiot.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 02:39:34
He is currently polling at 43.8.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/

You are cherry picking for as long as you refuse to use this link. I have provided it many times.

If I wanted to do it like you are, then Trump is polling at 42% according to Ipsos and Morning Consult.
Dukhat
Member
Sat Feb 08 02:43:51
Gallup was the outlier poll. Rasmussen was sold by its namesake a few years ago to a conservative outfit.

Not only is Rasmussen notoriously inaccurate, it's also had Trump significantly higher in the past and was the only pollster that showed a positive net approval rating for Trump for much of his early presidency.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 03:10:17
Jergul. I know you have provided it many times.

And you still seem to cling to this site. Yes I get that they take a bunch of polls and average them out , that doesnt make them more accurate, lets look at these individual polls that are used to determine this number.

First and foremost we should find a standard. Likely voters, registered voters, everyone what are we measuring?

Then when was the poll taken and how accurate/ trustworthy are the pollsters.

Your average is a mix of many different standards and is from im guessing his entire presidency when you click on " more polls" it has polls going back further than last October ( I stopped clicking so i dont know how far it goes back)

Right off the bat how does that give a current up to date figure if your counting old put of date polls?
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 03:14:01
As for ipsos and morning consult, never even heard of them. Everyone knows Rasmussen, Gallup and zogby.
Paramount
Member
Sat Feb 08 03:32:48
Never heard of Zogby.

Ipsos and Gallup, yes.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 03:46:09
Hababe
2020 uses a pretty robust system. It predicted Trump had a decent shot at winning in 2020 for example. To much redicule.

The system does not give the average of all polls evah.

If Trump's approval is actually 50%, then 2020 will show this quite soon.

The site has articles on its method.

If you want to benchmark it, then you can do it against all post war presidents. The site has analysed polling data presidents since Truman won his first full term.

Congrats btw. Trump finally has higher approval than a president at this point in that presidency.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 03:54:52
Well it appears to be using polls at least as far back as last October. Which doesn't really give us anything current.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 05:21:45
Well, it appears you do not understand the methodology. Its not a 9th grade school project.

Remember last time we had this discussion. It took 2 days for 2020 to match a poll you were citing.

It gives a poll based estimate of his current approval.

Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 07:31:35
Well tell me then, what are the dates of the polls used?
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 07:40:47
"Calculating a trend line (local polynomial regression)

Because individual polls can be noisy, we estimate how Trump’s approval rating has changed over time using local polynomial regression. Basically, this consists of drawing a smooth curve over the data; this method is similar to those used on Huffington Post Pollster and other sites. In the regression, polls are weighted on the basis that I described earlier, so higher-quality polls with larger sample sizes have more say in the estimate.

While local polynomial regression is a flexible and fairly intuitive method, it’s a bit trickier to work with than it might seem. That’s because people don’t always take the time to determine the correct degree of smoothing, which is governed by several parameters, including the bandwidth and the degree of the polynomial. Too little smoothing can make the curve jut up and down unnecessarily and will result in overfitting of the data. If you smooth too much, however, the curve may be aesthetically pleasing but won’t do all that good a job of describing the data and may be slow to catch up to new trends. While there are usually a wide range of “reasonable” settings when choosing trend-line parameters, our experience has been that people often over-smooth the data when applying these techniques.6

For our election forecasts, we choose the degree of smoothing based on what will maximize predictive power. Generally, this results in a fairly aggressive setting, especially in the days and weeks just before an election. This was one of the reasons our model came closer to the mark than most others in last year’s presidential election; it was aggressive about detecting the substantial tightening in the race that came after FBI Director James Comey’s letter to Congress in late October.

In the case of approval ratings, there’s no election to predict — so we instead choose the settings based on how well they would have predicted a president’s future approval ratings. It asks, for instance, what settings would best have predicted Bill Clinton’s approval ratings in March 1998 based on data through February 1998. The analysis is based on approval-ratings polls since 1945.

This also turns out to produce a relatively aggressive model. A week or two is usually enough to detect a meaningful change in approval ratings, and perhaps sooner than that if several high-quality polls tell a consistent story. See the footnotes for more detail about which settings we use."
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 07:45:55
If you check the graph, then you will find that the trendline is between lots of dots where each dot represents a poll. Two of the dots are from the polls you quoted and are of course at the very top of the range.

So, yah, you cherry-picked. Probably indirectly through the source you used, but letting someone else cherry pick for you is hardly any better.

Trumps current approval rating is 43.8.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 07:46:44
As for predicting Trump, your 385 called him bot a real candidate, sounds more like journalism/ pundit than a pollster but they entwined with the Nyt.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 07:48:34
First off, I didn't see Gallup on there.

2ndly you can not answer a simple question. What arw the dates of thw polls used?
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 07:50:12
Do your own research, cherry picker.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 07:55:26
I did it says your poll is pit of date.

The fact is this poll firs.your narrative. You can copy and past but you dont know what polls are used to to get at that number some may 3 years old averaging his entire presidency they dont seem to say.

At least with Gallup/ Rasmussen they are more transparent.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 08:03:53
The polls are at the absolute high end. So is cherry picking.

The last time we had this discussion, it took 538 two days to match the cherry-picked results you were citing.

It may at worst take a week or two if there is any underlying support to Trump's approval being around 50%.

538's goal is to be right, not to be partisan.

It picked Trump as a likely winner in 2016. Gallup did not even poll for the election outcome after attrocious predictions in 2008 and 2012.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 08:12:33
528 does not poll. It analyses polls.

"Based on what most of us would have thought possible a year or two ago, the election of Donald Trump was one of the most shocking events in American political history. But it shouldn’t have been that much of a surprise based on the polls — at least if you were reading FiveThirtyEight. Given the historical accuracy of polling and where each candidate’s support was distributed, the polls showed a race that was both fairly close and highly uncertain.

This isn’t just a case of hindsight bias. It’s tricky to decide what tone to take in an article like this one — after all, we had Hillary Clinton favored. But one of the reasons to build a model — perhaps the most important reason — is to measure uncertainty and to account for risk. If polling were perfect, you wouldn’t need to do this. And we took weeks of abuse from people who thought we overrated Trump’s chances. For most of the presidential campaign, FiveThirtyEight’s forecast gave Trump much better odds than other polling-based models. Our final forecast, issued early Tuesday evening, had Trump with a 29 percent chance of winning the Electoral College.1 By comparison, other models tracked by The New York Times put Trump’s odds at: 15 percent, 8 percent, 2 percent and less than 1 percent. And betting markets put Trump’s chances at just 18 percent at midnight on Tuesday, when Dixville Notch, New Hampshire, cast its votes.

So why did our model — using basically the same data as everyone else — show such a different result? We’ve covered this question before, but it’s interesting to do so in light of the actual election results. We think the outcome — and particularly the fact that Trump won the Electoral College while losing the popular vote — validates important features of our approach. More importantly, it helps to explain why Trump won the presidency.
A small, systematic polling error made a big difference

Clinton was leading in the vast majority of national polls, and in polls of enough states to get her to 270 electoral votes, although her position in New Hampshire was tenuous in the waning days of the campaign. So there wasn’t any reasonable way to construct a polling-based model that showed Trump ahead. Even the Trump campaign itself put their candidate’s chances at 30 percent, right about where FiveThirtyEight had him.

But people mistake having a large volume of polling data for eliminating uncertainty. It doesn’t work that way. Yes, having more polls helps to a degree, by reducing sampling error and by providing for a mix of reasonable methodologies. Therefore, it’s better to be ahead in two polls than ahead in one poll, and in 10 polls than in two polls. Before long, however, you start to encounter diminishing returns. Polls tend to replicate one another’s mistakes: If a particular type of demographic subgroup is hard to reach on the phone, for instance, the polls may try different workarounds but they’re all likely to have problems of some kind or another. The cacophony of headlines about how “CLINTON LEADS IN POLL” neglected the fact that these leads were often quite small and that if one poll missed, the others potentially would also. As I pointed out on Wednesday, if Clinton had done only 2 percentage points better across the board, she would have received 307 electoral votes and the polls would have “called” 49 of 50 states correctly.

FiveThirtyEight’s probabilities are based on the accuracy of polling averages in presidential elections dating back to 1972. That is, our models are based on how accurate polls have or haven’t been historically, instead of making idealized assumptions about them. For instance, national polling averages in the final week of the campaign have missed the actual outcome by an average of about 2 percentage points. That’s larger than you’d expect from sampling error alone2 and suggests that the polls sometimes suffer from systematic error: Almost all of the them are off in the same direction.

Historically, meanwhile, the error is larger in state polls than in national polls. That’s because there’s less of an opportunity for polling errors to cancel each other out. Suppose, for example, that the polls underestimate Clinton’s performance with Hispanic voters, but overestimate it among white voters without college degrees. In national polls, the overall effect might be relatively neutral. But the state polls will err in opposite directions, overestimating Clinton’s performance in states with lots of noncollege white voters but underestimating it in Hispanic-heavy states.

That’s something like what happened this year. In fact, the error in national polls wasn’t any worse than usual. Clinton was ahead by 3 to 4 percentage points in the final national polls. She already leads in the popular vote, and that lead will expand as mail ballots are counted from California and Washington, probably until she leads in the popular vote by 1 to 2 percentage points overall. That will mean only about a 2-point miss for the national polls. They may easily wind up being more accurate than in 2012, when they missed by 2.7 percentage points.

But what about the state polls? They were all over the place. Clinton actually overperformed FiveThirtyEight’s adjusted polling average in 11 states and the District of Columbia. The problem is that these states were California, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington. Since all of these states except for Nevada and perhaps New Mexico were already solidly blue, that only helped Clinton to run up the popular vote margin in states whose electoral votes she was already assured of. That’s especially true of Calfornia, where Clinton both beat her polls by more than 5 percentage points and substantially improved on Barack Obama’s performance from 2012."
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 08:17:16
For the entire presidency perhaps. For the current mood, I doubt it. It may be a great methodology, but your input matters more.

"For this reason alone, Trump has a better chance of cameoing in another “Home Alone” movie with Macaulay Culkin — or playing in the NBA Finals — than winning the Republican nomination."

http://www...al-candidate-in-one-chart/amp/
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 08:29:36
538 is far more robust than your method. Your can be countered by 2 polls were Trump is underperforming.

The only thing cherry picking tells us is the bias of the picker.

If your numbers are correct, then 538's trendline will reach them in a week or two.
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 08:37:29
So its outdated. So when.you said " he is currently polling at"

You should have said a few weeks ago he was polling at.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 20:57:20
You cannot gauge national approval on the basis of two cherry picked polls habebe.

Trump's current popularity trend is 43.8. Worse than every post war president save Truman. And Truman was pondering a third term.



Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 21:07:40
So old outdated polls are more accurate than two well known trusted sources? What ever fits your narrative.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 21:36:28
Projecting there, bro. You cherry-picked the two highest polls.

The only thing they prove is the narrative you are pitching, your bias, and perhaps to some extent your desparation. You actually care who wins you see.

For actual approval, see his trend. If in doubt of how bad it is, then compare his trend to all other post war presidents.

If you want a solid argument, then wait to see how his trend develops.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 21:52:19
Solid argumet: Trump's popularity is trending upwards and has gained two points in a month.

You are welcome!
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 22:03:00
Your words said that your poll will only show a trend weeks after.

"If your numbers are correct, then 538's trendline will reach them in a week or two."

Never mind that 538 doesnt use Gallup afiak.

The last two polls ( Harris ams Rasmussen) on the 538 list and the Gallup poll....im not cherry picking the highest polls, I'm posting the most respected recent polls not weeks old polls as you said with your own words your poll is not current.
jergul
large member
Sat Feb 08 22:48:21
You should at least own up to cherry picking. Or will you be updating us when the newest poll shows 42% and change your views on Trump's support accordingly?

Or accept that your view on Trump's support has been supplanted by new data?

"My poll" is not a poll. It is a trend given by many polls. I keep on mentioning this and you keep on forgetting it.

Why?
Habebe
Member
Sat Feb 08 23:17:54
What is the newest poll?
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 09 00:05:18
The last poll always counts for you then. At least there will be no problem filling up threads.
Habebe
Member
Sun Feb 09 00:36:18
Well, when your looking for current* answers should you look at old data? I would look for current data from reputable sources.

I have no doubt Trumps approval throughout his presidency is one of the lowest if not the lowest in recent times.

But he has alot going for him ATM. He has two trade deals, ne signed one in the works but they jabe agreed to phase one. He was aquitted, he had a popular SOTU and the dems bumbled the first primary which by comparison makes him lool good.

As far as the economy goes many polls habe said for a time now that he is viewed favorably.

Now can he hold on to that? Who knows I wouldnt give up on jos ability to self sabotage, so youve got some hope, but as for me I wouldnt bet against him.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 09 01:03:47
Am am looking at current trends. Its a better, more robust metric by far.

I seriously don't care who wins. There are upsides and downsides either way.

Habebe
Member
Sun Feb 09 10:07:23
Yes you've said robust....

What in your opinion is the positive of about re electing Trump?
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 09 11:23:31
It speeds along the development of a multipolar world.

That is a value important to me.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 09 11:33:58
Another: Trump will keep the focus on strong stock markets. We have a 1.1 trillion sovereign dollar fund for say 5.5 million people.

This is good in two ways. The fund has a 60/40 spread between stock and other stuff. So any gain in the market is good. Any crash is also good as the Fund would be immediately engage in a massive stock buy-up when prices are low.

There is no forseeable scenario were state spending would need more than the dividends from its investment.

So yay Trump. Make us $$$.

http://www.nbim.no/en/

Do you need more?

Norwegian defence spending is too low. We need to put more into an credible conventional deterrent.

Trump is helping that.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 09 11:35:45
Sorry about the grammar and word structure there. I am multitasking.
Habebe
Member
Sun Feb 09 12:21:00
I'm the last person to attack some ones grammar/typing. I like run ons and havr saudage fingers.
jergul
large member
Mon Feb 10 16:09:34
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

New polls today!

Trumps approval has plummeted from your 49-50% to 41-43%. We know the new polls are absolutely correct because they are new.
Habebe
Member
Mon Feb 10 19:26:57
We know Jergul is retarded because can read.
jergul
large member
Tue Feb 11 01:43:03
What? You said we must use the most recent polls to get a true picture of where Trump stands.

I agree that it is retarded, but it is your retardation, not mine.
Habebe
Member
Tue Feb 11 01:53:47
I also stated reputable sources. What is your reputable source?
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share