Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > International affairs/politics  
View Poll Results: Will Trump be a good President?
Yes 93 26.50%
No 258 73.50%
Voters: 351. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #18681  
Old 02.04.2019, 13:43
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
Who voted for him in CT, NJ, NY or CA?

Tom
Quote:
View Post
Number of people who voted for Trump in:
CT - 673,215
NJ - 1,601,933
NY - 2,819,534
CA - 4,483,810

Source: Wikipedia


I was referring to people who voted for him outside those states as well. As you can see though, it's a non zero number within those states.

Tom - don't you have Trump-supporting relatives left in the US?
  #18682  
Old 02.04.2019, 22:12
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Fascinating article on Rachel Maddow (MSNBC) and her failure regarding her reporting notwithstanding ethical journalism. And yes, Reids, this is MSM at its worst!

From Matt Taibbi (a former Rolling Stone journalist; Rolling Stone is a decidedly left-leaning publication):

First, a note in defense of iconic MSNBC host Rachel Maddow:

On the evening of Friday, March 22, 2019, when word leaked out Special Counsel Robert Mueller had wrapped up his investigation and was heading home without recommending new charges, the eyes of the collective journalism world darted in Maddow’s direction.

A massive machinery of ass-covering began whirring. Maddow was the industry name most intimately connected with collusion. She was practically the Madame DeFarge of Russiagate. In 2017 and 2018 The Rachel Maddow Show transformed into the Trump is a Russian Agent show, in which each night a new piece of the conspiracy would be stitched into view for audiences. This put her in some career jeopardy if Trump turned out not to be quite so guilty.

It had been a wire-to-wire routine. When Trump was inaugurated, she quipped, “We’re about to find out if the new President of our country is going to do what Russia wants.” She and fellow MSNBC host Lawrence O’Donnell wondered aloud if Trump attacked Syria in early 2017 as part of a Putin-orchestrated plan to make him look less Putin-dependent.

She described the Trump presidency as a “continuing operation” of Russian influence. She suggested Trump appointments were done at Russian behest, and dished innuendo freely, saying for instance that Trump was “curiously well-versed” in Russian talking points. Most infamously, during a national cold front in early 2019, she asked her audience, if a “Russia killed the power in Fargo today,” then “What would you and your family do?”

It worked, financially most of all. The Russia story helped make Rachel Maddow the #1 cable news host in the country in 2017, smashing her Obama-era ratings. Her ascent continued through early 2019, when she eclipsed 3 million viewers for the first time, an astonishing number for a former little-known host of Air America radio.

Those ratings turned into record profits for MSNBC, making her an iconic rarity within a news business that traditionally struggles on the cash front: a bankable star.

When the Mueller finding of no conspiracy or coordination came back, the leading hotshots in the industry made an instant calculation: Maddow’s two years of conspiratorial rants probably could not be defended. Almost immediately, in the peculiar way my colleagues in the press have when it comes to facing adversity with a sense of bravery and togetherness, they decided to toss her overboard.

The letter by Attorney General William Barr quoting the Mueller report on collusion came out on a Sunday, March 24th. By the next morning of Monday, March 25th the new conventional wisdom was that if mistakes were made, it was the fault of cable news, a small inconsequential island of suckage in a vast sea of responsible journalism. The turnover was so fast, editorials against her must have begun being written more or less at the moment the Barr letter landed.

Some pundits didn’t name Rachel by name. But everyone knew who media writer Margaret Sullivan of the Washington Post was talking about when she said the Mueller decision wasn’t a reflection on “serious” journalists.

If anyone had to wear the black eye, Sullivan wrote, it would be “cable pundits” who “make a living off speculation” and those “ridiculous” explosions made by “tiny cannons on Twitter.” Those people, Sullivan sneered, “aren’t really journalists anyway.”

From there, the floodgates opened. “Commentary television is not news,” snapped David Cay Johnston of the New York Times, himself just days removed from saying on Democracy Now! that “I think [Trump] is a Russian agent.”

He added: “Rachel Maddow in particular has certainly pushed the Mueller matter,” doing so in conjunction with “the facts at the time.” However, he said, her work was “driven by the commercial values of television.”

“Cable television,” wrote Columbia Journalism Dean Steve Coll in the New Yorker, “mixes field reporting and news-making interviews with personal asides from prime-time personalities and roundtables of bombast-mongers.”

After Mueller’s “March surprise” (which wasn’t a surprise to me and a lot of other reporters), Coll added it would be “unrealistic” to expect audiences could make the distinction between “editorializing and reporting.”

“Yes, the mainstream press gave too much credence to the Steele dossier and rushed to publish too quickly on seemingly incriminating stories,” piled on Ross Douthat at the New York Times. “But as long as you got news from somewhere other than Rachel Maddow the case for skepticism was amply available as well.”

These people all worked in organizations that either bungled Russia stories as MSNBC did, or shamelessly hyped fears to boost ad sales as MSNBC did, or both.

Douthat’s New York Times outstripped Rachel’s act with its insane infographic series, Operation Infektion: Russian Disinformation from the Cold War to Kanye. (Kanye!) Maddow never described Russia, as this Times animation piece did, as a virus literally eating us alive at the cellular level. She was never so shameless as to blame Russia for your creeping sensation that the American media is not awesome at its job. From Infektion:

“If you don’t know who to trust anymore, this might be the thing that’s making you feel that way,” the Times suggested, over graphics of red disease eating your cells. “If you feel exhausted by the news, this could be why.”

Absent a crazy new development, Rachel will almost certainly be turned into the Judith Miller of Russiagate, the human symbol of What Went Wrong. Just like Judith Miller, she won’t deserve to wander the desert alone.

Future commentators will probably make note of the obvious fact that in both cases outspoken women ended up being the ones herded out of the village by colleagues, forced to wear the yoke of journalistic blame. Make what you will of that, but it’s not all on her.

Rachel Maddow is not on the cover of this book because of anything she did by mistake, because Russiagate turned out to be a bad guess.

She’s on the cover because of what she did on purpose, with the core concept of both her program and her public image, before the Russia story. She transformed from a sharp-minded, gregarious, small-time radio host to a towering patriotic media cudgel, a depressingly exact mirror of Hannity.

Last edited by terrifisch; 02.04.2019 at 22:29.
  #18683  
Old 03.04.2019, 07:41
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
..
<patchwork of pastes apparently out of order with contradictions introduced with an exclamation mark as if that makes a point more valid>
..
Look, I don't know how to explain this any clearer, if you don't get it you don't get it. The story was that there was a special counsel investigation into Russia influence in the US election campaign. Thats a fact, it existed, it wasn't made up, it wasn't fake news, it wasn't pizzagate. Speculation on the investigation was fueled by the avalanche of lying over contacts with Russian actors and Spanky being a poodle to Putin and thats not made up either. The Steele dossier mentioned in your disjointed posting was not fake news either, it's a real thing which may be 100% true or a 100% false or somewhere in the middle, so far what could be verified has proved true. I don't understand the confusion over the press reporting and editorialising actual things that are happening, and totally made up stories.

Almost forgot, I need to put haha with an exclamation after it to lend credence to my post, Haha!
The following 3 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18684  
Old 03.04.2019, 10:30
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

"Oranges of the investigation"....?

can you say "cognitive decline"? I'm pretty sure Spanky can't.


Regarding clear thinking, it would seem that 'Oranges' demonstrates the new lack.
The following 2 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18685  
Old 03.04.2019, 10:42
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
"Oranges of the investigation"....?

can you say "cognitive decline"? I'm pretty sure Spanky can't.


Regarding clear thinking, it would seem that 'Oranges' demonstrates the new lack.
I'm thinking of writing a book about how Trump mislead his way to the top, I'll call it:

Oranges of the Specious

I'll get my coat.
The following 3 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18686  
Old 03.04.2019, 10:54
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
I'm thinking of writing a book about how Trump mislead his way to the top, I'll call it:

Oranges of the Specious

I'll get my coat.
Bravo sir, bravo
  #18687  
Old 03.04.2019, 12:53
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

I liked the title of this article....
https://www.theguardian.com/educatio...rage-and-trump

And its true. That people even listen to the mangled nonsense coming out of these bozos.

Journalists are among the worst, sad to say.
  #18688  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:13
curley's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: canton ZH
Posts: 13,135
Groaned at 218 Times in 182 Posts
Thanked 15,264 Times in 7,847 Posts
curley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
I liked the title of this article....
https://www.theguardian.com/educatio...rage-and-trump

And its true. That people even listen to the mangled nonsense coming out of these bozos.

Journalists are among the worst, sad to say.
<<The mistake Trump, Farage and countless others made rests on one of the most critical principles in statistics: measurement. >>
The thing is I am absolutely sure that they are not "mistakes" but totally intended deflection of facts.
And it's not new either, it used to be called propaganda.

I've noticed the word propaganda seems to have vanished from general vocabulary. Guess the normal does not need a description.
The following 2 users would like to thank curley for this useful post:
  #18689  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:16
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
I liked the title of this article....
https://www.theguardian.com/educatio...rage-and-trump

And it‘s true. That people even listen to the mangled nonsense coming out of these bozos.

Journalists are among the worst, sad to say.
The problem with this article is that

1) it assumes only one side is being manipulative
2) it suggests the leaders, policy makers etc are victimns of bad statistics, although in many cases the opposite is true, as they are the ones actually doing the maniplauting
3) it is published by a newspaper that is more part of the problen than part of the solution
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #18690  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:21
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 8,461
Groaned at 299 Times in 228 Posts
Thanked 19,487 Times in 6,783 Posts
k_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond reputek_and_e has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Really, lies about statistics?
That's something new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_...and_statistics
  #18691  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:22
aSwissInTheUS's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Zurich area
Posts: 12,783
Groaned at 99 Times in 88 Posts
Thanked 19,576 Times in 8,681 Posts
aSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond reputeaSwissInTheUS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
<<The mistake Trump, Farage and countless others made rests on one of the most critical principles in statistics: measurement. >>
The thing is I am absolutely sure that they are not "mistakes" but totally intended deflection of facts.
And it's not new either, it used to be called propaganda.
Or as Reich Minister of Propaganda Mr Goebbels said: "Do not trust any statistics you did not fabricate yourself - Winston Churchill".
The following 3 users would like to thank aSwissInTheUS for this useful post:
  #18692  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:23
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
Or as Reich Minister of Propaganda Mr Goebbels said: "Do not trust any statistics you did not fabricate yourself - Winston Churchill".
hey, don't misattribute quotes. Everybody knows it was Abraham Lincoln who said that, or maybe Oscar Wilde.
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #18693  
Old 03.04.2019, 13:25
curley's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: canton ZH
Posts: 13,135
Groaned at 218 Times in 182 Posts
Thanked 15,264 Times in 7,847 Posts
curley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
Really, lies about statistics?
That's something new: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_...and_statistics
One time a city I won't name evaluated a statistic and I was part of it. Numerous times I turned to my boss, telling him this case does not fit anywhere (surprise, surprise).
I was told to just put it anywhere that seemed close!

Not that I was ever very interested in statistics, I never waste my time reading any since.
  #18694  
Old 03.04.2019, 14:20
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
One time a city I won't name evaluated a statistic and I was part of it. Numerous times I turned to my boss, telling him this case does not fit anywhere (surprise, surprise).
I was told to just put it anywhere that seemed close!

Not that I was ever very interested in statistics, I never waste my time reading any since.
Well, if statistics has taught us anything, it is to base our entire reasoning on one example of things.
The following 4 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18695  
Old 03.04.2019, 14:29
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
One time a city I won't name evaluated a statistic and I was part of it. Numerous times I turned to my boss, telling him this case does not fit anywhere (surprise, surprise).
I was told to just put it anywhere that seemed close!

Not that I was ever very interested in statistics, I never waste my time reading any since.
I don't waste time reading statistics either. I do, however, invest time in understanding them.
The following 2 users would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18696  
Old 03.04.2019, 14:34
curley's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: canton ZH
Posts: 13,135
Groaned at 218 Times in 182 Posts
Thanked 15,264 Times in 7,847 Posts
curley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond reputecurley has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
Well, if statistics has taught us anything, it is to base our entire reasoning on one example of things.
Yes, of course, the development of the statistics I mentioned was of course totally unique and all other statistics are compiled 100% accurately and reliable.
Amen.
  #18697  
Old 03.04.2019, 15:36
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
Yes, of course, the development of the statistics I mentioned was of course totally unique and all other statistics are compiled 100% accurately and reliable.
Amen.
Where does anyone say that? That's exactly why you have to understand them. To quote from the Guardian article earlier:

Quote:
The mistake Trump, Farage and countless others made rests on one of the most critical principles in statistics: measurement. To understand what a number really says about the world, we need to know exactly what is being counted. Neglect of this principle is the source of a large fraction of the misleading statistics bandied about in the media and in politics.
This user would like to thank for this useful post:
  #18698  
Old 03.04.2019, 15:45
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
The problem with this article is that

1) it assumes only one side is being manipulative
2) it suggests the leaders, policy makers etc are victimns of bad statistics, although in many cases the opposite is true, as they are the ones actually doing the manipulating
3) it is published by a newspaper that is more part of the problen than part of the solution
No to all three of these. 1. Although the article specifically addresses Farage and Trump it clearly includes "countless others". It picks up on those two because it was written following the completely misleading presentation of Swedish rape statistics by those two. 2. The article portrays leaders etc. as being neither victims or manipulators of statistics, just rather generously refers to them misunderstanding. And 3. The Guardian is one of the better media users of statistics IMO.
  #18699  
Old 03.04.2019, 15:58
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,361
Groaned at 340 Times in 276 Posts
Thanked 26,264 Times in 11,001 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
No to all three of these. 1. Although the article specifically addresses Farage and Trump it clearly includes "countless others". It picks up on those two because it was written following the completely misleading presentation of Swedish rape statistics by those two. 2. The article portrays leaders etc. as being neither victims or manipulators of statistics, just rather generously refers to them misunderstanding. And 3. The Guardian is one of the better media users of statistics IMO.
by definition (almost) a newspaper reports on anecdotal incidents (lots of them) and not so much on statistics. Every article, or almost every article reports on a particular occurrence. A newspaper is thus a collection of anecdotes and not a statistical compilation.

The Guardian calls out Farage for misrepresenting rape statistics from Sweden, but has no quialms itself in presenting statistics on things like increase in hate crimes which are similarly dependent on shifting definitions and reportiing levels.

So this is pretty much the pot calling the kettle black.

Can we agree that it's bad that it happens, but one side calling out the other out over it without making any attempt to desist from it themselves is not really the way to solve it.
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #18700  
Old 03.04.2019, 16:16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Will Trump be a Good President?

Quote:
View Post
by definition (almost) a newspaper reports on anecdotal incidents (lots of them) and not so much on statistics. Every article, or almost every article reports on a particular occurrence. A newspaper is thus a collection of anecdotes and not a statistical compilation.
Odd statement. Every newspaper has both types and it always clear if an article is referring to a report of a single item or is referring to a statistical analysis.

AFAIK, no newspaper ever claims the summation of its reporting to be some sort of source of statistical analysis. Unless that analysis is on reporting itself.
Closed Thread




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (0 members and 3 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will Hillary Clinton run for president again? PanFastic International affairs/politics 162 06.11.2020 11:15
Poll: Will Trump win the 2020 elections? k_and_e International affairs/politics 14 05.06.2018 22:06
A generic "will my salary be good enough" post Larsh Employment 51 12.12.2017 12:51
Will Trump be the next US President? Phil_MCR International affairs/politics 2618 14.11.2016 11:16
Shall I inform my employer that I will be self employed or be a owner of a company? Broth76 Business & entrepreneur 6 09.07.2012 16:59


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:15.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0