2020 Elections - Trump FIRED

[MDlaxfan76]

But hey, that's cool, he wasn't indicted.
But then again, Mueller made clear that he couldn't indict a sitting President, but that Trump could be indicted once he left office. Went out of his way to make that point.

Trump was the only one shielded from indictment. There was supposed to be a conspiracy. It takes more than one person to form a conspiracy. No co-conspirators were indicted. All the rest is chaff & white noise.

Mueller was referring to obstruction, after Trump leaves office.

Yes, for obstruction. A crime. Multiple counts.

Mueller was clear that he found lots of evidence of what we would term "collusion" but not sufficient to prove the crime of conspiracy. At least one reason, the Report and Mueller in testimony said, was that so many people lied about what they and others had done. If an explicit conspiracy occurred, no one admitted it. So, they nailed them for the lying and other crimes found.

But the Report, and Mueller in his testimony, also made clear that the Trump folks knew about and welcomed the Russian interference (while they lied about it to the American people and then to the FBI and DOJ), signaled to the Russians many times that they welcomed the interference, and then actually aligned their digital strategies with the Russians (though Mueller's team was unable to prove explicit such coordination, albeit yes the Campaign Manager provided the Russians with internal polling and strategy...such that it could be expected they'd align).

So, while they did not reach the threshold of proving 'conspiracy', it's very clear to a rational person that at a minimum the Campaign and Russia worked in parallel for the same fundamental purposes, and knew and welcomed this alignment.

Moreover, the Trump folks knew what Russia wanted in return: removal of the sanctions. And Trump signaled willingness to do so.

So...as far as you are concerned, that's all "chaff and noise" just as the Trumpists want you to see it.

But here's what the American people really do know:
The sitting President welcomed Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Lied about it again, and again and again. Still is lying.

Most don't actually think that's no BFD.

Most also know that he's welcoming it to happen again.

But this is NOT what is on most folks' minds as they consider whether to vote for Trump or whoever his opponent will be. But it WILL be a factor.

Just as the general feeling about HRC was that she was corrupt.

[seacoaster]

Hick getting out?

https://beta.washingtonpost.com/politic ... story.html

Like to see him in the Senate.

[HooDat]

But the point is that the american worker has basically been on a treadmill.....

which is why he and she are soooo ticked off! Throw on top of that the fact that while wages haven't budged in almots fifty years, the cost of a car has grown 10x, the cost of a house has gone up 100x and the cost of an education has gone up 1,000x!

But don't worry, the "man" will loan you money at 15% to buy that crud.

Yup...this is what keeps that treadmill spinning......faster and faster and faster.

As you say the place that has gone up 1,000x is college education, is the same place where the man will lend you the most money with the least interrogation AND allow an 18 year old college freshman to have a CC with darned near zero credit history and no co-signer. Cha-Ching says the guy smoking Cohibas and lighting them w/$100 bills. His 42' Fountain stabin cabin boat name is likely.... "Interest Pays".

Lower his taxes so the money can trickle down.

[6ftstick]

The standard reply from sufferers of Trump derangement syndrome.

The guys credentials are perfect for the discussion. Its his findings that aren't.

Here's his work in psychology:
Work in psychology[edit]
In various writings, Epstein has been a strong advocate of the view that people can deliberately learn to love each other. He studied arranged marriages and found that in many of them the partners developed greater feelings of affection for each other than did couples who had married for love.[3] In 2002 he published a study in which he said that many couples marry for other reasons than love, and develop love in their relationships over time.[4] He gave students in one of his classes at University of California, San Diego extra credit for taking part in affection building exercises.[5] At one time he used himself as an experimental subject to investigate this.[6]

Epstein collected data from over 18,000 people via the Internet for a study on sexual orientation published in 2007. He found a continuum between heterosexuality and homosexuality that is skewed by societal influences.[7] He also found that some people changed their orientation during their lives.[1]

Epstein is also a scholar in the field of psychological maturity, and once published an online maturity test. He is critical of what he sees as the "artificial extension of childhood" over the past century, arguing that what society views as the "teen brain" is often the result of Western cultural factors and infantilization, rather than a set of brain characteristics that are inherent in all humans throughout their teen years. In certain essays, he has cited studies which found that some teenagers are in some ways more developmentally mature than most adults, and advocates giving young people more adult responsibility, as well as placing them in environments in which they will not be prone to socializing simply with other teenagers.[8][9]


Anything in there about computers, algorithms, or even behavioral manipulation???

And here's his beef:

Criticism of Google[edit]
See also: Criticism of Google and Web search engine § Search engine bias
In 2012, Epstein publicly disputed with Google Search over a security warning placed on links to his website.[10] His website, which features mental health screening tests, was blocked for serving malware that could infect visitors to the site. Epstein emailed "Larry Page, Google's chief executive; David Drummond, Google's legal counsel; Epstein's congressman; and journalists from The New York Times, The Washington Post, Wired, and Newsweek."[10] In it, Epstein threatened legal action if the warning concerning his website was not removed, and denied that any problems with his website existed.[10] Several weeks later, Epstein admitted his website had been hacked, but criticized Google for tarnishing his name and not helping him find the infection.[11] Epstein has since continued to criticize Google, writing in TIME magazine that Google had "a fundamentally deceptive business model".[12][13]

Gee, a real "expert".

Yep just some dumbass that stumbled into a degree from Harvard nd a job as editor of Psychology Today. Must be that journal is all fake psychology.

[RedFromMI]

[Other stuff omitted]

Yep just some dumbass that stumbled into a degree from Harvard nd a job as editor of Psychology Today. Must be that journal is all fake psychology.

Psychology Today would not be considered a journal by any means - it is a magazine meant to present topics to the more general public.

As someone who has worked in IT for many years (in addition to my academic position) he is making baseless claims about Google with respect to his website, for which he was entirely responsible. Google had NO responsibility to help him fix the problems with malware on his site, and showed responsibility in pointing out the existing malware, and protecting many people from getting infected.

Nothing wrong with his credentials with respect to his chosen field. He clearly is off base with much of his technological criticism.

Now, that is not to say that Google cannot be criticized. They are so dominant in many aspects of their business that there are plenty of things they can be criticized for.

[MDlaxfan76]

[Other stuff omitted]

Yep just some dumbass that stumbled into a degree from Harvard nd a job as editor of Psychology Today. Must be that journal is all fake psychology.

Psychology Today would not be considered a journal by any means - it is a magazine meant to present topics to the more general public.

As someone who has worked in IT for many years (in addition to my academic position) he is making baseless claims about Google with respect to his website, for which he was entirely responsible. Google had NO responsibility to help him fix the problems with malware on his site, and showed responsibility in pointing out the existing malware, and protecting many people from getting infected.

Nothing wrong with his credentials with respect to his chosen field. He clearly is off base with much of his technological criticism.

Now, that is not to say that Google cannot be criticized. They are so dominant in many aspects of their business that there are plenty of things they can be criticized for.

Agreed.

6ft, this kinda reminds me of William Shockley, Nobel winning physicist, claiming that genetics explained differences in performance on IQ tests between blacks and whites back in the '60s. I remember my dad being ticked that I was challenging this butthead, having actually studied the subject area...what do you think you're smarter than a Nobel scientist? Turns out Shockley was Depp racist, falsified his data.

But this is more mundane. This guy just has a beef and no data at all.

[youthathletics]

But the point is that the american worker has basically been on a treadmill.....

which is why he and she are soooo ticked off! Throw on top of that the fact that while wages haven't budged in almots fifty years, the cost of a car has grown 10x, the cost of a house has gone up 100x and the cost of an education has gone up 1,000x!

But don't worry, the "man" will loan you money at 15% to buy that crud.

Yup...this is what keeps that treadmill spinning......faster and faster and faster.

As you say the place that has gone up 1,000x is college education, is the same place where the man will lend you the most money with the least interrogation AND allow an 18 year old college freshman to have a CC with darned near zero credit history and no co-signer. Cha-Ching says the guy smoking Cohibas and lighting them w/$100 bills. His 42' Fountain stabin cabin boat name is likely.... "Interest Pays".

Lower his taxes so the money can trickle down.

Or force how banking/lending and CC companies can no longer gouge us all on overly inflated rates. Or is that too close to home?

[Typical Lax Dad]

But the point is that the american worker has basically been on a treadmill.....

which is why he and she are soooo ticked off! Throw on top of that the fact that while wages haven't budged in almots fifty years, the cost of a car has grown 10x, the cost of a house has gone up 100x and the cost of an education has gone up 1,000x!

But don't worry, the "man" will loan you money at 15% to buy that crud.

Yup...this is what keeps that treadmill spinning......faster and faster and faster.

As you say the place that has gone up 1,000x is college education, is the same place where the man will lend you the most money with the least interrogation AND allow an 18 year old college freshman to have a CC with darned near zero credit history and no co-signer. Cha-Ching says the guy smoking Cohibas and lighting them w/$100 bills. His 42' Fountain stabin cabin boat name is likely.... "Interest Pays".

Lower his taxes so the money can trickle down.

Or force how banking/lending and CC companies can no longer gouge us all on overly inflated rates. Or is that too close to home?

Lower taxes and reduce regulations.... and the money will trickle down. The more money for banks, the more available to trickle down.

[youthathletics]

But the point is that the american worker has basically been on a treadmill.....

which is why he and she are soooo ticked off! Throw on top of that the fact that while wages haven't budged in almots fifty years, the cost of a car has grown 10x, the cost of a house has gone up 100x and the cost of an education has gone up 1,000x!

But don't worry, the "man" will loan you money at 15% to buy that crud.

Yup...this is what keeps that treadmill spinning......faster and faster and faster.

As you say the place that has gone up 1,000x is college education, is the same place where the man will lend you the most money with the least interrogation AND allow an 18 year old college freshman to have a CC with darned near zero credit history and no co-signer. Cha-Ching says the guy smoking Cohibas and lighting them w/$100 bills. His 42' Fountain stabin cabin boat name is likely.... "Interest Pays".

Lower his taxes so the money can trickle down.

Or force how banking/lending and CC companies can no longer gouge us all on overly inflated rates. Or is that too close to home?

Lower taxes and reduce regulations.... and the money will trickle down. The more money for banks, the more available to trickle down.

The good thing is that Trump is reducing regulations and has been arguing with the Fed about interest rates. So you and he are in lockstep. Net thing you know, you'll wanna have a pilsner and ribeye with him.

[Farfromgeneva]

Where did I say outcomes don’t matter explicitly?

Your direct quote was "Outcomes don't prove anything.", and this was said in response to my point that there are better health outcomes in Europe.

If I did or my fat fingers typed that what I’m saying is it comes only matter if you consider all the costs. Many of which will come outside the system your talking about and you seem to be ignoring. The “cost” is much bigger than the price/service which you are describing. How much of those “cheaper” (imputes from your comments to be equal or better service though I understand that’s completely untrue in europe). I keep saying that it’s much more complex and when you dig in you'll find a lot of pricing transfer and other costs not included within those societies. It all needs to be accounted for. You keep posing the same thing that other countries do it fine but is that really true when fully and truthfully accounting for all the costs (like as it stands today these new scooters are environmentally inefficient as was the ethanol mandate by bush 2).

There are agreed to standards which are used to gauge health spending in each, together with stats on outcomes like infant mortality and life span. These numbers aren't perfect...none are. But when the US is spending twice as much as the next country, something's not right. Same goes for drugs. I'd hope you'd agree that we're getting taken for a ride on that account, no?

Many others before just saying “the government does it better”. (Maybe it does maybe it doesn’t but I gladly challenge that type of claim).

Have you not been to a State run hospital ever? I got care at the University of Michigan. World class, by any standard. The government does just fine.

We also have to consider our subsidies and other structural features to o educational system, many of the countries have free or much more heavily subsidized education allowing doctors to be less focused on p&l overall. I don’t like the current system but no one has explained how we shoehorn this one piece of the overall system in and not have a massive hellhole of a butterfly effect on 70 other quality of life metrics in a negative manner.

Well, that's because you can't! Of course there will be waves in the pond from the pebble. No choice in the matter. So when you suggest that we be able to buy insurance across State lines, you understand there will be unforeseen consequences to this move, yes? It's unavoidable.

socratic method means questioning the statements posited....

So again, more condescension? Ok.

Outcomes don’t prove anything and outcomes don’t mater are very much the same thing. That’s freaking scientific inquiry. You accuse me of condescension but are just exhausting in arguing and all are loaded with anecdotal evidence (imo has hospital is dope therefor the government works just fine, huh???). Go back and read Talib again about narrative fallacy and how a successful singular incident or result is in fact a signal of nothing whereas you actually gain further understanding and knowledge of what works and what doesn’t through failure.

Your own argument is flawed but all you do is argue. I’m tired. Have a life to deal with and if all you want to do is argue until everyone else gives up cool, but this is my stop on this stupid train.

[a fan]

Outcomes don’t prove anything and outcomes don’t mater are very much the same thing. That’s freaking scientific inquiry. You accuse me of condescension but are just exhausting in arguing and all are loaded with anecdotal evidence (imo has hospital is dope therefor the government works just fine, huh???).

What you call argumentation, I call discussion of ideas. If you don't like doing that, why in heaven's name are you here? If you want a one sided conversation, read a newspaper, and keep your thoughts to yourself.

As for loaded with singular anecdotal evidence: what would you prefer I use to gauge how good a hospital is in providing care? Every friend I had in Ann Arbor used the University of Michigan Hospital system for everything from cancer treatment to childbirth. All felt it was world class. I agreed, as I had treatment there, too.

What you are telling me is: Bollocks to that real world result, you should read Talib, and focus on data. UMich does indeed provide outcome data, but that's besides the point. My point is, obviously, government-run health care can, and does, work at an elite level. At some point, you have to look at the scoreboard.

Ask Talib if he ever goes to the same restaurant twice---or if he has a favorite restaurant. He'll say yes, because everyone has a favorite restaurant.

Then ask him: "why would you have a favorite restaurant? Just because you had a singular good meal, doesn't mean the next one will be any good. Or the next one after that."

He'll probably chuckle, and tell you you're taking his books a little too literally. Talib himself counseled buying the safest possible securities for 90% of your portfolio, and using the 10% chasing that Black Swan, correct? There you go.

[6ftstick]

Thought the NY Times was a "news" organizations?

Apparently racism is what the left will hang their hats on in 2020,

Since nothing else has worked.

https://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2019 ... a-history/

The NY Times will seek to convince all americans that their country is a fraud and unexceptional.

[ggait]

The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” did not apply to fully one-fifth of the country.

Six -- So what's incorrect about the above statement? I think anyone who has taken fourth grade American history knows that's true.

Yet, as the headline blares, the "New York Times Magazine Declares War on America and History"!!!

Ignorant. Lame. Dumb. Fake.

[6ftstick]

The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” did not apply to fully one-fifth of the country.

Six -- So what's incorrect about the above statement? I think anyone who has taken fourth grade American history knows that's true.

Yet, as the headline blares, the "New York Times Magazine Declares War on America and History"!!!

Ignorant. Lame. Dumb. Fake.

So nothing America has done to come closer to the ideas expressed in the constitution and declaration have any merit.

100,000s dead in the civil war, A trillion dollar welfare state. Electing a black as president. Blacks as CEOs, Supreme Court Judges, Board members prominent politicians. NOTHING redeems us.

Our founding fathers were all despicable racists.Writing and adopting the Bill of Rights was ignoble and meaningless.

we're all just deplorable frauds. And that's the message your going to ride into the election.

[ggait]

So you didn't answer the question.

What exactly is incorrect about the NY Times thesis?

Answer -- nothing.

How exactly is telling the truth "declaring war on history"?

SMH

[6ftstick]

So you didn't answer the question.

What exactly is incorrect about the NY Times thesis?

Answer -- nothing.

How exactly is telling the truth "declaring war on history"?

SMH

The Times is trying to REFRAME the founding of the country. Not just discuss History. They want to destroy any acceptance of the founding of the country as something GOOD for humanity.

[MDlaxfan76]

The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” did not apply to fully one-fifth of the country.

Six -- So what's incorrect about the above statement? I think anyone who has taken fourth grade American history knows that's true.

Yet, as the headline blares, the "New York Times Magazine Declares War on America and History"!!!

Ignorant. Lame. Dumb. Fake.

So nothing America has done to come closer to the ideas expressed in the constitution and declaration have any merit.

100,000s dead in the civil war, A trillion dollar welfare state. Electing a black as president. Blacks as CEOs, Supreme Court Judges, Board members prominent politicians. NOTHING redeems us.

Our founding fathers were all despicable racists.Writing and adopting the Bill of Rights was ignoble and meaningless.

we're all just deplorable frauds. And that's the message your going to ride into the election.

I'm puzzled as to the gross exaggerations necessary to your argument, 6ft.

Are the actual ideas on the right now so bankrupt that it's necessary to exaggerate everything the opponents think?

You posted a ridiculous screed from Red State, then doubled down with all this nonsense as if any of us on here, much less ggait, actually holds such extreme views.

Problem is, we don't.
So you're tilting at wind mills that don't exist, except without any of Cervantes' ennobling moral spirit.

[6ftstick]

So you didn't answer the question.

What exactly is incorrect about the NY Times thesis?

Answer -- nothing.

How exactly is telling the truth "declaring war on history"?

SMH

So you're happy riding that message into the election. Along with open borders, infanticide, the green new deal and FREE healthcare for illegal immigrants.

[6ftstick]

The United States is a nation founded on both an ideal and a lie. Our Declaration of Independence, approved on July 4, 1776, proclaims that “all men are created equal” and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” But the white men who drafted those words did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” did not apply to fully one-fifth of the country.

Six -- So what's incorrect about the above statement? I think anyone who has taken fourth grade American history knows that's true.

Yet, as the headline blares, the "New York Times Magazine Declares War on America and History"!!!

Ignorant. Lame. Dumb. Fake.

So nothing America has done to come closer to the ideas expressed in the constitution and declaration have any merit.

100,000s dead in the civil war, A trillion dollar welfare state. Electing a black as president. Blacks as CEOs, Supreme Court Judges, Board members prominent politicians. NOTHING redeems us.

Our founding fathers were all despicable racists.Writing and adopting the Bill of Rights was ignoble and meaningless.

we're all just deplorable frauds. And that's the message your going to ride into the election.

I'm puzzled as to the gross exaggerations necessary to your argument, 6ft.

Are the actual ideas on the right now so bankrupt that it's necessary to exaggerate everything the opponents think?

You posted a ridiculous screed from Red State, then doubled down with all this nonsense as if any of us on here, much less ggait, actually holds such extreme views.

Problem is, we don't.
So you're tilting at wind mills that don't exist, except without any of Cervantes' ennobling moral spirit.

So the NY Times isn't the paper of record of the left. Isn't the first response to my posting a defense of the Times racist screed. And yours the second response exactly the same.

The ideas of the right "Bankrupt." Check the economy, the market, our performance to the rest of the world, the dismantling of ISIS. Trade?

Yeh we're bankrupt of ideas when all the left has is white supremacy and racism.

[MDlaxfan76]

So you didn't answer the question.

What exactly is incorrect about the NY Times thesis?

Answer -- nothing.

How exactly is telling the truth "declaring war on history"?

SMH

The Times is trying to REFRAME the founding of the country. Not just discuss History. They want to destroy any acceptance of the founding of the country as something GOOD for humanity.

Ok, I'll bite.
Why is an honest recognition of the tension between the aspirational ideals and the reality of our Founders' necessarily leading to "destroy any acceptance of the founding of the country as something GOOD for humanity."

Huh?
How is that the necessary conclusion?

No, the aspirational ideals were a hugely important step forward in mankind's development of civilization, imperfectly achieved as they were and are still today. Definitely "GOOD for humanity".

The Founders also designed a form of government with all sorts of self-correcting, self-improving systems in place to help actualize those aspirational ideals over time. It was an enormous experiment, one which they knew was undoubtedly imperfect, so they provided for mechanisms to evolve further.

Acknowledging these realities is essential for us to actually further move toward the achievement of those aspirational ideals, and not to revert into a self congratulatory mode that denies truth in the name of maintaining power. That would have been the opposite of the Founders' intent.