Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - DonaldD

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51
1
General Comments / Re: Who will be next to speak out about Trump?
« on: October 27, 2020, 08:46:00 PM »
Trump appointee Ronald Sanders resigns instead of being a party to Trump's attempts to politicize the whole federal civil service.

Quote
On its surface, the President's Executive Order purports to serve a legitimate and laudable purpose ... that is, to hold career Federal employees 'more accountable' for their performance. However, it is clear that its stated purpose notwithstanding, the Executive Order is nothing more than a smokescreen for what is clearly an attempt to require the political loyalty of those who advise the President, or failing that, to enable their removal with little if any due process.

...

[The order] seeks to make loyalty to (the President) the litmus test for many thousands of career civil servants, and that is something I cannot be part of.

2
I understand that you are incapable of seeing the problem there, William, but most other people have no problem doing so.

Trump's tax return summaries anyone? They were not released in any kind of legal manner, and not subject to third party verification beyond the New York Times saying it's Trump's Tax summary. No effort to suppress the illegally obtained information at all.

But the moment someone with a clear and compelling case of having a legal chain of custody on potential evidence regarding the Bidens? Try to call it a Russian Hoax, even after US Government officials say no intel indicates russia, and there are third parties verifying the e-mail contents...

But the MSM goes radio silent, tries to debunk it, or claims the information was "illegally obtained" (What about the Trump's taxes again?) instead?

Really?
Without access to the drive itself, it is not possible to validate metadata, disk sectors, file system structures, all things that would go into verifying the data, of which the provenance is in question.

For Trump's tax returns - it would be academic to show that the data was incorrect: Trump could simply release his tax returns and prove the New York Times was either lying or being played.  Also, the New York Times has a reputation to guard, and business interests at stake; they would be liable.  Giuliani, if the laptop is shown to have been faked, is not going to suffer from passing it on.  Similarly for the NY Post - they are reporting on the existence of the laptop. And neither really has any reputation at stake.

3
The assumption that the rest of the world is not properly accounting for their cases, and more specifically, deaths associated to COVID-19, is seriously provincial on your part.

Well hey, in a world where China's media happily reports that they've tested a city of 10 million people for Covid19 in response to some isolated cases in the area and they can proudly report that nobody came back with a positive test result. What is there to do but throw in the towel.

Never mind the best covid19 tests out there have false positive rates that are significant fractions of the 1% range, if not higher.
So China's ability to test has what relationship to Canada's or France's or Taiwan's or Australia's reported numbers..?

4
Is there any evidence whatsoever that any of them have sat down for an IQ test in the past 40 years?  If so, I missed it.  Has Trump even provided his school transcripts?

If you're relying on school transcripts to predict IQ, you're in for a nasty shock. Some of the people held to among the world's most brilliant... Had abysmal grades in school, at just about every level.
I think you're missing the point - William's contention that Trump has an IQ of 154 came from some rando on the internet making that argument based on Wharton's SAT requirements, and the fact that Trump got accepted to Wharton.

So, you're taking exception with William's argument, not mine :)

5
"Whoosh!" (the sound of words flying right over William's head)

6
I understand that you are incapable of seeing the problem there, William, but most other people have no problem doing so.

7
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 26, 2020, 10:03:05 PM »
And depressingly, the numbers continue to increase unabated.

Today saw the highest new-daily-case count for a Monday, and a new record was set for the highest 7-day average of new daily cases according to Worldometer: ~70,000.

Hospitalizations are increasing, and the daily deaths are also now starting to tick upwards.

8
And the Post reporter that Rudy evidently gave it to is claiming he's offered to share it, but nobody is taking him up on it.
How exactly would he be able to do that, if the hard drive is in the possession of the FBI?

9
Are you suggesting you can more readily access Russian propaganda on Russian media sites? 

Colour me shocked.

10
Maybe if I did the math for you: 99.98% without symptoms would mean 2 people in 10,000 with symptoms.

There have been at least 225,000 deaths attributed to COVID-19.  If the only symptom of the illness were death, that would mean, for each of those 225,000 deaths, there would have to have been 4999 asymptomatic infections. That would require there to have been more than 1 billion infections in the USA alone.

11
You mean him stating we have far more testing than anyone else? When 99.98% of those testing positive get over it without most showing any symptoms, why are we locking down at all? Protect those who need protecting - but that does not mean giving Democrat Mayors and Governors dictatorial powers. Have you ever even mentioned Project Warpspeed? Have you ever mentioned a patient entering the hospital gets the hospital extra money if it is listed as Coronvirus?
The assumption that the rest of the world is not properly accounting for their cases, and more specifically, deaths associated to COVID-19, is seriously provincial on your part.

The USA leads the world win COVID-19 deaths, and that isn't because people are getting tested.

As for this ridiculous claim: "When 99.98% of those testing positive get over it without most showing any symptoms" - the case fatality rate in the USA is greater than 0.2% for every age group above 30 years.  So unless you don't consider death as a symptom, your estimate is off by more than an order of magnitude for the vast majority of the population.

12
Is there any evidence whatsoever that any of them have sat down for an IQ test in the past 40 years?  If so, I missed it.  Has Trump even provided his school transcripts? Again, no.  The 156 'estimate' came from assumptions that 'somebody on the internet' came up with, based on Trump being accepted at Wharton, the required SAT scores involved, and an estimate of how SAT scores map to IQ.

Except Trump was not accepted as a freshman at Wharton, but was rather a transfer student, and Wharton doesn't list SAT scores among its requirements for students transferring in.  And of course, we all know that standards are never stretched for the wealthy, and the wealthy never pay other people to take their SATs for them anyway...

13
The only other non-opinion based indicator that doesn't point to Trump would be in regards to the economy, except that's in the context of Covid19, and opinion polling showing people overwhelmingly thinking Trump is the better candidate in regards to the Economy.
One more non-opinion metric that does not favour Trump - Black voters are voting en masse.  Early polling numbers suggest they are extremely motivated to turn out this election.

14
Quote
We have made tremendous progress with the China Virus, but the Fake News refuses to talk about it this close to the Election. COVID, COVID, COVID is being used by them, in total coordination, in order to change our great early election numbers.Should be an election law violation!

It's unclear whether Trump is simply lying again, or if he truly lives in another reality where the USA didn't just break the record for the highest new daily coronavirus case count since the beginning of the pandemic.

15
Does anyone here believe Biden has the mental acuity and strength to even run the Presidency by himself?
Trump has pretty much shown that one can remain president, regardless of mental acuity, if you command enough adulation and blindness from your base.

That being said, Biden is clearly more prepared and better suited to be president than Trump has shown himself to be.  Yes, that is a pretty low bar, but "it is what it is".

We're not actually pretending that Trump is actually running the executive branch now, are we? 

16
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 26, 2020, 09:28:51 AM »
Some thoughts on "long COVID" post-COVID syndromes [ul=https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/the-tragedy-of-the-post-covid-long-haulers-2020101521173]from the Harvard Medical School[/url]

Quote
Tens of thousands of people in the United States have such a lingering illness following COVID-19. In the US, we call them post-COVID “long haulers.” In the United Kingdom, they are said to be suffering from “long COVID.”

Published studies (see here and here) and surveys conducted by patient groups indicate that 50% to 80% of patients continue to have bothersome symptoms three months after the onset of COVID-19 — even after tests no longer detect virus in their body.

17
Quote
By the way, we’re turning the corner. We are turning the corner on the virus.

It just now occurred to me what Trump might actually mean by this: maybe the "corner" that the county is "turning" is one where a critical mass of people get infected, beyond which it will be impossible to control the virus.  Maybe he thinks that if enough people get infected, transmission will become unstoppable, and at that point any effort to reduce infections would be wasted, so the country might just as well open up and get it over with - basically, the "close your eyes and think of the queen," strategy.

Maybe, just maybe, in this one case he is being honest.

Well, it took just a few hours for this snarky observation to have been shown as freakishly prescient, as by late morning, Mark Meadows was announcing the White House surrender to the virus.

18
General Comments / Re: Who will be next to speak out about Trump?
« on: October 25, 2020, 07:57:31 PM »
From the Twitter feed of the American Medical Association:

Quote
AMA @AmerMedicalAssn

Let’s be clear, physicians are not inflating the number of #COVID19 patients. spr.ly/6008G7ex0

"At a time when physicians and other health care professionals are providing care to a record number of COVID-19 patients amidst a third wave, there is misinformation about how patients are counted.  Let’s be clear physicians are not inflating the number of COVID-19 patients.  Research published in JAMA and in CDC reports indicate the US had significantly more deaths in 2020 than in previous years (excess deaths). Physicians and patients are making remarkable sacrifices and we continue urging all to wear a mask, physical distance and wash your hands to reduce suffering, illness and death."

And by "there is misinformation", what they mean is "Trump is lying to you."

19
General Comments / Re: Who will be next to speak out about Trump?
« on: October 25, 2020, 07:20:17 PM »
It's impressive the number of editorial boards that have rarely if ever backed a candidate before, but who are now either encouraging voters to oppose Trump's re-election (I see you Science, The Lancet, and the New England Journal of Medicine) or have gone so far as to actually endorse Biden (Scientific American and Nature).

In that vein... The New Hampshire Union Leader, a conservative-leaning Newspaper that has not supported a Democratic presidential candidate in over 100 years, has come out and endorsed Joe Biden for President.

20
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 25, 2020, 06:37:04 PM »
The Columbia University National Center for Disaster Preparedness released a study this week: 130,000 – 210,000 AVOIDABLE COVID-19 DEATHS – AND COUNTING – IN THE U.S.

Quote
Through comparative analysis and applying proportional mortality rates, we estimate that at least 130,000 deaths and perhaps as many as 210,000 could have been avoided with earlier policy interventions and more robust federal coordination and leadership.

Even with the dramatic recent appearance of new COVID-19 waves globally, the abject failures of U.S. government policies and crisis messaging persist. U.S. fatalities have remained disproportionately high throughout the pandemic when compared to even other high-mortality countries.3 The inability of the U.S. to mitigate the pandemic is especially stark when contrasted with the response of high-income nations, such as South Korea, Japan, Australia, Germany, France, and Canada, as well as low- and middle-income countries as varied as Thailand, Pakistan, Honduras, and Malaysia. All of these nations have had greater success in protecting their populations from the impact of the coronavirus.

Given the United States’ unique social and political realities, we recognize that it might have been particularly challenging to implement the same caliber of response as South Korea and Japan, both of which maintain centralized unitary governments. Nonetheless, the range of “avoidable deaths” outlined above stems from data illustrating how some of the best performing nations have achieved much greater results in protecting their populations.

21
That's the problem with getting your statistics by looking at exciting video on the "6 o'clock news", as opposed to actually looking at and counting up all incidents of violence, even if they weren't being amplified by one's favourite media (or president).  I'm sure that incidents of media reports of terrorist violence do NOT match the 67%/20% ratio.

As for this:

they're crediting the White Supremacists with 80% and the left with only 20%? On what planet are they living on?

You misread: the numbers in the study are actually 67 percent for far-right terrorists (not 80%) and 20 percent for far-left terrorists.

22
The only other non-opinion based indicator that doesn't point to Trump would be in regards to the economy, except that's in the context of Covid19, and opinion polling showing people overwhelmingly thinking Trump is the better candidate in regards to the Economy.

Overwhelmingly? You're at least 2 months behind the times on that:Other non-polling metrics are fundraising, where large numbers of small Democratic donations are simply swamping Republicans' - to the tune of Biden having 4 times the war chest as does Trump at this point.  That certainly talks to Democrats' motivation this year, and actual intent to vote; the youth vote, which is significantly higher in early voting and which tends to skew progressive; the state of the economy - presidents get saddled with the economy in place at the time of the election, and like it or not, the USA is in a recession, with truly awful unemployment numbers; and then there is COVID-19, which is flaring up at the most inopportune time for Trump, who is generally seen as weak on the pandemic.

Then there is Trump's schedule, where, instead of expanding the electoral map, Trump has been defending states that he won previously (some easily).

I have to wonder, though: what is the rationale for believing the polls are that far off?  Pollsters get paid to be correct: once they've lost the trust of the people buying their product, that's the end of their business.  Even if you assume that the same limitations are in place today as existed 4 years ago (although pollsters have corrected a number of issues with state level polling - specifically, weighting based on population density metrics, as well as level of education) Biden is still 4% ahead of Clinton, and there is no Comey letter bringing Biden down.  So even if (and this is a big "if") Biden's numbers soften to the same extent as did Clintons, he will still have a likely 6% margin in the national vote.  Not to mention that Biden has a favourability advantage over what Clinton had of more than 10%, whereas Trump's favourability hasn't really budged; Trump has a huge gap there.

23
It's the Sunday one week before election day, and a number of observations:
  • Biden's current lead over Trump is 4% higher than Clinton's at the same point in 2016 (9.2% vs 5.2%)
  • There are very few undecided voters in the polls this year, and the vote share of 3rd parties is also smaller than in 2016
  • In 538's average, Biden's support hasn't dropped below 50% of likely voters since the beginning of August.
  • Young people seem to be motivated to vote (voting early, at the very least) this year.  The percentage of young voters (18-29) having already cast their ballots increased from 7.0% of the total at this time in 2016, to 9.2% of the votes cast so far in 2020 - an increase of ~30%. 

24
It's in the summary of the study.  Click on the link if you are interested.

25
Mask wearing is the number one failing of the USA right now.  It should be feasible for the president to convince large numbers of his followers to do so (as that is primarily where the resistance of masks is centred).

It was just last week (or two weeks ago?) that the CDC stated that more than 100,000 lives could be saved between now and February by just taking that one step.

Not trying to take that step is, frankly, criminal.

26
It looks like the White House has settled on a strategy of allowing the pandemic to rip through the population, shutting down borders with the rest of the world and hobbling the economy until the middle of next year:

Quote
Washington (CNN)White House chief of staff Mark Meadows said Sunday that the US is "not going to control" the coronavirus pandemic, as cases surge across the country and nearly 225,000 Americans have died from the virus.

"We are not going to control the pandemic. We are going to control the fact that we get vaccines, therapeutics and other mitigation areas," Meadows told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union."

Whether this is a winning strategy remains to be seen.

27
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 25, 2020, 09:04:46 AM »
And just to show that people can be stupid elsewhere, too: The Scotsman: Scottish Government urged to agree coronavirus 'ceasefire' on Christmas Day

Quote
The Bishop of Paisley has called for an easing of restrictions on Christmas Day amid warnings of a “digital Christmas”.

"...when, in a stunning show of humanity and brotherhood, the coronavirus agreed to lay down arms, share cigs, sing carols and organized pick-up matches of football with the soldiers facing them down across the fields of death."

28
Filed under "Dog Bites Man": Centre For Strategic and International Studies: Far-Right Groups Are Behind Most U.S. Terrorist Attacks, 2020 Report Finds

I know this is inconvenient for the narrative being pushed in support of a particular political group, but to quote one of the great thinkers of our time: "It is what it is."

And here is the source study.

Quote
Based on the data, this analysis has several findings, which are discussed at greater length later in this assessment. First, white supremacists and other like-minded extremists conducted 67 percent of terrorist plots and attacks in the United States in 2020.

...

Despite these findings, this violence needs to be understood in historical context. The number of fatalities from terrorist attacks in the U.S. homeland is still relatively small compared to some periods in U.S. history, making it important not to overstate the threat.7 Roughly half of the years since 1994 had a greater number of fatalities from terrorism than 2020—at least between January 1 and August 31, 2020.

29
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 25, 2020, 07:30:08 AM »
Oops - my bad.  The past two days weren't actually record breaking:

Quote
You know why there are so many cases? Because we test. Because we test more than any country in the world, nobody tests like us. Everybody uses the word 'cases'... Use the word 'case' because you're trying to scare people. Don't scare people. Don't scare people. The fact is, that we're doing very well.

30
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 24, 2020, 09:40:52 PM »
Another milestone - today, with just 2,000 fewer new daily cases than was recorded yesterday, was not only the second-highest daily case count of the pandemic, but at 79,000 new cases, was more than 10,000 more daily new cases than reported on any other Saturday.

The 7-day average is now just 2000 lower than the peak recorded in late July.

31
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 24, 2020, 06:19:38 PM »
Given the likely spike (or maybe more accurately, the increasing spikes that will likely occur over the next month at least) are people - Democrat, Republican, independent or other - encouraging their acquaintances to vote early (in any fashion) in order to avoid what will likely be a more dangerous situation on each successive day?

32
Quote
By the way, we’re turning the corner. We are turning the corner on the virus.

It just now occurred to me what Trump might actually mean by this: maybe the "corner" that the county is "turning" is one where a critical mass of people get infected, beyond which it will be impossible to control the virus.  Maybe he thinks that if enough people get infected, transmission will become unstoppable, and at that point any effort to reduce infections would be wasted, so the country might just as well open up and get it over with - basically, the "close your eyes and think of the queen," strategy.

Maybe, just maybe, in this one case he is being honest.

33
Quote
We're not going to have a socialist president, especially a female socialist president, we're not gonna' have it, we're not gonna' put up with it.

There he goes, chasing after the women's vote again...

34
So that's a "no".

35
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 23, 2020, 09:26:52 PM »
Boom.  And just like that, today saw the highest number of new daily cases reported in the country since the beginning of the pandemic, 81,210 new cases according to Worldometer.

36
Your wrong on that. Trumps said during the 2016 election that he was gong to place his business into a blind trust but he never did it.

"Trump has served as president while holding on to his hundreds of businesses. He has continued to promote his Trump-branded properties, spending roughly a third of his presidency on his business interests."

I'm frankly curious whether William will be able to acknowledge this point.  It's not exactly contentious...

37
Darn those fake news reporters at fake news Foxnews the fake fake news organization: Jacqui Heinrich: Fox News

Quote
Jacqui Heinrich
@JacquiHeinrich

I completed searching all of Tony Bobulinski’s emails. They establish:
  • the “Chairman” is China.
  • NO ROLE for Joe Biden in emails/docs
  • Tony Bobulinski states himself there are NO OTHER MEMBERS besides Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, Rob Walker, James Gillar, and Bobulinski
1:18 AM · Oct 23, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

38
He doesn't smell like toast...

39
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 23, 2020, 03:00:42 PM »
Yeah, but I'm not asking about rational input here - I'm trying to get my head around the accusation that Trump thinks he is making...

40
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 23, 2020, 12:28:16 PM »
So, the president continues to blame China not just for the virus, but also seemingly every single effect associated to the virus (see "I take full responsibility. It’s not my fault that it came here. It’s China’s fault")

Putting aside that Trump is responsible for his own actions, which might just have had effects also (I know, a crazy thought...) what exactly does that mean?  Is he blaming China for being the geographical location of the first infections?  Is he blaming China's 'cultural practices' of harvesting wild foods?  Was it that China targeted the USA for the infection - and if so, how? If another country was the source of an infection - say, swine flu - would it then be that country's 'fault'?

41
Quote
I take full responsibility. It’s not my fault

This, in a nutshell...

42
Somebody, please, call this man a whaaaaambulance:

Quote
Excuse me, no, no, your first statement to me “this is going to be tough questions”.  Well, I don’t mind that. When you set up the interview you didn’t say that. You said “let’s have a lovely interview.”  And here’s what I do say: you don’t ask Joe Biden - I saw your interview with Joe - the interview with Joe Biden - it was a joke. The interview with 60 minutes.  I see Joe Biden getting softball after softball...

44
General Comments / Re: How to save the country
« on: October 22, 2020, 04:38:32 PM »
Oh, you mean the Emperor's New Polls, set up by his sycophants to feed his ego?

Or are these "real polls" published along with their methodology?

You would think... except, this: What Republican internal polling can actually tell us:

Quote
I looked at more than a dozen of these partisan polls released to the public from House and Senate races since the major party conventions in August. These partisan polls are notoriously unreliable, and none of them meet CNN standards for reporting.

The reason is simple: Partisans don’t want to release polls that are bad for their side. That means the polls sponsored by a party, candidate or partisan organization tend to be biased in favor of the side releasing the poll.

That’s why it was amazing to find that on average, Trump was doing 5 points worse than he did in 2016 in the states and districts in released Republican and conservative polls.

45
General Comments / Re: How to save the country
« on: October 22, 2020, 12:19:46 PM »
Also "proved", "accurate", and "real"

46
General Comments / Re: Voting mechanisms
« on: October 22, 2020, 11:28:48 AM »
Trump's Army has kicked off their voter intimidation program:

Quote
The Sheriff [Bob Gualtieri] told me the persons that were dressed in these security uniforms had indicated to sheriff’s deputies that they belonged to a licensed security company and they indicated—and this has not been confirmed yet—that they were hired by the Trump campaign,” said Marcus in a video interview with 8 On Your Side’s Chip Osowski Wednesday night.

There is almost no chance that these men were actually hired by the Trump campaign, and the Trump campaign has denied they were involved. Of course, this was completely expected to happen, and people warned about it happening, after Trump encouraged people to do just this on numerous occasions.

47
"proven facts" - you seem to be suggesting that significant numbers of non-Murdoch rags are running with the story.

I don't think they are, but please, point out which media entities are running with the 'story'.  Which media actually have access to the laptop in question?   And of those that do not have access to the laptop, which of them are reporting blindly on the contents thereof?

Or was that whole post a non-sequitur, and had nothing to do with my pointing out that most media are ignoring the click bait?

48
Time will tell, but for now, with a few notable exceptions of Murdoch rags, the media is notably not biting because the evidence that they all have is limited to what Giuliani has said and what the NY Post has reported.

Basically, they can safely report on the existence of the Giuliani claims, and on the existence of the NY Post story, but not actually about the 'substance' of those claims.  They can also report on the FBI's "no comment"...

49
It seems like somebody is using the words "real", "confirmed", "all" "charged" and "crime" to mean something different from what normal people do when they use those words.

50
General Comments / Re: coronavirus
« on: October 21, 2020, 05:26:02 PM »
Is this just how 2020 works, now?  Why are (relatively) famous US men getting caught on video playing with themselves?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 51