FAKE news, LIES, fake lies. We need the Trump Oracle.

[Lweji]

A new thread. From
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2862265-Were-only-showing-Ami-the-good-news-now-to-keep-her-sweet-Its-another-Trump-thread?watched=1&msgid=67235918#67235918

I'm sorry, Across. It's time for your boy to get off his fence and declare.

I don't think he has read the poll. He just got told it.

Yes, in that strategy of only giving him positive news.

There's also the margin of error which is 3%. So he can't say 32% is better than 31% with such an error.

Oh -and we know polls are fake polls.

Um... if they know that Russia meddled, aren't there a whole lot of constitutional and legal impacts?

The main question is not whether they meddled, is if there was a link between the winner and the meddlers.

Argh, yes I worked that out a while ago after trying (and failing hugely) to zoom in on phone screen and wondering why anyone would publish a poll on 100 people not easy to read but I'm guessing the writer didn't mean it to be shared so widely.

Having said as much, 1000 isn't much better for a nation as big as the US.

I've worked out a problem on Twitter (for me at least) which is that if someone deletes their tweets, it's gone, no records, and your responses just sit pointlessly so you may as well delete them too.

Not a big deal but makes me realise Mumsnet is quite valuable in keeping conversations going, even if you make a silly mistake!

I don't get the mindset.

Did he not realise that a few weeks ago he tweeted that polls are fake polls. Then he tweets a poll that shows he has a low approval rating, the Democrats and Republicans are similar in ratings and that 51% of people think the USA is on the wrong track.

How did this guy become a billionaire?

Is he really a billionaire though?

I've worked out a problem on Twitter (for me at least) which is that if someone deletes their tweets, it's gone, no records, and your responses just sit pointlessly so you may as well delete them too

Deleted? Not on the internet. It remembers...

He REALLY should have read that poll. Especially the questions on health care, trade and the economy.
If he's going to believe 1 thing, then he should believe the rest of the poll.

Most national polls are about 1000 people. Which is why sites such as realclearpolitics pool the different polls to get a better picture. Even apart from the statistical error, different polls use different sampling methods and I find that they rarely report how the sample is distributed across states.

Ah, page 20 is interesting. They ask about Russia and Trump:

Too friendly: 38
Not too friendly: 29

Should Congress investigate interference with election/links with Trump=
Yes: >50%
No:

Russia then?

Wow, I've always been taught to look for a certain % of audience before saying the results of any of our surveys are useful.

Maybe that's harder to do when you have millions and millions to connect with - but surely even more important?

I love though that he's drawn attention to poll results which are negative about him. Good stuff

W supports media:
www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/27/george-w-bush-media-immigration-donald-trump

It's got to be hard to get a representative sample from 1000 people to represent a country. Because there are so many factors to take into account.

I bet if you took 2000 people - and divided them into 2 groups - and tried to weight your group for the population, the results would change everytime.

But - if he 'validates' this poll by tweeting it, he has fucked up as the poll is quite damning.

Thanks, woman. Those are quite stinging rebukes, all told..

Change.org UK‏ @UKChange 13m
More
BREAKING VICTORY: Student Shiromini and her mother are released and will not be deported

Wow, I've always been taught to look for a certain % of audience before saying the results of any of our surveys are useful.

It's not so simple. It depends on the error margin you are willing to accept. This one is +/- 3,19 among registered voters. It means that you need a difference between two results of about 6,40 to be significant. For example, if a result is 30%, in reality it could be anywhere between 26,81 and 33,19%.

“It’s kind of hard to tell others to have an independent, free press and we’re not willing to have one ourselves,” Bush said.

Bigly ouch.

Good news, woman. Yay.

The US has a MASSIVE budget deficit.

The U.S. federal budget deficit is $441 billion as of the most current budget estimate. That's for fiscal year 2017, which covers October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017. The deficit occurs because the U.S. government spending of $4.07 trillion is higher than its revenue of $3.63 trillion.9 Feb 2017

That's the Federal budget - it's a lot.

So...how do you reduce the deficit? Where will the cuts come?

These debates sound familiar.

It's very strange watching the video of Bush, because he's far from an innocent, wonderful man - but he seems so kind, intelligent and loquacious in comparison to Trump.

Sharing this again as it's worth a read if you've skipped over it before, Robert Mercer, billionaire financing all this stuff from the Guardian.

And with that I'm going to sleep before I embarrass myself more on the Internet

www.nytimes.com/2017/02/27/us/politics/trump-budget-proposal-republican-ideology.html

But Mr. Trump, in a dogged effort to fulfill his campaign promises, has turned that logic on its head in the budget outline he is expected to present to Congress this week. That blueprint would make good on his promise to increase spending on the military and law enforcement by $100 billion over the next 18 months. And it would extract all of the savings he can from the one part of the budget already most squeezed, domestic discretionary spending, potentially decimating programs in education, poverty alleviation, science and health

“For Paul Ryan, this seems to be the opportunity he has been waiting for and working for for years,” said Douglas Elmendorf, the recently departed director of the Congressional Budget Office and current dean of Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. “But Paul Ryan’s budget plans with cuts to Social Security and Medicare are not that popular with most voters, and what helped elect Donald Trump was the promise not to cut benefits and programs, and that is an unresolved tension.”

I know on one of the first threads after the inauguration, there was some discussion as to whether George W was suffering from some sort of cognitive impairment. I thought the interview today - well, certainly the brief excerpt I saw - did not show this at all. It may be that after the godawful rambling shite that spews from Scrotus' mouth, anyone seems literate and educated but W got his points across well and succinctly. The only times he really stumbled was when he was trying to remain diplomatic . Try to ignore the nodding dog mannerism though - just wanted to pat him.

His comments in full

I also saw some of the interview not covered in the video above and he really does have a lot of passion for his art project. I don't know if he was good or bad for the US in many ways as I was quite young at the time, but for some reason I quite like him.

Cheers CaveWoman

Feel nostalgic for Bush now, at least he wasn't a Fascist.

Never thought I'd be wishing for Dubya to come back, but he looks like a towering intellect by comparison.

There does seem to be something that happens with former leaders where even the weak ones seem to display a lot of sensible insight and reason once they've had a bit of a break. Not always of course, but I've noticed it a lot.