Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

eeehhhhhh sorta

obama crushed mcain for several reasons.

He was viewed as the anti-war candidate and that dominated the campaign. The Iraq war was massively unpopular.

Also the economy was in tatters, yes.

And also the regular USA metronome of 8 yrs per party in the WH.

But the war was probably the most important part. We forget that.

Fauci and Birx and all the other scientists employed in the Federal Branch can be fired or reassigned by the guy you did elect. That's how they are held accountable.

Did you really not know that?

Fat hurts wrote:

Make America Great Again! wrote:

No one has elected those "scientists" and no one can vote them out. How can we hold them accountable? American people did not elect Fauci or Birx. We elected President Trump! That's why we should trust him.

Fauci and Birx and all the other scientists employed in the Federal Branch can be fired or reassigned by the guy you did elect. That's how they are held accountable.

Did you really not know that?

M. A. G. A. is parodying the Trumpettes. So, yeah, he does know that.

Gallup down to 39% approval, 10 pts lower than last month.

And trump approval among repubs near lowest ever: 85%

https://news.gallup.com/poll/203198/presidential-approval-ratings-donald-trump.aspx

KAG2020

P wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Fauci and Birx and all the other scientists employed in the Federal Branch can be fired or reassigned by the guy you did elect. That's how they are held accountable.

Did you really not know that?

M. A. G. A. is parodying the Trumpettes. So, yeah, he does know that.

Sometimes he does such a good job I don't notice it's him.

Racket wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

I should have replaced the word math with "numbers/data". Sorry to offend your superior credentials.

I know that you meant "numbers/data" when you said "math" and I said what I did regardless. You cannot blindly pull some model out of a book and apply to any data you happen across. There can be dozens of underlying conditions required of the data before analysis, usually first and foremost in regards to it being random or not.

You are looking at this with a math lens... math is not stats. You actually can model flexibly and the results can often be meaningful... whether you want to engage in predictive analysis, forecasting, or some other study. And you can work backwards from results and take a top down vs bottom up approach. When doing statistical analysis you can learn a lot about the quality of the data points by performing unadulterated analysis, and still draw meaningful and valid inference.

Democrats hate police!!!

Fat hurts wrote:

Make America Great Again! wrote:

No one has elected those "scientists" and no one can vote them out. How can we hold them accountable? American people did not elect Fauci or Birx. We elected President Trump! That's why we should trust him.

Fauci and Birx and all the other scientists employed in the Federal Branch can be fired or reassigned by the guy you did elect. That's how they are held accountable.

Did you really not know that?

Sally doesn't understand anything, so no, he really did not know that.

Fair points on that example. I'd still say McCain lost by a large margin not through any particular shortcomings as a candidate, but because Obama was able to essentially run against Bush's record and there was little McCain could do about it. Under different circumstances McCain ought to have done well with the swing vote.

The bigger point I was trying to express in regard to Trollminator's post is that in total the fundamental drivers of the public mood don't necessarily drive a race to be closer over time.

Trollminator wrote:

Racket wrote:

I know that you meant "numbers/data" when you said "math" and I said what I did regardless. You cannot blindly pull some model out of a book and apply to any data you happen across. There can be dozens of underlying conditions required of the data before analysis, usually first and foremost in regards to it being random or not.

You are looking at this with a math lens... math is not stats. You actually can model flexibly and the results can often be meaningful... whether you want to engage in predictive analysis, forecasting, or some other study. And you can work backwards from results and take a top down vs bottom up approach. When doing statistical analysis you can learn a lot about the quality of the data points by performing unadulterated analysis, and still draw meaningful and valid inference.

This is incorrect. It's like saying since you can apply the central limit theorem to any set of data. You can't. There are very important assumptions that must be proved first. You also seem to reject the existence of any a priori statistics which is false. "Unadulterated analysis" and "modeling flexibility" are not terms I've seen so I can't really speak to it.

Specifically for what we're talking about, mean reversion rejects polling as a sequence of random walks which significantly changes the probability space and the metric (and the measure (and the filter (and the sub algebra))).

Smorbun wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Fauci and Birx and all the other scientists employed in the Federal Branch can be fired or reassigned by the guy you did elect. That's how they are held accountable.

Did you really not know that?

Sally doesn't understand anything, so no, he really did not know that.

Not me. I haven't posted on here for some time but will check every few days or every few weeks to ensure that all are behaving. Best to all of you! Remember how much I was castigated for saying the Dow would be up to 30,000 by the end of August from its low of around 18,000? Well, it is up 50%, the Nasdaq and the S & P are approaching all-time highs. No matter how hard Democratic governors and mayors tried to crater the economy and the stock market, the more resilient both seemed to be. Dow up to 30,000 by August 31! Fasten your seat belts!

Racket wrote:

I agree he's in rough shape if the economy bombs (as any president would be) but I don't think that's as much of a certainty as many seem to claim.

In order for the economy to show any real comeback there would have to be strong business travel and a solid vacation season this summer.

You need people filling concert and sports stadiums.

You need high traffic in malls.

I don't see that happening, do you?

I hope to see that next year, but we're into June and these plans would have been made by now for this summer season.

Q1 was negative. Q2 will be negative.

Q3 gets reported a few weeks before the election to look back and see how well things went in July, August and September.

It may uptick over 2020Q2 but will be a drop from 2019Q2.

And it may be quite a feat to bring the unemployment back under 10% by October.

Many of the current "employed" aren't working or making money. They just haven't been terminated by their employers. They're on hold.

What are the scenarios that make a decent looking economy heading into November?

airline traffic is build. But is still severely depressed.

After bottoming out on April 14 at around 87,000 passengers a day, the Transportation Security Administration is reporting steady, if slow, growth in travel as many states begin lifting COVID-19 restrictions. By the first week in June, the TSA said total “traveler throughput” had risen to more than 400,000 passengers a day in the U.S. If that sounds like a healthy number, consider in the same period last year averaged about 2.5 million passengers a day. Overall in 2020, the number of passengers who traveled in April and May was just 10 percent of the total from the year before.

Sally Vix wrote:

Smorbun wrote:

Sally doesn't understand anything, so no, he really did not know that.

Not me. I haven't posted on here for some time but will check every few days or every few weeks to ensure that all are behaving. Best to all of you! Remember how much I was castigated for saying the Dow would be up to 30,000 by the end of August from its low of around 18,000? Well, it is up 50%, the Nasdaq and the S & P are approaching all-time highs. No matter how hard Democratic governors and mayors tried to crater the economy and the stock market, the more resilient both seemed to be. Dow up to 30,000 by August 31! Fasten your seat belts!

I do not believe you, a position you are in because you are a confirmed liar. I was not one who refuted your Dow prediction, so that comment is unimportant to me. No Democratic governros or mayors tried to crater the economy.

Then think about how those passengers normally flying will stay at hotel.

So hotel businesses is down.

And of course they would eat out, but we know that's down locally as well.

And people working for airlines, hotels and restaurants have less money to spend in other sectors of the economy.

L L wrote:

Then think about how those passengers normally flying will stay at hotel.

So hotel businesses is down.

And of course they would eat out, but we know that's down locally as well.

And people working for airlines, hotels and restaurants have less money to spend in other sectors of the economy.

Not sure you comprehend how much money the fed and gummint hosed down the economy with.

it's a lot. A very large number. Fleets of helicopters, dumping giant sacks of money.

Today we're seeing signs of inflation picking up. that's not a sign of lack of spending.

Trump whines about a CNN poll, get lawyered up. Wants everyone to "cease and desist" from reporting any bad news about him.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/10/politics/trump-campaign-cnn-poll/index.html

L L wrote:

Racket wrote:

I agree he's in rough shape if the economy bombs (as any president would be) but I don't think that's as much of a certainty as many seem to claim.

In order for the economy to show any real comeback there would have to be strong business travel and a solid vacation season this summer.

You need people filling concert and sports stadiums.

You need high traffic in malls.

No you don't. You need people to spend money. Doesn't really matter what it's spent on. As long as the American consumer has money, they're gonna spend it. Like agip said, the amount of money getting sloshed around by the Federal Reserve is not to be underestimated