Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

I don't know exactly what it's going to look like. It's unprecedented. But just because people aren't traveling or staying in hotels doesn't mean they aren't spending the money on other things. And consumer spending by far drives the economy (and I believe consumer confidence is actually starting to rise). That's the only point I was trying to make.

But could it all be sh!t in November? Definitely.

Keep America Great 2020 wrote:

https://i.imgflip.com/2zz83e.jpg

That's racist. Or sexist.

Of course, the flip side is that if you think nothing is racist or sexist, you might be a Trumper.

Racket wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

You didn't get the hint that agip threw mean reversion out there without intending to go into philosophical and substantive ramblings. This is LRC and you know why he used the term. Anyway, I award you the internet if it makes you happy.

You literally came at me with a bunch of weird and incorrect a posteriori concepts in stats that didn't make sense, after I ceded the fact that mean reversion can be used and put up the research to the fact....

and you just expected to get away with it?

Pick a non-math subject next time you wanna pull the wool over my eyes.

Try again, you are no math expert and you took your arguments straight from a google search. You won the internet, goodbye.

Trollminator wrote:

Racket wrote:

You literally came at me with a bunch of weird and incorrect a posteriori concepts in stats that didn't make sense, after I ceded the fact that mean reversion can be used and put up the research to the fact....

and you just expected to get away with it?

Pick a non-math subject next time you wanna pull the wool over my eyes.

Try again, you are no math expert and you took your arguments straight from a google search. You won the internet, goodbye.

Oh yeah, shoot me because I used the most comprehensive search engine literally ever to do research on relevant material.

It's almost as if you've spent years parroting a bunch of fake news pseudo-intellectual bullsh!t and now you're throwing a fit because someone's calling you out on it.

:D

Trollminator wrote:

Racket wrote:

You literally came at me with a bunch of weird and incorrect a posteriori concepts in stats that didn't make sense, after I ceded the fact that mean reversion can be used and put up the research to the fact....

and you just expected to get away with it?

Pick a non-math subject next time you wanna pull the wool over my eyes.

Try again, you are no math expert and you took your arguments straight from a google search. You won the internet, goodbye.

Racket and I have had our differences lately, but for what it's worth, I take him at his word that he has a PhD in math.

Fat hurts wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

Try again, you are no math expert and you took your arguments straight from a google search. You won the internet, goodbye.

Racket and I have had our differences lately, but for what it's worth, I take him at his word that he has a PhD in math.

I tend to have my doubts when engaging with strangers on the internet, but I don’t have any particular reason to doubt him. However, that he had to look it up and take direct arguments from the net to compliment his PhD is not impressive.

Racket wrote:

1100 wrote:

No offense, but I just thought you might want to be aware of what an insecure douche bag you look like with your "Look at how superior I am with my math PhD" thing.

Not a good look.

I'm sorry

No worries. I appreciate most of your posts.

Cheers.

Trollminator wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Racket and I have had our differences lately, but for what it's worth, I take him at his word that he has a PhD in math.

I tend to have my doubts when engaging with strangers on the internet, but I don’t have any particular reason to doubt him. However, that he had to look it up and take direct arguments from the net to compliment his PhD is not impressive.

What PhD claims to know the entire corpus of their discipline? I specialized in algebraic number theory and algebraic geometry, not poll science. The amount of math I don't know greatly outweighs the math I do know.

Regardless, I know how to research topics in math and things to look for.

JFC get a room, guys, willya? Sheesh!

LOLer wrote:

JFC get a room, guys, willya? Sheesh!

Yeah--now that you lot have beaten a dead horse and stomped on the hide a few times, can we move on?

LOLer wrote:

JFC get a room, guys, willya? Sheesh!

I guess this is the result of Sally Vix having finally been run off. No one left to argue with...except ourselves.

Racket wrote:

L L wrote:

A one time $1,200 payment doesn't do much for people without income.

The extra unemployment benefits help if they can get it.

But people need to work and earn, and a lot of people aren't earning despite all of that federal money you mentioned.

The trillions honestly aren't enough or aren't going to the right places.

How has this money helped the typical restaurant server or hotel maid?

That's a lot of Americans.

Those people are earning more right now being unemployed than they would if they were at work (which was the whole point: encourage people to stay at home to reduce infection rates). I'm not saying it's perfect, but what else do you suggest?

I'm not suggesting anything else, I'm saying continuing an economy where tens of millions of additional people rely on unemployment benefits is not a long term strategy and it isn't the way those people want to live.

The extra $600/week ends soon. And can't continue indefinitely anyway.

States are struggling to even process the first level of UI.

There are also people who don't qualify for money because they weren't fired or weren't on any official books but they were working and making money, but not now.

People need to work. People want to work. Many of them are not working.

People with money spending more at companies that unemployed people don't work for, doesn't help the unemployed.

It seems like your answer to the question "How has this money helped the typical restaurant server or hotel maid?", is unemployment benefits.

Sounds like the plan to make the economy look good is a huge welfare state.

I'm simply saying it's going to be bad and it will take time to get better. It's not easy to solve.

Politically speaking, I don't think the government can manufacture a quick fox in time for November.

If Hillary was president right now, she'd probably be voted out in November even if she did a "better" job.

Some things are out of your hands.

Trump supporters mocking the killing of George Floyd. To quote our President, they're some very fine people.

Where are the right wingers that complain about Colin Kaepernick, when these guys have the nerve to wrap themselves in the flag?

https://www.phillyvoice.com/video-george-floyd-death-mocked-south-jersey-gloucester-county-black-lives-matter-protest/

I don't think I disagree really. Lots of question marks for the long term

L L wrote:

If Hillary was president right now, she'd probably be voted out in November even if she did a "better" job.

She would have done a much better job, and I think it would have saved her re-election chances.

If Hillary was president right now we would have very few cases of COVID-19. Hillary would not have disbanded the pandemic task force. Hillary would not have thrown away the pandemic handbook. Hillary would not have called it a hoax. Hillary would have trusted the experts from the beginning and taken their advice. Hillary would have ramped up testing and tracing. Hillary would have pushed to make sure that everyone had what they needed to shelter in place for three months like the other nations who have beaten this virus.

Of course the Republicans would have thwarted a lot of her efforts, but if Hillary was president the US would look a lot more like New Zeland and a lot less like Brazil.

And if she was indeed as successful as New Zeland she would have been re-elected in a landslide.

The thing about it is that Tiny could have done the right things. He would have gained popularity like most leaders in a crisis. And if he had done the right things he could win in a landslide too.

Whoa! NASCAR just banned the confederate flag.

I am totally floored.

I had a realization today...

It doesn't matter if 60%, 70% or what % of Americans want Trump out of office. If they can't get to the polls in urban areas then Trump wins. If the most recent primaries are any indicator if we are still operating under social distancing procedures come election day then Trump wins even if 55-60%+ wants him out. Waiting 3-4 hours to vote is simply unacceptable.

Alan