I'm not doing anything. Just pointing out the bleeding obvious.
Donald Trump
- Thread starter kaz7
- Start date
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
who will remind him his guy is a 34 times convicted felon?
God help us.
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Apr 2019
- Messages
- 18,114
- Team supported
- FC Zurich (and city of course)
So, during a particularly shitty 4 hours on the M6/M40 last night I listened to the entire 3 hrs of trump with Joe Rogan. On the whole not particularly enlightening and I don't recommend giving the time to it unless you are particularly interested.
Rogan tried to initially take trump down the route of how he had been victimised by 'the system'. Surprisingly trump didn't seem to want to go very far with that. The first hour seemed to be mostly trump repeating how loved he is by everyone and how everything he has done ever has been an incredible success I found this daft, as nearly every billionaire, film star, sports star or whatever that has reached the top generally has to endure many failures and knock backs - the ability to bounce back from these is what makes successful people. I think a psychologist could put a label on this but I assume some sort of narcissism.
Rogan did press him a little and sort of had him on the ropes a couple of times and I think could have pushed harder for a straight answer. Notably re acceptance of the last election result and how he would have stopped/prevented the current situations in Ukraine and the middle east. Trump made many claims of successes which were I not driving I might have fact checked - I think rogan could have though. Trump is rather adept at slipping out of difficulty questions simply by linking his answer to a long meandering and unrelated story. He managed to divert the chat to MMA / UFC for quite some time.
Trump made some very compelling arguments for huge import tariffs or the threat of them as a solution to various economic problems. I'm no economist but I think he ignored the possible second order effects of such economic isolationism.
Similarly he made sound arguments for voter id and no postal voting. Cited the french system, and an electoral commission led by ex president carter in the 80s - I can't find that, I tried as it sounded interesting. His most compelling argument was that anything but paper votes in a ballot box can be cheated and both parties have tried to include /exclude certain voters to their advantage historically.
He made the usual gags about bidens fitness for office, Kamala's IQ and legitimacy etc. seems to be very impressed by 'smart' and successful people - mostly business people and military generals on the ground as opposed to the staff officers in the pentagon who I imagine gave him some trouble in office. His take on the environment is unsurprisingly pro oil and pretty dismissive of climate change. A lot of blame thrown at china/India for that and raises some valid objections to wind power.
Surprisingly he seemed very aware of the possibilities and danger of nuclear power. Also showing genuine fear and concern for the perilous state of the globes expanding nuclear arsenal's as well as pride in making Americas nukes great again which seemed contradictory.
Very pro Israel - worryingly so. Anti china, and surprisingly very anti Taiwan who he sees as robbing the chip industry from the US. I think he'll let Putin have Ukraine although he reckons Putin would never have dared invade if he were in office. He'll start a(nother) trade war via tariffs with china/Taiwan, and will let netanyahu do whatever he likes (and give US military assistance).
He has some tittivating insights into secret files on aliens and JFK, without actually giving anything new away. On JFK in particular he has promised to open all the files - he didn't last time he was in office as some key players who may be named were still alive. He was pretty cute throwing this and the MMA stuff into the conversation as he knows Rogan will take the bait.
Interestingly he was quite open on where he and RFK deviate. Certainly on pharma. Trump seems to be targeting food additives and pesticides instead - I imagine more a reflection on the power of lobbyists than conscience and conviction.
Overall his audience will love this, and the people who already hated him will hate it. This probably has more reach than anything else he (or Kamala) will do this side of the election, won't have done him any harm and may do some good. He's good entertainment and can 'freeball' as Rogan puts it - I don't think many politicians can, certainly not Kamala.
I think the offer for Kamala to go on Rogan is still open. I don't think she would do as well in that format as trump, but if she is slipping in the polls it may be worth doing as a last roll of the dice.
Rogan tried to initially take trump down the route of how he had been victimised by 'the system'. Surprisingly trump didn't seem to want to go very far with that. The first hour seemed to be mostly trump repeating how loved he is by everyone and how everything he has done ever has been an incredible success I found this daft, as nearly every billionaire, film star, sports star or whatever that has reached the top generally has to endure many failures and knock backs - the ability to bounce back from these is what makes successful people. I think a psychologist could put a label on this but I assume some sort of narcissism.
Rogan did press him a little and sort of had him on the ropes a couple of times and I think could have pushed harder for a straight answer. Notably re acceptance of the last election result and how he would have stopped/prevented the current situations in Ukraine and the middle east. Trump made many claims of successes which were I not driving I might have fact checked - I think rogan could have though. Trump is rather adept at slipping out of difficulty questions simply by linking his answer to a long meandering and unrelated story. He managed to divert the chat to MMA / UFC for quite some time.
Trump made some very compelling arguments for huge import tariffs or the threat of them as a solution to various economic problems. I'm no economist but I think he ignored the possible second order effects of such economic isolationism.
Similarly he made sound arguments for voter id and no postal voting. Cited the french system, and an electoral commission led by ex president carter in the 80s - I can't find that, I tried as it sounded interesting. His most compelling argument was that anything but paper votes in a ballot box can be cheated and both parties have tried to include /exclude certain voters to their advantage historically.
He made the usual gags about bidens fitness for office, Kamala's IQ and legitimacy etc. seems to be very impressed by 'smart' and successful people - mostly business people and military generals on the ground as opposed to the staff officers in the pentagon who I imagine gave him some trouble in office. His take on the environment is unsurprisingly pro oil and pretty dismissive of climate change. A lot of blame thrown at china/India for that and raises some valid objections to wind power.
Surprisingly he seemed very aware of the possibilities and danger of nuclear power. Also showing genuine fear and concern for the perilous state of the globes expanding nuclear arsenal's as well as pride in making Americas nukes great again which seemed contradictory.
Very pro Israel - worryingly so. Anti china, and surprisingly very anti Taiwan who he sees as robbing the chip industry from the US. I think he'll let Putin have Ukraine although he reckons Putin would never have dared invade if he were in office. He'll start a(nother) trade war via tariffs with china/Taiwan, and will let netanyahu do whatever he likes (and give US military assistance).
He has some tittivating insights into secret files on aliens and JFK, without actually giving anything new away. On JFK in particular he has promised to open all the files - he didn't last time he was in office as some key players who may be named were still alive. He was pretty cute throwing this and the MMA stuff into the conversation as he knows Rogan will take the bait.
Interestingly he was quite open on where he and RFK deviate. Certainly on pharma. Trump seems to be targeting food additives and pesticides instead - I imagine more a reflection on the power of lobbyists than conscience and conviction.
Overall his audience will love this, and the people who already hated him will hate it. This probably has more reach than anything else he (or Kamala) will do this side of the election, won't have done him any harm and may do some good. He's good entertainment and can 'freeball' as Rogan puts it - I don't think many politicians can, certainly not Kamala.
I think the offer for Kamala to go on Rogan is still open. I don't think she would do as well in that format as trump, but if she is slipping in the polls it may be worth doing as a last roll of the dice.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
roman totale
Well-Known Member
I typically don’t pay too much attention to polling data, but this analysis is particularly well thought-out.
tldr; There is a massive (and growing) correlation between Senate and Presidental voting. The Senate races, in swing states, show a healthy skew towards Democrats, yet national poll Presidential data in the same states shows a much tighter race. Why? As the article states, Averages like those from 538 and RCP try to counter these biases by minimizing outliers and accounting for partisan effects. However, the problem is that every publicly released poll is biased. No one is releasing a $25,000–$80,000 poll out of the goodness of their heart. When a campaign releases a poll, it’s not to inform the public; it’s to shape public perception in favor of their candidate or agenda.
app.vantagedatahouse.com
tldr; There is a massive (and growing) correlation between Senate and Presidental voting. The Senate races, in swing states, show a healthy skew towards Democrats, yet national poll Presidential data in the same states shows a much tighter race. Why? As the article states, Averages like those from 538 and RCP try to counter these biases by minimizing outliers and accounting for partisan effects. However, the problem is that every publicly released poll is biased. No one is releasing a $25,000–$80,000 poll out of the goodness of their heart. When a campaign releases a poll, it’s not to inform the public; it’s to shape public perception in favor of their candidate or agenda.
Vantage Data House
app.vantagedatahouse.com
Churchlawtonblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Dec 2013
- Messages
- 14,575
The video clip of him serving to the actors in the drive thru MacDonalds is quite funny.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
It'd be even funnier if it was played at double-speed to the Benny Hill theme.
Big Joe Corrigan
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 3,740
There’s nothing Christian about most of that lot.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 88,963
And I am doing.