WWTBAM Bored

Bob78164 wrote: Or are you just saying wah wah wah wah wah?

I'm saying Trump's approval ratings are higher than Obama's were at this point.
I'm saying unemployment is as a record low.
I'm saying unemployment for blacks is at an all time low.
I'm saying, no, not me, the New York Times (not a bastion of conservative opinion) is saying "We ran out of words to describe how good the job numbers are."
I'm saying November 7th will be just as depressing for you as November 9, 2016 was.

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote: Or are you just saying wah wah wah wah wah?

I'm saying Trump's approval ratings are higher than Obama's were at this point.

Wrong. By nearly 6%.

He's ahead of Gerald Ford's 39.5% approval rating at this point in his term. But he's behind every other President.

And your response is the response of a bully. You're saying that it doesn't matter whether I'm right or wrong because your side's gonna win. I'm saying that Donny is betraying our nation's principles and his actions are giving aid and comfort to a hostile foreign power (whether through malice or incompetence I don't know and don't much care), elected Republicans are standing silent while he does so, and that for that reason (among others), your side doesn't deserve to win.

What do you figure is going to happen to Donny's approval numbers when the Obama Boom finally runs out of steam? --Bob

Donald Trump 6/11/18 wrote:Our Great Larry Kudlow, who has been working so hard on trade and the economy, has just suffered a heart attack, He is now in Walter Reed Medical Center.”

I don’t agree with Kudlow about tariffs, but I wish him a speedy recovery.

jarnon wrote:

Donald Trump 6/11/18 wrote:Our Great Larry Kudlow, who has been working so hard on trade and the economy, has just suffered a heart attack, He is now in Walter Reed Medical Center.”

I don’t agree with Kudlow about tariffs, but I wish him a speedy recovery.

His wife says he's doing well, alert and talking.

Bob78164 wrote: What do you figure is going to happen to Donny's approval numbers when the Obama Boom finally runs out of steam? --Bob

LFOL.

Bob78164 wrote:Wrong By nearly 6%.

Guess it depends on which poll and on what date.


Rasmussen polling says I'm right and you're wrong. Based on that alone they are a more credible source than your 538 site which blew the 2016 election badly.

Trump 47% approval on June 11


Obama 46% approval on June 11, 2nd year in office

You don't have to like it, but you'll have to accept it.

tlynn78 wrote:

Beebs52 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:


No further comment.

?

Let me help: it's Trump's fault.

Can't blame that on Trump, Kudlow earned that all by himself.

I like to think that it was God's little smack on his head!

BackInTex wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Wrong By nearly 6%.

Guess it depends on which poll and on what date.


Rasmussen polling says I'm right and you're wrong. Based on that alone they are a more credible source than your 538 site which blew the 2016 election badly.

Trump 47% approval on June 11


Obama 46% approval on June 11, 2nd year in office

You don't have to like it, but you'll have to accept it.

Rasmussen has consistently pro-Republican numbers. FiveThirtyEight corrects for things like that (in both directions).

FiveThirtyEight is an aggregator, relying on many polls. You found 1 consistently Republican-leaning poll supporting your position.

And you're wrong about 538 blowing the 2016 election. They gave Donny better odds than almost anyone in the mainstream media, and specifically predicted, as one of 4 possible scenarios a couple of days before the election, the result that actually came to pass -- mild overperformance in the Rust Belt giving Donny a narrow win in enough states to win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote.

No one should ever expect to get rich betting against Nate Silver's numbers. But please feel free to try. --Bob

BackInTex wrote:
Rasmussen polling says I'm right and you're wrong. Based on that alone they are a more credible source than your 538 site which blew the 2016 election badly.

Here is the last set of Rasmussen predictions, issued on the Monday before the election:

Clinton 322
Trump 216

Senate 50-50

House Democrats Gain 13 (Actual Democratic gain 6)

Governors No Change (Actual Republican gain 2)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... 2016_picks

So, Rasmussen was wrong just like everyone else. For the record, 538 does not conduct polls. Instead, they analyze the polls and in essence compile a poll of polls. Their analysis does take into account the partisan tilt of the various polls and how reliable they have been in the past. Rasmussen has consistently shown a more Republican tilt than most other pollsters.

538 publishes a net approval rating for Trump, which they update daily and is currently approximately -11%, which means that 11% more of the public disapproves of Trump's performance than approves of it. That's an improvement since the end of the year, when his figures were around -20%. The current figures include polls that interviewed people as recently as yesterday.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote:
Rasmussen polling says I'm right and you're wrong. Based on that alone they are a more credible source than your 538 site which blew the 2016 election badly.

Here is the last set of Rasmussen predictions, issued on the Monday before the election:

Clinton 322
Trump 216

Senate 50-50

House Democrats Gain 13 (Actual Democratic gain 6)

Governors No Change (Actual Republican gain 2)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... 2016_picks

So, Rasmussen was wrong just like everyone else. For the record, 538 does not conduct polls. Instead, they analyze the polls and in essence compile a poll of polls. Their analysis does take into account the partisan tilt of the various polls and how reliable they have been in the past. Rasmussen has consistently shown a more Republican tilt than most other pollsters.

538 publishes a net approval rating for Trump, which they update daily and is currently approximately -11%, which means that 11% more of the public disapproves of Trump's performance than approves of it. That's an improvement since the end of the year, when his figures were around -20%. The current figures include polls that interviewed people as recently as yesterday.

Let's not forget the splash Nate made in 2009 by fingering Strategic Vision as a fraudulent pollster through analysis of their numbers. --Bob

a1mamacat wrote:My dear friends, at what point will you all admit that your status and respect in most of the world has been flushed down a great golden toilet.

(opinion) In a hotel honeymoon suite in Russia, allegedly.

a1mamacat wrote:It will be very interesting to finally find out how much he has been bought for.

(opinion) For about $130,000, again, allegedly.

Bob78164 wrote:..., and specifically predicted, as one of 4 possible scenarios a couple of days before the election, ...

Do you ever listen to yourself? I think normal people consider a proposal of 4 possible scenarios anything BUT a "specific prediction." To make this on-topic, it's like predicting that of the 4 answers on WWtBaM, one of them will be correct.

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:..., and specifically predicted, as one of 4 possible scenarios a couple of days before the election, ...

Do you ever listen to yourself? I think normal people consider a proposal of 4 possible scenarios anything BUT a "specific prediction." To make this on-topic, it's like predicting that of the 4 answers on WWtBaM, one of them will be correct.

On the other hand, predicting that a golf ball will land on one of four possible blades of grass is pretty damn specific. The 538 scenario analysis is somewhere in between the two. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:..., and specifically predicted, as one of 4 possible scenarios a couple of days before the election, ...

Do you ever listen to yourself? I think normal people consider a proposal of 4 possible scenarios anything BUT a "specific prediction." To make this on-topic, it's like predicting that of the 4 answers on WWtBaM, one of them will be correct.

On the other hand, predicting that a golf ball will land on one of four possible blades of grass is pretty damn specific. The 538 scenario analysis is somewhere in between the two.

I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:Do you ever listen to yourself? I think normal people consider a proposal of 4 possible scenarios anything BUT a "specific prediction." To make this on-topic, it's like predicting that of the 4 answers on WWtBaM, one of them will be correct.

On the other hand, predicting that a golf ball will land on one of four possible blades of grass is pretty damn specific. The 538 scenario analysis is somewhere in between the two.

I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:On the other hand, predicting that a golf ball will land on one of four possible blades of grass is pretty damn specific. The 538 scenario analysis is somewhere in between the two.

I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic. --Bob

Please tell me you're not a litigator.

tlynn78 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic. --Bob

Please tell me you're not a litigator.

I am. And judging by my track record, a very good one. That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic.

Please tell me you're not a litigator.

I am. And judging by my track record, a very good one. That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience.

Cite, please. What is your win/loss record for jury trials?

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:On the other hand, predicting that a golf ball will land on one of four possible blades of grass is pretty damn specific. The 538 scenario analysis is somewhere in between the two.

I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic. --Bob

Bob, you of all people should know the difference between a prediction and a projection. I only know of Nate Silver from your posts and from his work being frequently mentioned on Fangraphs... but I'm pretty sure he specializes in the latter and is smart enough not to make the former. Predictions are the single blade of grass, while projections take into account all possible outcomes and the probability of each happening...

lb13

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

tlynn78 wrote:Please tell me you're not a litigator.

I am. And judging by my track record, a very good one. That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience.

Cite, please. What is your win/loss record for jury trials?

Net, around plus $100 million. --Bob

littlebeast13 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:I think it's only a prediction if you pick the one blade. Otherwise, it's not a prediction, it's analysis.

It's a prediction if you pick your set of predicted outcomes before the event. It's just less deterministic. --Bob

Bob, you of all people should know the difference between a prediction and a projection. I only know of Nate Silver from your posts and from his work being frequently mentioned on Fangraphs... but I'm pretty sure he specializes in the latter and is smart enough not to make the former. Predictions are the single blade of grass, while projections take into account all possible outcomes and the probability of each happening...

lb13

That's correct, but basically he aggregated a large set of the likely incomes into four clumps, one of which (mild underperformance in the Midwest and losing the known swing states, leading to a loss of the Electoral College notwithstanding a win in the popular vote) was the one that actually occurred. It's true, he didn't say that the golf ball would land on one of those four particular blades of grass. But he (or one of his staff writers -- I think Harry Enten) said that those four were particularly likely. Which is a lot more than most of the media was saying. Which was my original point. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:I am. And judging by my track record, a very good one. That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience.

Cite, please. What is your win/loss record for jury trials?

Net, around plus $100 million.

That was not the question. Number of wins vs. number of losses in jury trials.

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:Cite, please. What is your win/loss record for jury trials?

Net, around plus $100 million.

That was not the question. Number of wins vs. number of losses in jury trials.

2-0.

But if you want to know how good a lawyer I am, you're asking the wrong question. A lawyer is only as good as the facts and the law his case presents. What you want to know is what the colleagues who have seen my work on a consistent basis think of me. And the fact that I was promoted to partner after one year at my current firm, a mid-sized Century City law firm, even though I don't have a cent of business to my name speaks volumes. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:Net, around plus $100 million.

That was not the question. Number of wins vs. number of losses in jury trials.

2-0.

But if you want to know how good a lawyer I am, you're asking the wrong question. A lawyer is only as good as the facts and the law his case presents. What you want to know is what the colleagues who have seen my work on a consistent basis think of me. And the fact that I was promoted to partner after one year at my current firm, a mid-sized Century City law firm, even though I don't have a cent of business to my name speaks volumes.

That's not what I want to know. You said, "That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience." I wanted to know how much actual experience you have with juries looking at evidence. A whopping 2 trials!

You said, "A lawyer is only as good as the facts and the law his case presents." Doesn't that only apply to average lawyers? I'd think a good or great lawyer would be able to win cases where the facts might not all be with them.

You once told of your experience representing your wife in traffic court. You failed to beat a traffic ticket for her. I have beaten 4 or 5, myself.

Estonut wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Estonut wrote:That was not the question. Number of wins vs. number of losses in jury trials.

2-0.

But if you want to know how good a lawyer I am, you're asking the wrong question. A lawyer is only as good as the facts and the law his case presents. What you want to know is what the colleagues who have seen my work on a consistent basis think of me. And the fact that I was promoted to partner after one year at my current firm, a mid-sized Century City law firm, even though I don't have a cent of business to my name speaks volumes.

That's not what I want to know. You said, "That's because judges and juries look at evidence and are willing to be guided by logic and common experience." I wanted to know how much actual experience you have with juries looking at evidence. A whopping 2 trials!

You said, "A lawyer is only as good as the facts and the law his case presents." Doesn't that only apply to average lawyers? I'd think a good or great lawyer would be able to win cases where the facts might not all be with them.

You once told of your experience representing your wife in traffic court. You failed to beat a traffic ticket for her. I have beaten 4 or 5, myself.

Two jury trials. Far more court trials and arbitrations. And even more court hearings on motions, of course, where judges also have to make decisions based on evidence. --Bob