Will Trump be Re-elected?

[dualstow]

Two votes for more wall, then.

...
Why can't some of these not-so-great countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and solve some of their own problems themselves and become great on their own, rather than sending all their best people to live here?

It’s more of a case of the people sending themselves, not being sent. I certainly have seen young refugees interviewed on places like reddit. Young privileged people who were able to fly here rather than walk across a desert. There were people who asked them, “Why didn’t you stay and fight so that your country could be better?”

Hmm, if I were Syrian or Iraqi and I could get on a plane, I would take that plane.

[Kriegsspiel]

Not sure about anyone else on this site, but I am definitely not pro-immigration. We have plenty of human capital to work with already and plenty of problems to solve. All humans are created equal right? Why can't some of these not-so-great countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and solve some of their own problems themselves and become great on their own, rather than sending all their best people to live here?

I think you are on the money.

[stuper1]

Two votes for more wall, then.

...
Why can't some of these not-so-great countries pull themselves up by their bootstraps and solve some of their own problems themselves and become great on their own, rather than sending all their best people to live here?

It’s more of a case of the people sending themselves, not being sent. I certainly have seen young refugees interviewed on places like reddit. Young privileged people who were able to fly here rather than walk across a desert. There were people who asked them, “Why didn’t you stay and fight so that your country could be better?”

Hmm, if I were Syrian or Iraqi and I could get on a plane, I would take that plane.

Yes, I didn't phrase that very well. I should have just send "rather than having all their best people end up here".

I can't blame the immigrants at all. I would do the same in their shoes also.

Actually, I think in some cases they are sent here for university but end up never leaving. In other cases, they come of their own accord.

In any event, the onus is on our politicians to tap the brakes a bit on the immigration rate.

[dualstow]

I think we should tap the brakes, too, if you mean get more selective.

@kriegsspiel: more WALL or no?

[stuper1]

I think we should tap the brakes, too, if you mean get more selective.

@kriegsspiel: more WALL or no?

Well sure, get more selective about the ones that are let in legally. And enforce border security better to reduce illegal immigration. If that means a wall, fine. And/or other measures. I really don't even care if we spending a bazillion dollars building a wall and it's basically only symbolic. I would consider that less of a waste of taxpayer money than funding another foreign war.

[WiseOne]

News today was all about the Lordstown GM plant closing and the unanticipated (if you're Trump) effects of steel tariffs. Sounds like the wall and the immigration issues have been forgotten, for the moment anyway.

The narrative says that the steel industry has done well, but tariffs increased costs for the auto industry and as a result they have to close plants and move production to Mexico. They don't say that the move to Mexico is about cheap labor but of course that's implied.

But let's think about it for just a second. Could the increases in minimum wage have something to do with it too? That was never mentioned of course :-). Also, it appears that the Lordstown plant is being closed because people are loving SUV's again, and there is less demand for the Chevy Cruze (which the plant specialized in). Of note, that's a fairly cheap car compared to SUV's. Kind of hard to imagine that price increases due to the tariffs is depressing sales, when people are actually shifting to buying more expensive cars. Why wouldn't GM simply increase car prices to reflect the increased price of steel, and carry on as usual? People don't buy cars often enough to be that aware of price increases. They also tend not to make car purchasing decisions based on price, but rather on monthly cost. The change in that amount due to steel tariffs couldn't be more than a few dollars, which would go basically unnoticed.

If my logic here is correct, then I can safely laugh at the news stories - but how many people will realize all these things?

[dualstow]

@WiseOne - more (steel) wall? Or would that give diminishing returns?

I briefly read Trump’s tweet about George Conway, Mr of Kellyanne, and some responses in the news. It certainly won’t harm his chances of being re-elected. At this point, we’re all used to a personal attack a day. But, man it’s unbecoming that our leader does this.

[dualstow]

its also unbecoming that the media has managed to achieve a negative reporting rate of 92% regarding the president compared to a 0.7% rate of reporting on the economy (which seems to be doing well)... trump may be the least presidential president with the how and why of his twitter postings, but the profession of journalism is even deader then presidential decorum...

It's taken a while, but this forum has convinced me to feel somewhat the same. Trump's approval rating is close to Obama's for the same length of time elapsed in the White House- at least that's what they said yesterday. The press are not the enemy of the people, but I do wish they would take the high road instead of reacting to his antics they way they do.

[moda0306]

its also unbecoming that the media has managed to achieve a negative reporting rate of 92% regarding the president compared to a 0.7% rate of reporting on the economy (which seems to be doing well)... trump may be the least presidential president with the how and why of his twitter postings, but the profession of journalism is even deader then presidential decorum...

It's taken a while, but this forum has convinced me to feel somewhat the same. Trump's approval rating is close to Obama's for the same length of time elapsed in the White House- at least that's what they said yesterday. The press are not the enemy of the people, but I do wish they would take the high road instead of reacting to his antics they way they do.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

Seems to me his approval rating is 7 points behind Obama (I like 538's methodology of combining polls and giving them grades for the quality of their methodologies), which while not massive is pretty significant, especially considering unemployment is much lower than where Obama was at at this point in his first term, and right or wrong that tends to much-more-positively affect the approval of meandering centrists that have a tendency to give too much credit or blame to the current president for the current economic scenario.

If Trump would have been elected in the midst of a financial crisis and oversaw the middle stages of skyrocketing unemployment with a similar "recovery" to Obama's, I'd imagine it'd be at least a few points worse. But that's just me.

[stuper1]

its also unbecoming that the media has managed to achieve a negative reporting rate of 92% regarding the president compared to a 0.7% rate of reporting on the economy (which seems to be doing well)... trump may be the least presidential president with the how and why of his twitter postings, but the profession of journalism is even deader then presidential decorum...

It's taken a while, but this forum has convinced me to feel somewhat the same. Trump's approval rating is close to Obama's for the same length of time elapsed in the White House- at least that's what they said yesterday. The press are not the enemy of the people, but I do wish they would take the high road instead of reacting to his antics they way they do.

The press are the tools of big business. I really don't understand how you can't see that the press are the enemy of the people. If force-feeding us propaganda lies doesn't make them our enemy, then I don't know what would. I am not speaking sarcastically, ironically, metaphorically, or anything other than just purely seriously.

[dualstow]

The press are the tools of big business. I really don't understand how you can't see that the press are the enemy of the people. If force-feeding us propaganda lies doesn't make them our enemy, then I don't know what would. I am not speaking sarcastically, ironically, metaphorically, or anything other than just purely seriously.

Are you saying other people can't see through it the way you can?

It's not as cut and dried as you're making it out to be.
The press comes in many different forms. Without it, we are screwed. Look at nations that don't have a free press. Sure there's an influence from big business. The most glaring example is The Washington Post being wholly owned by Bezos. (I like the WP, though). In Italy, much of the press is controlled by Berlusconi. Some of the corruption charges you may have heard about Netanyahu include his trying to bribe the press to give him favorable coverage. The world is not perfect, but the press is vital. Vital I say!

@moda: yep.

[jhogue]

So here is my 2nd post on "public" transportation in the USA:
(Hopefully then we can get back on topic!)

I. Unlike the Swiss, the American rail system (Amtrak) is expensive, inconvenient, and not well-connected.

The USA will never be connected by a European-style rail network. The geographical distances are much greater than Europe. The population density is much lower. Laying aside the absurdity of connecting Hawaii and Alaska to the lower 48 by rail, taking the train from New York to Los Angeles, (the USA’s two largest cities), is strictly for tourists and retirees.

Outside of the Northeast corridor, most of the US cannot be locally connected by a Swiss-style intermodal system of trains and buses.
Much of the country (think Trump’s red state America) is better connected and more conveniently accessible by pickup trucks and SUVs than it is by light-rail—which I regard as little more than a costly subsidy for a tiny fraction of the middle class. Even with anti-fossil fuel politicians like Obama in office, this country has managed to re-invent its petroleum extraction methods and keep the price of gasoline far lower than it is in Europe and Japan—to say nothing of the national security implications of being energy sufficient in ways that Europe is not.

II. Let me suggest some alternatives for the future of transportation:
-Stop investing in 19th century technology like trains. Invest/subsidize/ work on 21st century technology such as longer-distance electric cars and artificial intelligence. Invest in long-term upgrades to our existing aviation network, including the next generation of software for air traffic control, redundant safety networks, and fuel efficiency.

-Give Amtrak’s northeast corridor back to the states that actually operate Acela electrified and in the black. If Atlanta and Charlotte want to be connected to Acela, let the states of Georgia and North Carolina provide the subsidy rather than freeloading off the other states via federal grants. Lease the rest of the long-distance network to cruise lines, who specialize in slow travel for masses of wealthy tourists, foreign and domestic.

-One more even more radical solution:
Let New York City secede from New York state. Put it to a people’s referendum. NYC’s “public” transportation has long been a terrible mess and AOC’s Green New Deal posing is doing nothing to actually change anything. The evident antagonism between the current state governor and the city mayor is driven by institutional structures that significantly contributes to the continuing poor state of infrastructure in both the city and state.

[stuper1]

The press are the tools of big business. I really don't understand how you can't see that the press are the enemy of the people. If force-feeding us propaganda lies doesn't make them our enemy, then I don't know what would. I am not speaking sarcastically, ironically, metaphorically, or anything other than just purely seriously.

Are you saying other people can't see through it the way you can?

It's not as cut and dried as you're making it out to be.
The press comes in many different forms. Without it, we are screwed. Look at nations that don't have a free press. Sure there's an influence from big business. The most glaring example is The Washington Post being wholly owned by Bezos. (I like the WP, though). In Italy, much of the press is controlled by Berlusconi. Some of the corruption charges you may have heard about Netanyahu include his trying to bribe the press to give him favorable coverage. The world is not perfect, but the press is vital. Vital I say!

@moda: yep.

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart? You must be a much better person than I if you have that much faith in human nature. I know what human nature is like just by looking at myself.

To be fair, I think a lot of the press propaganda is not done deliberately by the actual writer but is the result of psychological manipulation upon the journalist. For example, a young journalist writes a sob story about children being held in cages at the border, because they truly feel bad for those children. The publisher chooses to prominently use the story because he/she knows it will please his/her corporate masters who want open borders. This is a very simplistic example. Of course, they never tell us that those "cages" are just regular chain-link fencing, that Obama did substantially the same thing, and that the real blame lies with the illegal immigrant parents for bringing their children into that situation in the first place.

[dualstow]

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart?

No, not at all. Although I do think there is no shortage of journalists who are passionate about journalism. They don't say to themselves, "I'd like to go into the field of Being a Corporate Tool."

To be fair, I think a lot of the press propaganda is not done deliberately by the actual writer but is the result of psychological manipulation upon the journalist. For example, a young journalist writes a sob story about children being held in cages at the border, because they truly feel bad for those children.

Agree.

The publisher chooses to prominently use the story because he/she knows it will please his/her corporate masters who want open borders. This is a very simplistic example.

Certainly possible.

Of course, they never tell us that those "cages" are just regular chain-link fencing, that Obama did substantially the same thing, and that the real blame lies with the illegal immigrant parents for bringing their children into that situation in the first place.

Well, as I said, the press comes in many different forms. How did you find out about the fact stated above?

[moda0306]

I frankly don't understand anyone who has a romantic view of "the press." It really is a joke in many ways.

That said, even more frankly, you're psychotic if you think Trump is better in any meaningful way. Watching Trump bash the press is like watching professional wrestling. Watching folks hold him on anything but a similar pedestal as the press is like watching two inbred cousins talk about how much they look forward to watching Hulk Hogan lay the smack down on Rowdy Roddy Piper.

And don't start with the "Trump loves America" garbage. Trump loves Trump. His love for America exists simply as an extension of his certainty that it must be the best country in the world because he was born in it. He is no more a public servant than "the media."

Speaking of Piper tho... has anyone seen "They Live?" I absolutely have to see that again.

[Kriegsspiel]

I think we should tap the brakes, too, if you mean get more selective.

@kriegsspiel: more WALL or no?

An actual wall doesn't make sense in a lot of places, but yea. Some combination of fences (need to let flooding water through), a wall, motion sensors, drones, and increased patrolling would be better than just "wall." A covered obstacle is better than an unobserved obstacle.

It would also be nice if the Mexicans removed the cartel observers just over the border, but that doesn't seem feasible.

[dualstow]

I frankly don't understand anyone who has a romantic view of "the press." It really is a joke in many ways.

I'm not sure what you mean by a romantic view, but...take it all away and see if you miss it, imperfect as it is.

Speaking of Piper tho... has anyone seen "They Live?" I absolutely have to see that again.

Is that the one in which the protagonist can see aliens (otherwise disguised as humans) through special glasses, or the creepy monstery show with that guy (now deceased) who played Tiny in the Rob Zombie movies?

[moda0306]

I frankly don't understand anyone who has a romantic view of "the press." It really is a joke in many ways.

I'm not sure what you mean by a romantic view, but...take it all away and see if you miss it, imperfect as it is.

Speaking of Piper tho... has anyone seen "They Live?" I absolutely have to see that again.

Is that the one in which the protagonist can see aliens (otherwise disguised as humans) through special glasses, or the creepy monstery show with that guy (now deceased) who played Tiny in the Rob Zombie movies?

To the Piper question, it's the ones with the "aliens" and glasses.

To the other one, I mean "romantic" in the gag-inducing sense of thinking that the media by and whole being now or really ever an "objective, principled reporter of facts and blah blah blah..."

Of course, there are exceptions, but they've always been exceptions. Never the rule.

[dualstow]

AP is pretty good.

[stuper1]

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart?

No, not at all. Although I do think there is no shortage of journalists who are passionate about journalism. They don't say to themselves, "I'd like to go into the field of Being a Corporate Tool."

To be fair, I think a lot of the press propaganda is not done deliberately by the actual writer but is the result of psychological manipulation upon the journalist. For example, a young journalist writes a sob story about children being held in cages at the border, because they truly feel bad for those children.

Agree.

The publisher chooses to prominently use the story because he/she knows it will please his/her corporate masters who want open borders. This is a very simplistic example.

Certainly possible.

Of course, they never tell us that those "cages" are just regular chain-link fencing, that Obama did substantially the same thing, and that the real blame lies with the illegal immigrant parents for bringing their children into that situation in the first place.

Well, as I said, the press comes in many different forms. How did you find out about the fact stated above?

How did I find the fact above? I just looked at the photo that went along with the article claiming that Trump was a monster for putting kids in cages. I saw a chainlink fence, just like the one around my kids' school, so I guess my kids are being kept in cages too. As far as where the real blame lies, I just thought to myself, "how does a 6-year old get to be crossing an international border in the first place?" As to whether Obama did the same thing, I probably read that on an alternative to the mainstrain media website.

I have no love affair with Trump, but I think he's better than what the Democrats were/are offering. Whatever will get us to smaller government is my preference. Government is not the solution; it's the problem.

[WiseOne]

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart?

No, not at all. Although I do think there is no shortage of journalists who are passionate about journalism. They don't say to themselves, "I'd like to go into the field of Being a Corporate Tool."

[/quote]

Passion is very easily squashed once you enter the corporate environment. The pressure to think and speak a certain way comes from the top. That's why I can easily believe that a journalist who genuinely thinks they're following best practices and doing the right thing, can produce articles that say things like "After Trump did X, Y happened" and imply that Y occurred solely due to X. However, often there are causative factors Z and W that are not mentioned, and are unrelated to X. Or, Y actually pre-dates X, which means it couldn't possibly be due to X. Regardless of how creepy and ridiculous X is, it still doesn't make the implication true.

OK so I haven't actually worked at a major newspaper so how would I know about this? I'm extrapolating from my own experience working in a place that's supposed to be immune from such things (academic freedom and all that). Example: In the last few weeks we've been bombarded daily with in person, emailed, and written demands to sign up for Doximity and vote for our hospital to get the US News & World Report "best" rating. Which means that those ratings are being manipulated without even a pretense of subtlety. I can only imagine that it would be even worse at a major media organization.

[dualstow]

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart?

(dual)No, not at all. Although I do think there is no shortage of journalists who are passionate about journalism. They don't say to themselves, "I'd like to go into the field of Being a Corporate Tool."

Passion is very easily squashed once you enter the corporate environment. The pressure to think and speak a certain way comes from the top. That's why I can easily believe that a journalist who genuinely thinks they're following best practices and doing the right thing, can produce articles that say things like "After Trump did X, Y happened" and imply that Y occurred solely due to X.
<snip>I can only imagine that it would be even worse at a major media organization.

No doubt. Again, I don't think anyone here is saying the press is perfect, but I'm insisting it's still indispensable. On other forums, it would be stating the obvious, but over here, I'm not so sure.

I remember chatting w/ an older guy who said he believes 70% of what he reads in the paper. Sounds fine to me. He was Palestinian -- I don't know if that colored his attitude toward the media before he came to the States.

One thing is certain: local news in the US is dying out fast, and that is most definitely the fault of news corporations.

[moda0306]

Passion is very easily squashed once you enter the corporate environment. The pressure to think and speak a certain way comes from the top. That's why I can easily believe that a journalist who genuinely thinks they're following best practices and doing the right thing, can produce articles that say things like "After Trump did X, Y happened" and imply that Y occurred solely due to X.
<snip>I can only imagine that it would be even worse at a major media organization.

No doubt. Again, I don't think anyone here is saying the press is perfect, but I'm insisting it's still indispensable. On other forums, it would be stating the obvious, but over here, I'm not so sure.

I remember chatting w/ an older guy who said he believes 70% of what he reads in the paper. Sounds fine to me. He was Palestinian -- I don't know if that colored his attitude toward the media before he came to the States.

One thing is certain: local news in the US is dying out fast, and that is most definitely the fault of news corporations.

An actual press that reported facts and distinguished them from opinion would be indispensable.
If we had one.

At this point, what we have is propaganda, not news.

So where do you get most of your "news" with facts, completely divorced from opinion?

Further, your description of aversion to facts seems to be as true of Trump as it is of the media. You seem to have selective outrage for factless reporting.

[WiseOne]

Moda (and maybe others), you need to spend some time overseas. It really opens your eyes to the problems with the American press.

I've had extensive stays in both the Soviet Union (i.e. pre-breakup) and Kenya. In the USSR I was traveling with a Moscow native, and got to see some samples of Pravda (which means Truth, a very orwellian name). We usually think of Pravda as the ultimate propaganda tool, but it was in fact very similar to any American newspaper. I remember being surprised at that, I was expecting heavy handed government pronouncements and little actual news.

In Kenya, the local newspapers (when you managed to get them) were something of a joke: they'd get the date wrong, make silly printing mistakes etc. But, the articles were the most informative pieces I'd ever read! Despite how unpolished they were, there was a refreshing absence of propaganda, manipulation etc. They just told it like it is. At the time, there was a ton of information on what was happening in the West Bank & Palestinian territories that were not EVER being reported back in the US. I clipped the articles to mail to family & friends, and I genuinely missed the paper when I returned home. It was quite an eye opening experience. It's where my deep distrust of the press comes from. So no, I don't think the press is indispensable. Genuine reporting is indispensable, but that's not what they do. Independent reporters with their own websites and no corporate governance would be ideal, as long as they don't end up getting tagged as "fake news".

I also had brought a world-band radio with me to Kenya. I still have it. Maybe I should dust it off and try it. There are bound to be some non-US-controlled channels with good reception.

[stuper1]

And I would say that you are naive. Do you think the press is performing this vital function just from the goodness of their heart?

(dual)No, not at all. Although I do think there is no shortage of journalists who are passionate about journalism. They don't say to themselves, "I'd like to go into the field of Being a Corporate Tool."

Passion is very easily squashed once you enter the corporate environment. The pressure to think and speak a certain way comes from the top. That's why I can easily believe that a journalist who genuinely thinks they're following best practices and doing the right thing, can produce articles that say things like "After Trump did X, Y happened" and imply that Y occurred solely due to X.
<snip>I can only imagine that it would be even worse at a major media organization.

No doubt. Again, I don't think anyone here is saying the press is perfect, but I'm insisting it's still indispensable. On other forums, it would be stating the obvious, but over here, I'm not so sure.

I think the people who frequent this forum must be a little dimmer than average. Maybe if you type very slowly, o r p u t e x t r a s p a c e s i n y o u r p o s t s , we will be able to understand easier.