Gyroscopic Investing

Thank you, Vintaneer. Figure of speech. I’ll just take melatonin.

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:46 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:41 pm I am saying he is getting all he deserves and not enough.

So you’re saying he should get more flak than he deserves. Interesting.

"Interesting" as in "an oxymoron".

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:15 pm • 60% approve of President Trump’s response; 93% of Republicans and 29% of Democrats agree.

Imagine what that number would be if he were able to drop the need to hit back. Simply be able to say things like "I'm not going to respond to that."

I think his approval would be 80%+ easy. GWB was at 90% after Sept 11. I'm not sure that is a valid comparison, but he jumped 40 points from before the 11th.

But as you see below, the bumps do not last long.

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 9:10 am
If he did that, then CNN, MSNBC, etc., would say "He has no response to that, which means he agrees with it. Impeach!"

Sure, but that's pretty boring, forgettable news vs. things like "Trump lashes out at the governor of Michigan."

Smith1776 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:47 pm We now have 2 senile dudes bordering on dementia competing for the presidency. Both which have been accused of sexual impropriety.

Trump doesn't show ANY signs of senility, that motherfucker is sharp. I wasn't sure at first whether you were referring to Sanders and Biden, but Sanders doesn't seem senile either. Biden seems nearly non-functional.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:43 pm

Smith1776 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:47 pm We now have 2 senile dudes bordering on dementia competing for the presidency. Both which have been accused of sexual impropriety.

Trump doesn't show ANY signs of senility, that motherfucker is sharp. I wasn't sure at first whether you were referring to Sanders and Biden, but Sanders doesn't seem senile either. Biden seems nearly non-functional.

He is much sharper than Biden seems to be. Something we can definitely agree on.

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:43 pm

Smith1776 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:47 pm We now have 2 senile dudes bordering on dementia competing for the presidency. Both which have been accused of sexual impropriety.

Trump doesn't show ANY signs of senility, that motherfucker is sharp. I wasn't sure at first whether you were referring to Sanders and Biden, but Sanders doesn't seem senile either. Biden seems nearly non-functional.

He must be talking about Canadian politics.

Darn, I didn’t want to push this to the next page. I was enjoying all the gold coins (tech’s avatar over and over).

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:56 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 7:24 pm ...
You are missing the point
...
But to some of us EVERY DAY Trump has at least one of those incidents, if not more. Therefore he deserves this media attention in the same way that Bill did for his incident.
<snip>

I used to think so, too, but (A) They really don’t give him credit when his policies are working.
(B) It is not often that you see articles showing that Obama killed and deported with the same gusto as Trump. The articles are out there, but barely. It helps that people point you to them.
(C.) A lot of these “events” are non-events, and just Trump mouthing off.
(D) Some of the most terrible allegations, e.g. firing the pandemic expert staff months ago turn out to be false, or at least possibly false. I read about it in the Washington Post, I see guests on TV repeating it, I firmly believe it. And then I see a an article refuting this by someone who was there, pointed out by Tyler.

But I don’t have Tyler working on this all the time, and most people don’t have a Tyler. I don’t know what to believe anymore, and not because of right-wing propaganda. I don’t watch Fox. No, it’s because of the left’s incessant onslaught. I guess I need to read more from different conservative news sources but Jesus, I’m tired.

Below is a better explanation of how he is NOT getting what he deserves and how the media has been too soft on him and continues to be too soft on him (for what he deserves)…….

The NY Times takes hands-off journalism to a laughable new level with Trump’s testing headline

https://www.mediamatters.org/new-york-t ... g-headline

"you surrender to the he-said-she-said variety of reporting, every time"

"Do your job. We are facing one of the greatest challenges in American history, largely due to political failures of the current Administration. Dig. Find out what is happening, the roots of the failures. Name names. You have the resources of one of [the] biggest papers in the US. Stop the transcription of press conferences, calls as the news in and of itself. Go deeper. Explain how current American politics led to this epidemiological and economic calamity, and how our leaders are or are not rising to the challenge. You may lose your access to certain prized sources inside the White House, the invitations to the best parties in DC, but you'll gain the respect of your readers and rescue your reputations from the disdain of history."

"The Times needs to make itself more receptive to criticism; it can start by putting a stop to the endless coddling of this administration."

"Endless coddling"! Polar opposite of "unrelenting media attacks"!

Vinny

She’s nuts. The Times is the equivalent of a shotgun in his face 24/7, and she’s unhappy that a few stray bits missed him. I think readers have gotten the picture by now, bel- (i wanted to say “believe me”, but then i would sound like the person I’m defending, haha).

The first two journalists she cites are Mehdi Hasan and Soledad O’Brien. They have pretty dismal reputations themselves, and well -earned. No, the NYT is not soft on Trump. Not in the universe I’m living in.

About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

Major retailers have opened only 5 drive-thru testing locations, none available to the general public

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/politics ... index.html

Trump Just Admitted to Downplaying the Seriousness of the Coronavirus Threat

The president says he decided to be a "cheerleader for the country," although he knew the situation "could be horrible."


https://www.menshealth.com/health/a3200 ... ce=twitter

Former Obama official: Trump needs to take a ‘military operations approach’ to the coronavirus pandemic

https://www.marketwatch.com/discover?ur ... amp_social

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

Now do Communist China Xi Jinping, Were they prepared?

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:56 am Trump Just Admitted to Downplaying the Seriousness of the Coronavirus Threat

The president says he decided to be a "cheerleader for the country," although he knew the situation "could be horrible."


https://www.menshealth.com/health/a3200 ... ce=twitter

Dude. Would you do me favor and listen to the the Presidents Press Conference and not post what Someone ELSE thinks or Interprets?
I saw that part of the speech and let's just say you would of had to be there.
So when information comes to you 2nd or 3rd hand does it mean what it says?

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:29 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

Point one - it is impossible to predict disasters with much accuracy - in the case of Hiroshima a brand new weapon. Like trying to predict exactly (e.g. in time to evacuate people) when the Yellowstone caldera is going to blow again. Meanwhile, the tourists keep on flocking there. I'm sure though, if it blows in July, it will be Trump's fault (pun intended).

Point two - the election is not going to be held next week - that's my prediction.

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:46 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:29 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

Point one - it is impossible to predict disasters with much accuracy - in the case of Hiroshima a brand new weapon. Like trying to predict exactly (e.g. in time to evacuate people) when the Yellowstone caldera is going to blow again. Meanwhile, the tourists keep on flocking there. I'm sure though, if it blows in July, it will be Trump's fault (pun intended).

Point two - the election is not going to be held next week - that's my prediction.

However, to stay on your analogy Nagasaki was 100% predictable. How many out of 10 Japanese would have said he was not prepared when he could have 100% prevented it?

Trump kept downplaying the seriousness of what this has turned out to be. Think that had no affect on the poor behavior of others?

I'll spare you here my other thoughts on what more he could reasonably been expected to do but which chose to not do.

Vinny

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:54 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:46 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:29 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

Point one - it is impossible to predict disasters with much accuracy - in the case of Hiroshima a brand new weapon. Like trying to predict exactly (e.g. in time to evacuate people) when the Yellowstone caldera is going to blow again. Meanwhile, the tourists keep on flocking there. I'm sure though, if it blows in July, it will be Trump's fault (pun intended).

Point two - the election is not going to be held next week - that's my prediction.

However, to stay on your analogy Nagasaki was 100% predictable. How many out of 10 Japanese would have said he was not prepared when he could have 100% prevented it?

Trump kept downplaying the seriousness of what this has turned out to be. Think that had no affect on the poor behavior of others?

I'll spare you here my other thoughts on what more he could reasonably been expected to do but which chose to not do.

Vinny

Trump on Feb. 26: "This is a flu. This is like a flu” ... It's a little like the regular flu that we have flu shots for. And we'll essentially have a flu shot for this in a fairly quick manner." Trump on March 15: “It’s something we have tremendous control of"

Vinny

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:54 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:46 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:29 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

Point one - it is impossible to predict disasters with much accuracy - in the case of Hiroshima a brand new weapon. Like trying to predict exactly (e.g. in time to evacuate people) when the Yellowstone caldera is going to blow again. Meanwhile, the tourists keep on flocking there. I'm sure though, if it blows in July, it will be Trump's fault (pun intended).

Point two - the election is not going to be held next week - that's my prediction.

However, to stay on your analogy Nagasaki was 100% predictable. How many out of 10 Japanese would have said he was not prepared when he could have 100% prevented it?

Trump kept downplaying the seriousness of what this has turned out to be. Think that had no affect on the poor behavior of others?

I'll spare you here my other thoughts on what more he could reasonably been expected to do but which chose to not do.

Vinny

Perhaps Nagasaki was reasonably predictible, perhaps not (this is my view especially if you apply the adjective reasonably to the noun predictable).... it was only a couple days later. I seriously doubt they could have evacuated every city in Japan just because they thought another atomic bomb were coming somewhere. I expect they also could have reasonably predicted Tokyo was a target but they still lost more people in the fire bombing than at Hiroshima (I think). I think when one views events like a horse through blinders, one will miss a lot of the unseen events that can totally change the overall scene. Leaves? Trees? Forrest? Some never see they are in a forrest. Some do, but only with 20-20 hindsight.

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:03 pmPerhaps Nagasaki was reasonably predictible, perhaps not (this is my view especially if you apply the adjective reasonably to the noun predictable).... it was only a couple days later. I seriously doubt they could have evacuated every city in Japan just because they thought another atomic bomb were coming somewhere. I expect they also could have reasonably predicted Tokyo was a target but they still lost more people in the fire bombing than at Hiroshima (I think). I think when one views events like a horse through blinders, one will miss a lot of the unseen events that can totally change the overall scene. Leaves? Trees? Forrest? Some never see they are in a forrest. Some do, but only with 20-20 hindsight.

He could have surrendered after the first one instead of waiting for a second.

It's actually a good thing for us he surrendered after two, because (IIRC) that's all we had.

A White House report blows up Trump’s latest coronavirus defense

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... s-defense/

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:03 pm

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:54 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:46 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:29 am

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 11:06 am

yankees60 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 10:34 am About 6 in 10 voters think Trump was not prepared for coronavirus outbreak, poll finds


https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101764002/

That's kind of like saying after the fact that poll finds 6 in 10 Japanese say Hirohito was not prepared for the atomic bomb.

I think you need to further explain your analogy for me to understand it. As far I know just the fact that Japan had an Emperor means that they were a closed, non-participatory country. We, on the other hand, are a democratic republic with information free flowing.

Next question for you....Of those 6 (in 10) what is your guess as to the range (low to high percent) who, if the election was held next week, would be voting for Trump?

Vinny

Point one - it is impossible to predict disasters with much accuracy - in the case of Hiroshima a brand new weapon. Like trying to predict exactly (e.g. in time to evacuate people) when the Yellowstone caldera is going to blow again. Meanwhile, the tourists keep on flocking there. I'm sure though, if it blows in July, it will be Trump's fault (pun intended).

Point two - the election is not going to be held next week - that's my prediction.

However, to stay on your analogy Nagasaki was 100% predictable. How many out of 10 Japanese would have said he was not prepared when he could have 100% prevented it?

Trump kept downplaying the seriousness of what this has turned out to be. Think that had no affect on the poor behavior of others?

I'll spare you here my other thoughts on what more he could reasonably been expected to do but which chose to not do.

Vinny

Perhaps Nagasaki was reasonably predictible, perhaps not (this is my view especially if you apply the adjective reasonably to the noun predictable).... it was only a couple days later. I seriously doubt they could have evacuated every city in Japan just because they thought another atomic bomb were coming somewhere. I expect they also could have reasonably predicted Tokyo was a target but they still lost more people in the fire bombing than at Hiroshima (I think). I think when one views events like a horse through blinders, one will miss a lot of the unseen events that can totally change the overall scene. Leaves? Trees? Forrest? Some never see they are in a forrest. Some do, but only with 20-20 hindsight.

All you say is reasonable. However, isn't it reasonable to also assume that after the first atomic bomb that the Emperor could have decided enough is enough? Thought that If the Americans had that one, how many others do they have? How can I continue to allow such destruction to occur in my beloved country?

The point was not evacuating. The point was unconditional surrendering.

Vinny

Xan wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:06 pm

Mountaineer wrote: ↑Wed Apr 01, 2020 12:03 pmPerhaps Nagasaki was reasonably predictible, perhaps not (this is my view especially if you apply the adjective reasonably to the noun predictable).... it was only a couple days later. I seriously doubt they could have evacuated every city in Japan just because they thought another atomic bomb were coming somewhere. I expect they also could have reasonably predicted Tokyo was a target but they still lost more people in the fire bombing than at Hiroshima (I think). I think when one views events like a horse through blinders, one will miss a lot of the unseen events that can totally change the overall scene. Leaves? Trees? Forrest? Some never see they are in a forrest. Some do, but only with 20-20 hindsight.

He could have surrendered after the first one instead of waiting for a second.

It's actually a good thing for us he surrendered after two, because (IIRC) that's all we had.

And, it's good for us (and the rest of the world) those were those only two that have ever been used in any war.

We are now 75 years later. Certainly not the case for any other weapon ever invented, some of which had the name of "peacemaker" due to the human destruction they caused and the thought the threat of their use would prevent wars.

Vinny