Accusing people of virtue signalling is a fun bit of pyschology- the entire idea is that when people say something nice, they don't mean it, they're only saying it to make other people [i]think[/i] they're nice. It can't be motivated by actually being nice, or saying what you genuinely think, everything is a ruse.
Obviously to think that's true, you have to be a sociopath.
But that's OK, because most people who say it now don't think it's true, in fact often they don't really understand what it meant at all. Today, it's like "do-gooder" on steroids- a brute force attempt to turn any sort of commendable thought or behavior no matter how small, into a sin.
Give 20p to a homeless person? Virtue signalling. Criticise a racist? Virtue signalling. Not being an arsehole in any way is now virtue signalling.
Why would you do that? Why would you have an insult in your vocabulary just to use on people who aren't arseholes? There's a few reasons I can see, and not one of them is anything I'd be able to admit to myself I did. I'd probably go and accuse people of virtue signalling instead, to make myself feel better.
So it's like "snowflake"- a term that's become almost devoid of real meaning when used, but which has gained a whole new use as a diagnostic for people who say it.
[quote=Northwind ]So it's like "snowflake"- a term that's become almost devoid of real meaning when used, but which has gained a whole new use as a diagnostic for people who say it.
Shhh - don't give away the secret that us lefties* rely on the use of those terms as a means of telling who is an arse.
* I'm using the ninfan definition here of anybody who isn't as right wing as him - ie almost everybody
As a matter of interest, what happened to that whole "sorting North Korea out" thing?
Spot on Northwind, spot on.
Unfortunately, I feel your erudite description of the mocking tactic used by ninfan et al will go straight over his head..
The day they start forming their own opinions, I'll treat them as individuals.
Or do you mean the day they start agreeing with you?....
LOL at Northwind. An accurate summary.
Use of those terms is a very handy indicator of the users personality.
As a matter of interest, what happened to that whole "sorting North Korea out" thing?
He sent "an armada. Very powerful."
Yuge in fact. Bigly.
Except he didn't. That was just something he saw on Fox News.
And what is happening with the Wall ?
Sounds like an interesting week coming up:
Trumps tax plan being unveiled on wed - it'll be interesting to see which disproportionately benefit trumps businesses.
And I think they are due to start negotiating the budget, risking the (always entertaining) government shutdown. Sounds like the biggest controversy is the money that trump wants for his wall.
Interesting times.
Well, with the dropping of the bomb (a very big bomb, bigly huge bomb) meaning the plan to destroy ISIS is complete, I expect he can get on with the wall now.
Anyway it will be beautiful. A bit like that chocolate cake.
Sounds like the biggest controversy is the money that trump wants for his wall.
butbutbut isn't Mexico paying for the wall? or hedge, or whatever it turns out to be
Jeez Ninfan, when chewy is yet best threadbuddy, it's mibbe time reassess....
Hmm, turns out Trump tweeting on Earth Day didn't go so well for him:
[url= http://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/855859245023211520 ]DT-say-Earth-is-beautiful[/url]
What a two faced twonk........
Angela Merkel reportedly had to explain the 'fundamentals' of EU trade to Trump 11 times
http://uk.businessinsider.com/trump-trade-merkel-germany-eu-2017-4
[quote=maxtorque ]Hmm, turns out Trump tweeting on Earth Day didn't go so well for him:
DT-say-Earth-is-beautiful
What a two faced twonk........
Lots of erudite replies on there, but my favourite is this brief somethingion:
https://twitter.com/joepabike/status/855859747727323138
GrahamS - MemberExcept he didn't. That was just something he saw on Fox News.
Trump fatigue's a sad thing tbh- this should be the stuff of legend, instead we're all just "meh". What a waste.
I think a competent Trump, one who actually managed to enact every horrible policy idea he has, would be terrible. It's becoming increasingly clear that here's a neutered moron in the hotseat. Just keep him away from the [url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/trump-has-already-pressed-fake-nuclear-button-cia-gave-him-over-a-dozen-times-20170126120990 ]real red button[/url].
I'd imagine they've given him the garage door remote and told him it's the red button.
So long as they get Fox to report the "nuclear strike" he'd never know
So long as they get Fox to report the "nuclear strike" he'd never know
A transcript of an Oval Office interview Friday with President Donald Trump by AP White House Correspondent Julie Pace. Where the audio recording of the interview is unclear, ellipses or a notation that the recording was unintelligible are used.
https://apnews.com/c810d7de280a47e88848b0ac74690c83
Classic Trump waffle or he's in early stage Dementia
"TRUMP: And the media, some of them get it, in all fairness. But you know some of them either don't get it, in which case they're very stupid people, or they just don't want to say it. You know because of a couple of them said, "He didn't call them a currency manipulator." Well, for two reasons. Number One, he's not, since my time. You know, very specific formula. You would think it's like generalities, it's not. They have — they've actually — their currency's gone up. So it's a very, very specific formula. And I said, "How badly have they been," ... they said, "Since you got to office they have not manipulated their currency." That's Number One, but much more important, they are working with us on North Korea. Now maybe that'll work out or maybe it won't. Can you imagine? ..."
From same transcript:
AP: Can I ask you, over your first 100 days — you're not quite there yet — how do you feel like the office has changed you?DRUMPF: Well the one thing I would say — and I say this to people — I never realized how big it was. Everything's so (unintelligible) like, you know the orders are so massive. I was talking to —
Who knew running the US could be such a big job? 🙂
you're not quite there yet
Excellent summary of Trump 😀
[url= http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/obamas-barrage-of-complete-sentences-seen-as-brutal-attack-on-trump?mbid=social_twitter ]Obama’s Barrage of Complete Sentences Seen as Brutal Attack on Trump[/url]
Getting a bit real over north k.
I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:
North Korea nuclear: White House calls Senate to briefing - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39694640
Im liking MTVs work
And Trump reportedly doesn’t use email, for which his staff and children must be grateful — can you imagine what kind of Snopes-baiting wastelands of “fwd:fwd:fwd” chain emails and nutritional supplement spam their inboxes would be otherwise?
but a good article, doesnt quite diagnose him with NPD, tho
http://www.mtv.com/news/2991623/trumps-me-me-media/
Goto BBC iPlayer to watch Jeremy Paxman on Panorama - Trump's First 100 Days.
😆
Trumps first 100 days on Panorama BBC1 now, not holding out much hope for it changing my mind regarding him and those who voted for him
There is no need to change others' minds if the people who have voted for President Trump continues to vote for him. 😆somafunk - Member
Trumps first 100 days on Panorama BBC1 now, not holding out much hope for it changing my mind regarding him and those who voted for him
The core might, the interviews where they believe being shat upon is for the good of the nation might continue for a bit but when he fails to deliver a wall or jobs they will turn fast. Note no plans for jobs yet just monster tax cuts coming and possibly his own party forcing a government shut down.
Special times.
mikewsmith - Member
The core might, ....
There is always hope ... after 8 years. 😆
Approval rating at record lows and some core voters already annoyed that he has bailed on repealing Obamacare, Chinese currency manipulation, and prosecuting Clinton, all while spending more time on the golf course than he criticised Obama for.
How he handles the spending bill will be interesting.
Approval rating at record lows
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_apr24
At 51%, up from a low of around 41% a few weeks ago. That's not a record low, it's rising.
Gallup polls have have him at 40% and another site which takes an average of all the polls has him on 41.8%. so record low would be an accurate description.
Rasmussen is a bit of an outlier. Other polls still have him around the 41% mark at the moment.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
That's not a record low, it's rising.
No that is being incredibly selective of your evidence to support your view points Sean.
Rasmussen polls registered voters. Gallup polls people of voting age, so interesting, but ultimately not as useful.
No that is being incredibly selective of your evidence to support your view points Sean.
Very droll. My name isn't Sean though. I guess that's just some more #fakenews.
It's the only poll that goes higher of a wide selection I believe, if you have a look at the 538 link you will see by how much and how strange it would be to pick that one and ignore all the rest unless you wanted something to support what all the others didn't show. Sean just being a name that reminds me of somebody who would cherry pick evidence
Sean just being a name that reminds me of somebody who would cherry pick evidence
FFS mike, you're just trying to spice up your argument there.
Well played DD and the hour is still so early.
remember that most polls also predicted he would lose. Only the 'outliers' got it right. We are in danger of only seeing what we want toRasmussen is a bit of an outlier
Few things
At 51%, up from a low of around 41% a few weeks ago. That's not a record low, it's rising.
The lowest on the chart I'm seeing is 42% a month ago, Rasmussen appears to also be consistently higher than most others and the general trend. The averages have him up from 39.8 to 41.8, not really a trend overall. The advantage of multiple is it helps with the extremes.
Also check out the bias levels/confidence in different polls methods and objectives
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/
remember that most polls also predicted he would lose. Only the 'outliers' got it right. We are in danger of only seeing what we want to
Different questions though. the 538 analysis was actually 75/25% to Clinton, in a 2 horse race that is still very close, the impact of the late FBI stuff did move people at the end.
Also he lost the popular vote ie less people actually voted for him which the polls did reflect, in the end it was down to about 300k votes across 3-4 states so that is certainly in the margin of error.
If you look at the overall picture his support or who voted red was less than 50% of voters. A significant number will have voted for party not him so they can easily come out of the approval. Add in his failures so far in terms of policy and delivery and the numbers are actually very believable. Numbers over 50% seem very unlikely given the record so far.
Hmmm, I'm pretty sure those 538 charlatans predicted a Clinton win, and yet here we are with Trump as President.
[s]Also he lost the popular vote ie less people actually voted for him which the polls did reflect, in the end it was down to about 300k votes across 3-4 states so that is certainly in the margin of error.[/s]Blah blah blah Called it wrong
Add in his failures so far in terms of policy
Failures? Strong stock market since his election, Chinese currency has strengthened, and the Chinese are once again engaged with the North Korean problem. And started looking at the vexed question of offshoring, completely ignored by Obama.
Blah blah blah Called it wrong
Yep, you can't be bothered to read the methodology and the principles behind the analysis. Sums up your stats analysis there. Read some if it you might learn something
Failures:
Repeal Obamacare on day 1
Build a wall
Fix ISIS
Muslim Ban can't even pass a watered down version
Upcoming tax and spending issues.
Just read the AP transcript
Yep, you can't be bothered to read the methodology and the principles behind the analysis. Sums up your stats analysis there. Read some if it you might learn something
I've read it, but heh, if you want to play the man rather than the ball, then go right ahead.
What do you think of their weighting and aggregation? They forecast a clinton win but not at 100%, he always said it was possible for Trump to win, there were some errors but at least he never picked the highest approval rating of them all to try and prove something.
What do you think of their weighting and aggregation?
Well, reading that 538 background detail makes me suspect that...they know only slightly more about statistics than I do.
I think I know enough to know that I shouldn't be trusted with stats; I suspect they've reached the level of a little knowledge being dangerous thing.
.they know only slightly more about statistics than I do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Silver
Your background?
I spend enough time looking at stats to follow but these guys know what they are doing more than most.
remember that most polls also predicted he would lose
Makes sense really. Clinton took 2.1% more of the "popular vote" (around 3 million votes) so if you polled a random selection of voters nationally then it would look like she was most likely to win.
I don't think any of the mainstream polls called it with absolute certaintity - the main trouble is that people are generally not very good with stats!
they know only slightly more about statistics than I do.
Would you accept that Gallup know a [i]bit[/i] about stats and polling?
They currently have him at 40% approval (3% error margin) on their daily poll:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/201617/gallup-daily-trump-job-approval.aspx
Cherry picking is what Trump stands for. Here is what Elijah Cummings said about him.
I have said repeatedly that he could be a great president if … if … he takes steps to truly represent all Americans rather than continuing on the divisive and harmful path he is currently on
And here is what Trump heard.
Well he said, you’ll be the greatest president in the history of, but you know what, I’ll take that also, but that you could be.
Slight difference and also incoherent.
So what do we think is going to happen with North Korea?
Backing the NC's into a corner would be rather stupid, so he's probably going to do that. Lets face it, it's taken the USA some 40 years to try to forget their last painful, expensive and derisive war in Indochina...
So what do we think is going to happen with North Korea?
Provoke them into the first move and then drop lots of bigly bombs on them.
GrahamS - MemberApproval rating at record lows
...
...
...
GrahamS - MemberWould you accept that Gallup know a bit about stats and polling?
Well, wouldn't you know it. That link takes you to a graph showing Trump's approval rating going up.
i.e. [b]not[/b] at "record lows".
Sigh.
His polls are at record lows for a new president, even when they are 5% above his lowest ever they are still record lows for a new president. Lifting your game to 40 isn't an achievement it just means he hasn't screwed up at the higher end (of what is now an open ended scale) but don't worry he has a spending request and tax plan to drop. That should kick him down a bit more. Or maybe somebody will testify about something Russian.
well not going up, back down to 40 after reaching 42 last week (dropping a really big bomb on some caves is a ratings winner)
his lowest was 35 a month ago his highest was 45% just after inauguration
Trump has the lowest ever for a presidents 1st 100 days though, so hes certainly got that record in the bag , bigly!
Hes the most unpopular president so far
Are we all waiting for the Lock Him Up chants here?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/us/politics/michael-flynn-white-house-documents-russia.html?_r=0
He has been a naughty boy and probably done something illegal, needs to be prosecuted 😉
Then the country kicks back again
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/us/judge-blocks-trump-sanctuary-cities.html
A climb down from the non existent wall followed
Three days before the deadline to avert a government shutdown, congressional leaders were negotiating a spending proposal on Tuesday that would supply no money for President Trump’s promised border wall with Mexico but would increase funding for White House priorities like the military and other types of border security.Lawmakers in both parties expressed confidence that a deal could be reached before the lights go out, a prediction that seemed safer as Mr. Trump backed off his demand that the border wall receive funding in this measure.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/25/us/politics/federal-budget-shutdown-congress.html
and still spending needs work.
Who would have thought this was quite so complicated. Imagine if you thought it was going to be just people doing whatever you said and then selling off the bankrupt bits.
I watched the BBC panorama (or was it newsround?) Trump program.
It reminded me of the classic Ferrero Rocher Advert... and the debate about whether that was terrible-on-purpose (and therefore genius), or just plain terrible.
Trump does somewhat remind me of a Ferrero Rocher.
Trump does somewhat remind me of a Ferrero Rocher.
Chopped nuts dipped in cheap chocolate, disguised by a shiny wrapper?
Making promises that they can't deliver on?
Inexplicably popular.
Inexplicably popular.
But not as popular as some might think.
Surveys showed that 106% of people buying Ferrero Rocher were buying Ferrero Rocher.
Tariffs slapped on Canadian timber and Dairy imports. Wonder how he will react if Canada reciprocates.
I think the problem is he's taking all the knowledge he's learned from ruining businesses and applied it to ruining the county.
Meanwhile:
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39708768 ]Trump backs down on border wall funding.[/url]
Which is a shame as it was going to be beautiful.
On Radio4 just now they were saying that landowners have started receiving letters demanding they sell their land to the government for the wall.
They also said that Trump had backed down on the border wall funding....
On Radio4 just now they were saying that landowners have started receiving letters demanding they sell their land to the government for the wall.They also said that Trump had backed down on the border wall funding....
sending out IOUs in the name of the mexican government 😉
its not so much that he has backed down as they simply refused to fund it so he had to give in,
Sure he will talk it up but , as he has shown already, he struggles to take the party with him and the Democrats will always vote against him
I think he failed to realise he needs to work with people rather than just bully them as he did in business
i think he is slowly discovering he lacks this skill set and he cannot build bridges and until he can he cannot build his wall either.
He absolutely hasn't "backed down" as that BBC News story says:
The president tweeted this morning: "Don't let the fake media tell you that I have changed my position on the WALL. It will get built and help stop drugs, human trafficking etc."
He'll be all over Twitter explain why the whining liberal snowflakes and MSM are trying to prevent him doing the right thing.
He won't take any blame on this: if it is blocked and voted down he can point at a "corrupt" system. It's probably worse for him if it goes ahead!
The only interesting aspect is that some Republicans are publicly against it too - especially those with a large number of Hispanic voters. Or those who think the estimated $21.6bn is a bit more than the $12bn he promised, especially with US citizens, not Mexico, footing the bill.
20bn, pah
the estimated maintenance costs, infrastructure (roads to get the machines there etc) are where its at
whoever gets those contracts will be laughing, I imagine theres a fair few construction magnates eyeing up $200,000 memberships at mar-a-lago asa worthy investment
That projection does not include land-acquisition costs, though the report notes that costs increase when the federal government has had to go to court. (In one case noted in the document, the government paid $4.7 million for a 3.1-acre parcel for which they initially offered $233,000.) The $66.9 billion figure also does not include the cost of border wall maintenance, which the Committee report estimates could be as high as $150 million a year.
slowoldman - MemberMeanwhile:
Trump backs down on border wall funding.
Which is a shame as it was going to be beautiful.
The Democrats sabotage the project what a shame indeed. 😆
Just need to try a different way ... 😛
Huge trump win - you guys think in goals, not systems, you dont analyse the consequences and therefore fail to recognise why Trump is ahead of the game.
If crime doesn't go down - congresses fault, they stopped me building the wall
Immigration up - congresses fault, they stopped me building the wall
Terrorist attack - congresses fault, they stopped me building the wall
Jobs - congresses fault, they stopped me building the wall
Etc.
Democrats sabotage the project
And there we go. Hook, line and sinker.
Just quietly ignore the Republicans that are against it eh?
what a shame indeed.
Indeed. Pesky democracy eh?
Never mind, I'm sure Trump will have a plan for that too.
failure is a huge trump gain...what irrefutable logic that there is surpassed only be chewkw blaming the minority opposition party for the failure to get it passed
Is there no one with a half decent, rather than half baked, suggestion from the al right trollers?
failure is a huge trump gain
I didn't say it was a huge Trump gain, I said it was a huge trump win
If you can't even be trusted to read and understand the first three words in a post, what hope is there that you will ever begin to comprehend and critically analyse the workings of the US political system?
..you guys think in goals, not systems, you dont analyse the consequences and therefore fail...
[i]*goes on to say exactly what I said but in many more words*[/i] 🙄
...If you can't even be trusted to read and understand the first three words in a post...
Set irony to maximum.
Jesus Ninfan you used to be quite good at this...are you not embarrassed by that [ at how rubbish it is not that you did it obvs]
D- see me after class
Trump once again fails to achieve one of his pledges, to be fair apart from his failure to carry out his promises, his unpopularity, his lining his own pockets through mar a lago, his security issues at mar a lago, his inability to understand international politics unless its explained to him repeatedly...etc etc...hes done not too bad. Still a bawbag though.
There's also the slight issue of how a wall would actually work if it got built.
Option 1: You have to build a wall that is physically un-crossable. This is very difficult and hence hugely expensive. I suspect you'd need something several feet thick of re-enforced concrete, and probably something like 30m (100 feet) tall. Anything smaller could be crosses with some ingenuity.
Option 2: You build a physically small wall, that could be crossed, but place suitable armed guards on it to prevent people crossing. No free lunches with this one. Yup, the wall is cheaper, but now you need to monitor ever length of wall, and put in place enough man power to do so. And realistically, are you going to shoot, in cold blood, people trying to cross the wall? How long do you think public support for cold blooded murder would last? And if you are not going to shoot people, then you need to catch then, and either lock them up (costly, difficult, and would require huge prisons to house them) or return them to there country (and next week they'll be back for another attempt.
In fact, assuming you have a higher IQ than a radish, it quite quickly becomes clear that a wall is not only morally bankrupt it's practically flawed as well.........