Merged Trump Fires Comey....

JPK said:
Good morning. As always, it's really impossible to tell what Trump means by this tweet. Is he implying Comey taped the conversation or that Trump taped the conversation.
Of course it really means anything Trump wants it to mean because he put the word "tapes" in quotes. Past experience shows that when he puts something in quotes it can mean anything that is convenient to him at the time.
Click to expand...

FTFY! :)
 
The Don said:
It would be funny but then the story according to the GOP and their press would "OBAMA-APPOINTED FORMER FBI DIRECTORY LEAKS ILLEGALLY RECORDED MATERIAL. TRUMP WAS RIGHT, OBAMA WAS TAPPING HIS PHONES !!!!!11!!!1!!"

...and the fact that Trump lied would pale by comparison and in any case "Trump Lies" is as surprising as "water is wet"
Click to expand...

Point of order: It's not illegal in D.C. They have a one-person's knowledge rule.
 
eeyore1954 said:
Also Trump should allow Comey to continue went from 38% to 58%.
Click to expand...

This is just a distraction: the fact remains that the firing of Comey had nothing to do with the Clinton e-mail issue, so pointing out that Democrats wanted him fired earlier for that reason when it was the actual reason has no bearing.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Point of order: It's not illegal in D.C. They have a one-person's knowledge rule.
Click to expand...

Very interesting...thanks

In which case the headline would be:


"OBAMA-APPOINTED FORMER FBI DIRECTORY LEAKS COVERTLY RECORDED MATERIAL. TRUMP WAS RIGHT, OBAMA WAS TAPPING HIS PHONES !!!!!11!!!1!!"
 
Newtons Bit said:
The number of democrats that went from not having an opinion to having one shot up. It's not quite the same thing, but it is very interesting.
Click to expand...
Quite right that it's not the same thing. One might think that Comey should be fired, but that Trump did so for nefarious reasons.
 
I went from the "tough to have an opinion on Comey" to "the firing was wrong."

I did so because prior to the firing Comey was the guy who rat-********** Hillary, but was also the guy investigating Trump. I wasn't pro-Comey, but the investigation was important.

If Trump had fired Comey at the same time he agreed to a special prosecutor, I probably would have approved (save for the fact that Trump gets to name his replacement, who would have been awful, as almost all of them are).

Firing him + giving obviously ******** reasons + then changing those reasons + it obviously being about Russia make me conclude that in this situation Comey should have been allowed to continue.

I don't see a justification for the radical switch on the Republican side. It's certainly fair to say things can change, but what did Republicans learn about Comey or the firing that justified the switch?
 
Argumemnon said:
That is so weird. What the hell do you think a poll means?

If I poll the population and find that 51% of them think the Penguins are going to win the Stanley Cup this year, and the Predators win instead, was the poll wrong? That's not how statistics work!
Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html?_r=0

Except it wasn't 51%. From the NY Times.
Hillary Clinton has an 85% chance to win.
Click to expand...

The Upshot’s elections model suggests that Hillary Clinton is favored to win the presidency, based on the latest state and national polls. A victory by Mr. Trump remains possible: Mrs. Clinton’s chance of losing is about the same as the probability that an N.F.L. kicker misses a 37-yard field goal.
Click to expand...

I see this also has a sports analogy.


No relevance whatsoever but it reminded me of when I was sitting in a Sports Book in Sparks Nevada and the preseason odds of the Rams winning the Super Bowl was around 300 to 1 and they went on to win it. With hindsight I should have bet $100,000 on that.
 
Last edited:
TraneWreck said:
I saw this on my facebook feed (liked by a former colleague):
Click to expand...

Mine had a graphic:

34613848615_c766ed76ba_z.jpg
 
TraneWreck said:
I don't see a justification for the radical switch on the Republican side. It's certainly fair to say things can change, but what did Republicans learn about Comey or the firing that justified the switch?
Click to expand...

There's a significant put an R beside it effect since Republicans are comically hyper-partisan.

37 percent of Democrats back Trump’s missile strikes. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats supported Obama’s plan. That is well within the margin of error.

How about Republicans? Well, that’s a wildly different picture:

In 2013, when Barack Obama was president, a Washington Post–ABC News poll found that only 22 percent of Republicans supported the U.S. launching missile strikes against Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against civilians.

A new Post-ABC poll finds that 86 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump’s decision to launch strikes on Syria for the same reason. Only 11 percent are opposed.
Click to expand...
 
Argumemnon said:
Talk about missing the point, and also not answering the question: at what point do you think a poll is "wrong" if the chandidate with the lesser chance actually wins?

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what those numbers mean.
Click to expand...

It reminds me of watching people play turn-based strategies like X-Com or Fallout. The game will tell you the chance-to-hit before you give the order to fire. You'd be amazed at how many people will miss a good shot and exclaim, "How did he miss? There was an 85% chance to hit!"
 
Argumemnon said:
How can a poll be wrong?
Click to expand...

The sample can produce different results than the population. That makes it wrong. Polls are usually wrong in this sense, but they are also usually less wrong than they were.

And how can odds be wrong?
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about odds.

If they predicted that Trump had a 30% chance of winning, for instance, would they be wrong if he won? Of course not. That makes no sense. It's like saying that there's a 1 in 6 chance of getting a 1 on a die roll and saying it's wrong to say that once the die actually rolls a 1.
Click to expand...

If you say that the odds are 1 in 7, then the odds are wrong. I make no claims about the applicability of that statement to these events, this is purely a note for pedantic purposes.
 
JPK said:
Good morning. As always, it's really impossible to tell what Trump means by this tweet. Is he implying Comey taped the conversation or that Trump taped the conversation.
Of course it really means anything Trump wants it to mean because he put the word "tapes" in quotes. Past experience shows that when he puts something in quotes it can mean anything that is convenient to him at the time.
Trump said:
James Comey better hope that there are no "tapes" of our conversations before he starts leaking to the press!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
(source)

So, just to clarify, The President of the United States is blackmailing Comey to keep his mouth shut about what he knows.

In writing.

In public.

The President of the United States.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom