Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Goukosan

Official Politics Thread.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Saucer said:

 

Again what's mind blowing is that you retards can't immediately logic out why self-selection bias screws up the sampling. :cruise:

 

1. The Morning Consult survey  is in no way countered by any of your posts thus far. You are purely juggling with this one and trying your hardest to ignore it. Using the SAME methodology, they were extremely accurate for 2016, as we saw in final results. Meaning there is zero reason to suggest they are now suddenly invalid unless you can directly PROVE it with their name specifically mentioned.

 

Data on this Poll:

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/161201_topline_Brands_fakenews_genpop_v1_TB.pdf

https://morningconsult.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/161201_crosstabs_Brands_fakenews_genpop_v1_TB-1.pdf

 

Credibility of the vendor:

http://www.businessinsider.com/morning-consult-election-polls-2016-11/

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/politico-morning-consult-poll-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-230818 (1 point off)

 

 

2. As for the RJI poll. You just googled self selection bias and copy and pasted the first few links of data. In no way do any of those links state how much error this gave way to the specific methodology of the RJI study. Nor is the RJI survey mentioned. Using those links, you THINK RJI is incorrect.  None of those sources link takes into account the specific weighting process used by RJI. Verdict: Arm Chair Theory.

 

Your dismissal of these 2 survey's is simply subjective, and far too loose.  I will continue to post all 3 sources facts proving my claim. I'm sure you already googled the credibility of these 2 sources, and as it came up with nothing you then switched gears to loose theory. 

 

https://morningconsult.com/2016/12/07/poll-majority-find-major-media-outlets-credible/

https://www.rjionline.org/reporthtml.html#fnref1

http://www.journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/table/trust/


Breitbart is not a trusted source. No citation has been given showing otherwise.

 

 

If you can find direct citation showing the above links are wrong, feel free to post it. The best would be a link with Breitbart having higher trust than the news sources I listed.  It would be good counter citation.

 

Until such sourcing is provided, I consider this "debate" won through the non refuted data in the 3 links above. But this is you just trying to get the last post in a debate you objectively lost a few pages back,

 

4 hours ago, Saucer said:

I'm sure that Brietbart isn't as trusted

 

Your Concession was noted on page #84. Unless this was a joke post, which I'm sure you will now claim. You can stop giving a show for the 2-3 far right extremists on this site.

Edited by Substatic
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Substatic said:

 

 

Breitbart is not a trusted source. No citation has been given showing otherwise.

 

 

If you can find direct citation showing the above links are wrong, feel free to post it. The best would be a link with Breitbart having higher trust than the news sources I listed.  It would be good counter citation.

 

Until such sourcing is provided, I consider this "debate" won through the non refuted data in the 3 links above.

 

 

"Nah brah...........google it!"

 

-Saucer

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So using the same exact methodology, Morning Consult was off by +0.8 points from actual results  in the 2016 GE. As an "expert" on polls I shouldn't have to tell you how incredible this is, Saucey.

 

There is absolutely no reason to suggest this poll is invalid sourcing unless you can find direct data (namedrops) showing that poll is invalid. 

 

Edited by Substatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy FUCK this story is nuts. I totally support ICE when it comes to drug dealers and violent criminals. But what the fuck is it with them and deporting community loved family men recently?

 

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article199691564.html

While to plane to Hawaii, Kansas chemist Syed Jamal granted new stay of removal

 

 

Edited by Substatic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Substatic said:

Holy FUCK this story is nuts. I totally support ICE when it comes to drug dealers and violent criminals. But what the fuck is it with them and deporting community loved family men recently?

 

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article199691564.html

 

Here's a hint: guess the color of his skin before you click the link.  Did you get it right?  I did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Substatic said:

Yeah I read that and laughed. He pretends to be some pseudo-intellectual then types some stupid tribal retard shit like that.  And I thought it was bad enough that he can't back up any of his claims for the last 2 pages.

"guiz, I think he's doing literally everything wrong from a policy standpoint.  But Iike him because liberals are angry that he's doing literally everything wrong from a policy standpoint!"

 

This is like championing a captain who is purposely running into an iceberg because it makes the rest of the crew angry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeeeaaaahhhh, what they're describing there isn't the government handing out food.  It's privatization of food stamps.  They'll give the contract to Aramark or some other shitty-assed food company.  They're trying to find a way to do away with welfare completely without having to admit they're taking poor peopoles' food away.

 

Just limit food stamps to food.  No alcohol or tobacco.  That's much easier and achieves essentially the same effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, McWickedSmawt85 said:

Yeeeaaaahhhh, what they're describing there isn't the government handing out food.  It's privatization of food stamps.  They'll give the contract to Aramark or some other shitty-assed food company.  They're trying to find a way to do away with welfare completely without having to admit they're taking poor peopoles' food away.

 

Just limit food stamps to food.  No alcohol or tobacco.  That's much easier and achieves essentially the same effect.

They're not taking any food away though. :wonder:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ghostz said:

So - Trump admin wants to replace a portion of welfare with food. Let's see how the dems spin this into being evil, although this should have happened a long time ago if it's cost effective.

 

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/02/13/blue-apron-for-food-stamps/

 

Why would it be cost effective? There's a lot of overhead being introduced and food is already purchased on a large scale by grocery stores and sold for razor thin margins. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ghostz said:

So - Trump admin wants to replace a portion of welfare with food. Let's see how the dems spin this into being evil, although this should have happened a long time ago if it's cost effective.

 

http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2018/02/13/blue-apron-for-food-stamps/

In other words..........he wants that budget that goes into the food program to not go to people to spend on what food they want, but rather give that money to a CONTRACTOR so that they can sell prepackaged shit.

 

A republican channeling tax money into government contracts to private companies. Yeah............that's going to require alot of spin from Democrats.

 

School Vouchers.........divert public money that would go towards road construction into establishing a toll road . Taking Medicare and turning it into a voucher program.

 

Republicans have never met a single government program in which they didn't want to funnel the money through government contracts to private companies or "vouchers" to private companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jehurey said:

In other words..........he wants that budget that goes into the food program to not go to people to spend on what food they want, but rather give that money to a CONTRACTOR so that they can sell prepackaged shit.

 

A republican channeling tax money into government contracts to private companies. Yeah............that's going to require alot of spin from Democrats.

 

School Vouchers.........divert public money that would go towards road construction into establishing a toll road . Taking Medicare and turning it into a voucher program.

 

Republicans have never met a single government program in which they didn't want to funnel the money through government contracts to private companies or "vouchers" to private companies.

Don't forget private prisons.

 

1 hour ago, ghostz said:

They're not taking any food away though. :wonder:

What are you talking about?  I didn't say they were taking food away, I said they're looking to privatize welfare.  I.E. instead of giving food stamps to people in need, they'll give money to some private corporation and just assume everything will be peaches and cream.  It won't, though.  A private corporation won't care to service anyone outside of the minimum it needs to to turn a profit.

 

Welfare is basically the government paying impoverished families not to commit crimes of desperation.  So if this happens, expect the crime rate to go up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Hot Sauce said:

 

Why would it be cost effective? There's a lot of overhead being introduced and food is already purchased on a large scale by grocery stores and sold for razor thin margins. 

according to the link it would say 100+ billion over the next 10 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, McWickedSmawt85 said:

Don't forget private prisons.

 

What are you talking about?  I didn't say they were taking food away, I said they're looking to privatize welfare.  I.E. instead of giving food stamps to people in need, they'll give money to some private corporation and just assume everything will be peaches and cream.  It won't, though.  A private corporation won't care to service anyone outside of the minimum it needs to to turn a profit.

 

Welfare is basically the government paying impoverished families not to commit crimes of desperation.  So if this happens, expect the crime rate to go up.

"They're trying to find a way to do away with welfare completely without having to admit they're taking poor peopoles' food away."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ghostz said:

"They're trying to find a way to do away with welfare completely without having to admit they're taking poor peopoles' food away."

Because if you take the welfare away, poor people end up with less food.  They're not directly taking food away, they're taking away the thing that poor people use to purchase food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, McWickedSmawt85 said:

Because if you take the welfare away, poor people end up with less food.  They're not directly taking food away, they're taking away the thing that poor people use to purchase food.

but they're not reducing the amount of $ given

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ghostz said:

but they're not reducing the amount of $ given

 

Uhh...yeah they are:

 

Quote

That’s how Budget Director Mick Mulvaney described the Trump administration’s proposal to replace nearly half of poor Americans’ monthly cash benefits with a box of food. It would affect households that receive at least $90 a month in food stamps, or roughly 38 million people.

It's in the first paragraph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McWickedSmawt85 said:

 

Uhh...yeah they are:

 

It's in the first paragraph.

do you know what the word replace means

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

    Chatbox

    You don't have permission to chat.
    Load More
×