The Donald Trump thread

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
There is NO WAY the mainstream media would allow someone like Joe Rogan to host a political debate, and it has NOTHING to do with Trump. Rogan is one of the most intellectually curious, fair minded, intelligent interviewers with a platform. He would ask intelligent questions, follow up when candidates gave misleading answers, zingers, or confusing political speech, and would cut through the bullshit. He will never ever be given an opportunity to ask probing questions to politicians. I learned more in his sit down interview with Bernie Sanders about Bernie and his beliefs than a did in a lifetime of hearing about Bernie in magazines, newspapers, and tv.

The most important thing to the media is controlling the narrative. Rogan would ask too many questions that the real media will never touch.
 

Cobra

Hummingbird
Gold Member
There are about 5000 pages in this thread discussing "opposing variables." Hardly anyone is avoiding them.

Some of the bullshit variables you mentioned are just that now: bullshit and largely irrelevant when looking at the big picture.

This election is the end of the line.
I've read a variety of your posts here. More negativity recently than before.

Look, dude, all I'm doing is asking questions and your "end of the line" theories don't answer a single one of them. I'm not claiming to know the answers. You are, and it's getting a bit old and crusty. That said, your behavior is symptomatic of a bigger issue with conservatives these days.

At least you caught on to my bashing of the "end of the line" narrative. I'm not happy with the state of affairs, either. I hear more of the "let's go to civil war" drivel than many examples or incidents of people driving actual change. The negativity brought in by some members has seeped over to the existing members. Now, everyone is a "civil war" expert. Some members have no conviction on their belief in Trump, but they are willing to go to Civil War?!?!

Remember when a whole lot of us believed in him. Even he couldn't destroy the deep state. Instead of understanding the limitations to this fully and moving forward, many guys just come up with the good ol' calling for "civil war.", A lot of guys that make these comments can't even pick up a weapon let alone know how to use it. If you can, great! I'm not talking about you.

This certainly sounds nice, but it may be wishful thinking. Why would all those factors suddenly kick in now, when they haven't kicked in anytime during the last 50 years?
Well, something sure as hell kicked in at the 2016 Election! Not the same factors but more suburban and rural support. So, why wouldn't different factors kick in at 2020? Lots of stuff people are sick and tired of. I mentioned them already in this thread. Boils down to Law & Order and Economy really.

Again, my original point was that these libtard articles will only cover a portion of the picture that favors the Democrat narrative. When you use that very narrative to further support your negative vibes for the election, you're just cannibalizing your own thoughts. Essentially feeling like he's going to lose and then finding liberal articles that support this theory, while simultaneously ignoring even questions that point in the other direction. Whatever subversion they are using would appear to be working. Not saying you HCE, just making a broader statement.
 

Tactician

Kingfisher
Gold Member
Re: Trump saying the climate will get cooler, we're supposed to be entering a Grand Solar Minimum which entails less activity from the Sun & cooler temperatures. You'll never hear about this in the MSM, besides the odd disparaging remarks.

I'm not an expert here, but my anecdote is that I've been taking a glance at Aurora strength every few days for 3+ years now & the strength this whole year has been pitiful. A few years ago, you'd occasionally see strengths of 5+. A strength of 7 makes for a visible Aurora just north of Vancouver or Ontario, as long as you're far from the city lights. This entire year has been a weak 2-3. https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/node/114

Regarding Trump's comment about Science not knowing, Komatiite wrote this excellent post from back in the day about the difficulty of modeling climate change: https://www.rooshvforum.com/threads/the-donald-trump-thread.23407/page-2054#post-748066

...
I just want to touch on something anecdotal for those who may read this that truly believe "The Science is Settled" because predictive models suggest things like Miami will be flooded out by rising sea levels in the next few years.

Many people espouse the ironclad credibility of 'climate models.' I have done a lot of work in petroleum reservoir simulation, which isn't exactly the best analogy for comparison to climate models, but it gives a good idea on how data can be manipulated in a model to fit a narrative. Basically, in order to predict the future value of an oil field, we will utilize predictive methods based on past history using production volumes, rock properties (porosity, permeability, fluid saturations), pressure and aquifer influence gleaned from the other wells drilled in the area. Say a production field was kicked off in 2005, and at the current time, we want to predict how much oil we will produce by 2025. Or you want to test the viability of drilling more wells. So we will fuck around with inputs using geostatistical methods such as Kriging and try to match the past decade of production with the software, and once we have a close 'history match,' we will forecast the future using this 'accurate' model using a complex conjugate gradient linear algebra-based timestepping method. Surprise surprise, the results are usually pretty poor, and it is assumed that at most 15% of reservoir models are accurate. Despite having all sorts of data points (core, drill cutting samples, well logs, production volumes, high-resolution 3D seismic imaging), it is really hard to predict future behavior for these models -- it is just hard to model all of these moving parts, even in a relatively small closed system like an oil reservoir.


Picture of a reservoir model, with well data indicated by the vertical sticks

So how the hell can a climactic model be any different? In a reservoir model, I am 'only' dealing with a couple dozen variables, meanwhile these complex open-system climate models can have up to 200 variables, a testament to all of the moving parts in our Earth such as atmospheric composition, solar activity, geological activity, oceanic variability, etc. They use the same method we use in the oil industry when making models, wherein a 'history match' of old climate data is emulated by the model, then use that model to forecast the future. Although they use the word 'Hindcasting' instead of 'History Matching.' I just don't see how all of the scientific and technological research into creating accurate models in the oil industry can be so inaccurate (where a company's ass is on the line with real money and investors), but these models pumped out by government scientists and University Professors (funded by Pro-Global Warming entities) with NO financial ramifications if they are wrong are treated as gospel. I am not trying to say that I am an authority on climate models but as an experienced petroleum reservoir simulation engineer, I have SERIOUS doubts on the validity of any history-matched climate model. In the words of Richard Feynman, Science is the organized skepticism in the reliability of expert opinion. And there is PLENTY of reason to be skeptical of the 97% of scientists who claim that the 'science is settled,' I have not even discussed The Pause wherein global climate hasn't risen in the last 20 years. It is fair to question Big Global Warming!
...
Anyway, I'm probably preaching to the choir :laugh:
 

Transsimian

Ostrich
Gold Member
There is NO WAY the mainstream media would allow someone like Joe Rogan to host a political debate, and it has NOTHING to do with Trump. Rogan is one of the most intellectually curious, fair minded, intelligent interviewers with a platform. He would ask intelligent questions, follow up when candidates gave misleading answers, zingers, or confusing political speech, and would cut through the bullshit. He will never ever be given an opportunity to ask probing questions to politicians. I learned more in his sit down interview with Bernie Sanders about Bernie and his beliefs than a did in a lifetime of hearing about Bernie in magazines, newspapers, and tv.

The most important thing to the media is controlling the narrative. Rogan would ask too many questions that the real media will never touch.
Rogan has a massive audience of politically uncommitted viewers, and if Joseph Robinette Biden truly is the man most qualified to lead the nation, then a stunning performance could quite easily win him the election.

But for some reason, he would prefer to hide away.
 

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
Rogan has a massive audience of politically uncommitted viewers, and if Joseph Robinette Biden truly is the man most qualified to lead the nation, then a stunning performance could quite easily win him the election.

But for some reason, he would prefer to hide away.
This is one huge clue that tells you neither political party really cares about winning, or about the supposed beliefs they espouse.

Almost 90% of Democrats are in favor of universal health care. Joe Biden is not, and he even said he would reject a law like that if Congress passed it. I guess some are now claiming democrats would support police reform. Joe Biden isn't going to change one single thing about policing or our justice system.

Republicans, it's hard for me to understand what they even believe in anymore, but I guess immigration would be one issue. They are routinely far worse than Democrats on this issue. They were ostensibly the party against all the social stuff but they fully embrace gay marriage and even trannies now apparently.

It's all just a fake charade to give people false hope and prevent them from ever taking any extra-political action by placing all hope and energy into this black hole of universal suffrage democracy so that real issues are never addressed. People who are invested in the political system spend unfathomable energy mentally defending or supporting candidate D or candidate R. Joe Rogan represents, more than anything, the normal person who doesn't buy into the lies or false promises of either party, and would easily sweep the nation.

That's why you saw a few fringe people who were actually serious about politics like Andrew Yang or Tulsi Gabbard being interested in Rogan but of course they were destroyed by the media. In a democracy, the media controls politics. And I don't know anyone who trusts our media.
 
Last edited:

Troller

Woodpecker
Trump posted on Facebook hinting on an atack from Iran against USA as a retaliation for solemeini assasination.

I remember George W Bush had the same beliefs as Trump of bringing back troops. And 9/11 happened.
 

CynicalContrarian

Owl
Gold Member

estraudi

Kingfisher
Gold Member
Good news, if it gets past the Obama judges.



Great News. But by "International Planned Parenthood" do they mean "American taxpayer overseas funded hitman's office?" Rhetorical question.
It was probably just going to be another money laundering scheme for democrats to move their money out of the socialist hell they are planning to remake America into.
 

Wutang

Hummingbird
Gold Member

Thread continue
==========
The 13-week series is called "Naming, Measuring, and Addressing the Impacts of Racism on the Health and Well-Being of the Nation and the World." I have obtained the internal emails (in white) and an APHA presentation by the series instructor that follows same structure (in blue).



...
The first three training sessions are focused on "racism, sexism, and other systems of structured inequality," then teaching CDC employees that they must "address institutionalized racism" to "really set things right in the garden" of a racist nation.
...
In sessions 6 through 9, the CDC claims that "racism is a public health crisis" and that "systemic racism" leads to "police killings of unarmed Black and Brown men and women" and leads to "the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on communities of color."
...
In sessions 10 and 11, the trainers will teach CDC employees that they must "target" and destroy the values of "focus on the individual," the "myth of meritocracy," the "myth of American exceptionalism," and "White supremacist ideology." This is textbook critical race theory.
...
The final session teaches CDC employees how to become activists. They will be encouraged to join an "Anti-Racism Collaborative with eight Collective Action Teams," focused on "communications," making scientific publications "anti-racist," and influencing "policy and legislation."
...
My whistleblower is outraged: "I thought maybe they would wisely cancel this training series. Instead we got a message this morning confirming ... The pressure to participate is palpable and if you don't you will have to explain why you aren't a racist."
...
We are in the midst of a pandemic and the CDC is prioritizing a critical race theory training program that is in direct violation of a presidential order. @CDCDirector Robert Redfield must immediately terminate this program—and focus on COVID-19, where CDC has been disastrous.
...
Finally, I want to issue a warning to every federal department in the United States: if you violate the president's order on critical race theory, I will find you, expose you, and shut you down.

P.S. I've posted the source documents here.
==========
 

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
I know Biden wont do the Rogan thing

What if Trump does a podcast with Rogan
Rogan would be "cancelled" so fast by whatever shill media group he is working for now if he gave a voice to Trump alone.

The only way is if they are both on together. I mean if he had balls, he could invite them both and only Trump shows up. Jimmy Carter failed to show up to one of the two presidential debates (at that time they were operated by the non partisan League of Women Voters, not the RepublicCrat hacks that run it now) and it was a big part of him losing his election to Reagan.
 
Top