Here’s A List Of Every Single Trump Lie Since He Took Office

[Augustus]

As I'm sure you do, I assess each poll on its own merit. There is no "polls like these".

What specifically do you see as making this poll accurate other than it confirms what you want to see? Did you analyse the methodology? What are your thoughts on how they weighted to account for the political imbalance of those polled?

Anyway, just for fun, let's assume the poll was 100% accurate as regards its published MOE of 3.2% (which it isn't)

The most recent = 42 +/- 3.2% so a minimum of 38.8% (ignoring rounding done to original figure)

Most recent = 36 +/- 3.2 = a maximum of 39.2%

They overlap.

Any narrative based on stats within the MOE = noise

Now when you factor in that the real MOE is probably double the stated one...

 

[icehorse]

@Augustus I believe we've discussed confirmation bias before? If not, just to recap. I'm aware. I've read Kahneman cover to cover. The best that any of us can do is try to remain aware and trudge on.

As for your math, are you arguing that the two trends indicate no change or that the rate of change might be exaggerated or that no trends can be concluded at all...?

 

[Twilight Hue]

It isn't acceptable.

Of course it is. Look around you. Everywhere. Politics, marketing, religion.

 

[Sunstone]

Wow, one almost gets the feeling that Trump is the only person alive who has never told the truth.

He lies even more than most of today's so-called "conservatives", Paul. Perhaps even you have noticed that?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

"I guess it's just my inherent need to keep the right wing hating alive"

I think Trump does that well enough by himself.

Yes, but he still gets help: Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, and Newt Gingrich are doing a fine job being deplorables. Cornyn and Mike Lee are doing all they can. Bannon, Sessions, and Kushner all seem pretty reprehensible as well.

Does anybody really like any of those people?

 

[YmirGF]

Does anybody really like any of those people?

Not really, but then again, there are the alternative. *gags*

 

[Augustus]

@Augustus I believe we've discussed confirmation bias before? If not, just to recap. I'm aware. I've read Kahneman cover to cover. The best that any of us can do is try to remain aware and trudge on.

Which is why I asked you what makes this poll reliable when many other simple political polls are not? You have no idea how they weighted this poll, you know polls are often unreliable, what makes you so confident this poll is accurate?

People only seem to get critical when the poll says something they don't want to hear.

As for your math, are you arguing that the two trends indicate no change or that the rate of change might be exaggerated or that no trends can be concluded at all...?

No trend can be concluded at all because it is within the stated MOE. If you can't tell if a difference is caused by random variance or by a genuine trend then you cannot construct a narrative based on this fact. If you do it is fake news.

(And this polling methodology was particularly biased against Trump in the Presidential. And in actuality, the real MOE is probably close enough to double the stated MOE, which makes your narrative pure noise. )

In a thread criticising Trump's dishonesty, constructing fake narratives seems a bit incongruent.

 

[icehorse]

@Augustus You're cherry-picking and straw manning here.

That said, this article was published in the NYT. It is LOADED with factual claims. What you have *possibly* demonstrated, is that a few of the factual claims in the article could have been better presented. I don't do a detailed study of every article I read. To some degree I rely on the reputation of the publisher and authors and editors. This article seems well researched and legit to me.

 

[Augustus]

@Augustus You're cherry-picking and straw manning here.

That said, this article was published in the NYT. It is LOADED with factual claims. What you have *possibly* demonstrated, is that a few of the factual claims in the article could have been better presented. I don't do a detailed study of every article I read. To some degree I rely on the reputation of the publisher and authors and editors. This article seems well researched and legit to me.

I never mentioned the article, only the poll and your narrative about the public not accepting his lies.

I said the poll doesn't show that even if it was accurate (which is not).

Any thoughts on what I actually said rather than claiming some imaginary fallacy?

Why do you trust that poll? And even if you do, how can you construct a narrative based on a change of less than the MOE?

 

[Revoltingest]

He's a blowhard. Get over it already.

We see thread after thread listing Trump's problems (which were known before the election).
Since he's now president, we don't face a decision about whether he or someone else should
be president, so I wonder what the purpose of continually trumpeting Trump's faults is?

Some criticize us for having a wait & see attitude for evaluating his record. What else is there
to do? It seems that it's mere venting, & that they're angry at our not angering over his faults.
Perhaps it's just about finding comfort in hating him, eh? Don't get in the way of that.

 

[icehorse]

@Augustus I feel as though I've already answered this but...

As with many articles I read, I didn't analyze every factual claim made. I considered the source, the quality of writing, did a "gut check" and deemed the article as "legit". I believe that many statisticians would look at that graph and conclude that some trend could be established based on the data. I'm not interested in getting wound around the axle over this particular graph. If you want me to say that you might have found a factual error, then "congrats" you might have found a factual error.

But that really seems tangential to what I *think* your bigger point is, and that seems to be about whether we should trust polls. And to that broader question my answer is: consider the source and the other characteristics you can evaluate. Some polls will be useful, other will not.

 

[Twilight Hue]

There's this continual on going sanctioned spamming of I hate Trump rhetoric no matter what happens.

Let it all out.....

There........

All better......

Breath people. Breath......

 

[Augustus]

I believe that many statisticians would look at that graph and conclude that some trend could be established based on the data. I'm not interested in getting wound around the axle over this particular graph. If you want me to say that you might have found a factual error, then "congrats" you might have found a factual error.

What do you think MOE means?

Can you explain why margin of error doesn't actually mean margin of error in this case?

Or will you just avoid the question again and pretend I'm strawmanning or being pedantic or some other cop out that avoids saying anything of substance?

But that really seems tangential to what I *think* your bigger point is, and that seems to be about whether we should trust polls. And to that broader question my answer is: consider the source and the other characteristics you can evaluate. Some polls will be useful, other will not.

In this case, the fact that polls are much less reliable than claimed is totally irrelevant.

If the poll is exactly as accurate as claimed your narrative is still false.

Why do you care about Trump telling not the truth, but are willing to spread misinformation yourself in the same thread?

Within the MOE, you cannot construct a narrative without being misleading. You can't be wilfully misleading at the same time as claiming a moral high ground regarding honesty and integrity.

we cannot let lies become normalized.

For me, we should not let people spreading BS narratives based on misrepresentation of data become normalised (well it is normalised, I just think we should stop it).

It's amazing how many 'rational' people disagree with this basic point.

 

[icehorse]

@Augustus Dude, you're making a mountain out of a mole hill. Here, let me fall on my sword for you. Upon close analysis the graph at the end of the article cannot be relied upon to predict a trend, the margin of error is too great for such minor shifts in the polling.

(But please notice an IMPORTANT distinction here - there was no evil intent on my part or @Sunstone 's part to deceive anyone. This is as opposed to trump, who absolutely intends to deceive.)

Hooray for you, you found one error in an article positively LOADED with factual claims, you get a gold star.

As for "BS narratives", are you largely in agreement with the claim that trump has told a long list of lies? If so, then voter trend or no trend, I stand by my assertion that we cannot afford to let lying become normalized. trump IS a frequent liar. It's Orwellian. We cannot allow his steady steam of lies replace reality.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

We see thread after thread listing Trump's problems (which were known before the election).

You did? And voted for him anyway?

Some criticize us for having a wait & see attitude for evaluating his record. What else is there to do?

No problem. If you ever start to suspect that you made a poor choice, feel free to say so.

It seems that it's mere venting, & that they're angry at our not angering over his faults.

I'd say that the anger is directed more at Trump than his base. Do you consider it unjustified?

 

[Revoltingest]

You did? And voted for him anyway?

Do you remember why?
People forget that Trump didn't & doesn't exist in a vacuum.
He was one of 2 alternatives, both bad, but the other being worse.

No problem. If you ever start to suspect that you made a poor choice, feel free to say so.

It's too early to tell.
But the results must be compared to the likely results of electing the other.

I'd say that the anger is directed more at Trump than his base. Do you consider it unjustified?

Yes.
It's one thing to disagree with Trump or those who voted for him,
but it's another to go off the deep end with anger & personal animosity.

And then there's the question of just what his "base" (a nebulous term) is.
Many who voted form him are not his supporters.

 

[Jeremiahcp]

We see thread after thread listing Trump's problems (which were known before the election).
Since he's now president, we don't face a decision about whether he or someone else should
be president, so I wonder what the purpose of continually trumpeting Trump's faults is?

Some criticize us for having a wait & see attitude for evaluating his record. What else is there
to do? It seems that it's mere venting, & that they're angry at our not angering over his faults.
Perhaps it's just about finding comfort in hating him, eh? Don't get in the way of that.

" Some criticize us for having a wait & see attitude for evaluating his record. "

So him molesting women then bragging about it, is what? Something you just decided was not on the "record"? Or how about all those college kids he ripped off? Is that also not on the "record"? Or how about the charity money, for kids with cancer, he redirected into his business?

Wait and see? Or denial?

 

[Revoltingest]

" Some criticize us for having a wait & see attitude for evaluating his record. "

So him molesting women then bragging about it, is what? Something you just decided was not on the "record"? Or how about all those college kids he ripped off? Is that also not on the "record"? Or how about the charity money, for kids with cancer, he redirected into his business?

Wait and see? Or denial?

Do you ever actually read the posts you respond to?
It seems more like you use a random thought generator.

 

[metis]

Here’s A List Of Every Single Trump Lie Since He Took Office

Please discuss.

I'd love to discuss this but my computer is now in meltdown.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'd love to discuss this but my computer is now in meltdown.

I hate it when that happens!
Sometimes mine will sporadically freeze for 5 to 10 seconds.
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!

But don't worry....I'll be here posting for you.