First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
Post Reply I want to speak like Donald Trump
runec 
28334 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16
14783 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

stars201 wrote:



Seriously, WHAT IS THAT??
You post that every single time there's a Trump thread, and nothing else--No punchline, no context, no wacky meme caption, no Photoshop pasteups, no crazy GIF animation, no context, no message, no...freakin'....NOTHING.
What, can we get a little hint, to help us out? Are we joking about the "Tangerine Tornado"'s fake tan (thank you, SNL), which has now become the default replacement gag to the "toupee" thing? Or is it just "Smug no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity expression because we're talking about him" from a supporter?

Honestly, I got....nothin'. And I flatter myself that I don't think I'm alone in that.
Like parents tell toddlers, use your words, dear, not your wacky graphic repostings.
19345 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

Fabricate wrote:


goodman528 wrote:



Trump will beat Hillary in a landslide. If I had the money to bet on this, I would put all of my money on Trump being the next president. Not because I like him, and certainly not because I support him. I hate everything Trump stands for. But he will win. Save a link to this post, and when Trump wins in November. Come back and tell me how right I was.


That's some confidence as the bookmakers have Trump at a 2/1 (33% chance) at best based on all current knowledge. That'd be a nice return.




Fabricate, you are a great guy. A really great guy. I haven't seen you around much, but my friends, they are all telling me Fabricate is a great guy. People are always telling me about what great things Fabricate has posted on the forum. People say Fabricate's posts are always so factual. So full of facts. Great facts. Real facts. Facts people care about. And so people tell me you are the best poster ever.

Now the bookmakers say Hillary is the favorite, but what do they know? They are always getting things wrong. When Trump first entered the race, they said his odds were very long, hugely long, it was so long I don't even know how many zeros they put on the end. But they don't know anything. They got Bush's odds wrong. They got Cruz's odds wrong. If the bookmaker entered the race, he would get his own odds wrong. So mark my words folks, Trump will win in November, and it won't be a close thing like Kerry vs Bush, oh no. It will be a landslide. A huge landslide of a win. The landslide will be so huge. Huge.


On a more serious note: yes, I absolutely think Trump will win. I think he will carry 40+ states, and possibly even California. Because on a fundamental level Trump understands what an election is more than anybody else. It's not about policies or facts, those things are irrelevant. It's all about building a brand, and Trump has built a tremendous brand. Trump's brand is "Make America Great Again", everybody wants to do that, regardless of who you are. Whereas Hillary's brand is what? By November the only word anybody will associate with Hillary will be "crooked". Nobody understands exactly what where the law stands on Hillary's E-mails, so nobody cares where the law stands, so if Trump can associate the image of Hillary as a criminal, then that is what Hillary is.

Trust me Fabricate, go and bet on Trump right now, do it. Bet as much money as you can afford. And come November just remember to come back and say thank you.
Posted 5/29/16

Ejanss wrote:


stars201 wrote:



Seriously, WHAT IS THAT??
You post that every single time there's a Trump thread, and nothing else--No punchline, no context, no wacky meme caption, no Photoshop pasteups, no crazy GIF animation, no context, no message, no...freakin'....NOTHING.
What, can we get a little hint, to help us out? Are we joking about the "Tangerine Tornado"'s fake tan (thank you, SNL), which has now become the default replacement gag to the "toupee" thing? Or is it just "Smug no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity expression because we're talking about him" from a supporter?

Honestly, I got....nothin'. And I flatter myself that I don't think I'm alone in that.
Like parents tell toddlers, use your words, dear, not your wacky graphic repostings.



282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / United Kingdom
Offline
Posted 5/29/16
wtf
15947 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / Cold and High
Offline
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

stars201 wrote:
its all ogre now..


19345 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

auroraloose wrote:

*puts on Trump simulator helmet*

Thus saith The Donald:


You wanna be like me, Goodman? Great - you know, I'm happy for you. You sound like a good guy. 'Cause it's NOT easy to admit you admire someone you disagree with, and believe me I know. I say Putin's done his country good and the liberal media jumps all over me, but they know I'm right. You gotta be true to yourself and say what you think, 'cause otherwise you're just gonna get used.

Listen, I don't say this to a lot of people, but I think I like you, Goodman, so I'll tell you my secret: I don't give a shit about anyone but myself. And everyone's like that - they just don't know it. Crooked Hillary and Lyin' Ted talk like they care, but they're just trying to pull one over on you. You know how much money it takes to get Hillary to change her mind on something? I do, and I have that much money - and a lot more. That's what makes me different from them - no one can buy me. If I want something I can get it myself. I don't talk in some politically correct code or hide my agenda in private servers like someone we know. I want to be president, and what I plan to do as president will be good for all of you. Because I want what America wants. And Americans aren't dumb: they know what they want. How many candidates are ACTUALLY saying what the people want, and not what the Washington snobs want? Just me, no one else. And it's clear as day. That's why you can trust me: I will do 100 percent of what I say, and no other candidate can say that.

You see what I did there? I flattered you, acted like I like you, and told you you were special. I leveled with you - let you in on a "secret". Said I was on your side. Everyone wants that - especially poor people like you. Even explaining this to you I'm still playing you. See, I understand people, because I talk to so many - because everyone wants my money. Even the geniuses need money, and none of them makes money like I do. Eventually you learn what really moves people. And the truth is, you can't be like me, because you DON'T have a lot of money. But I can help you with that. I have this university...


Don't talk like Trump. Don't play people.



Maybe this is why I have such a hard time trusting people. How are people able do this?
14783 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Online
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

Freddy96NO wrote:
(um...something)


At this point, Freddy, I don't even know WHAT Goodie's doing anymore.
It thought it was Maybe-Sort-of Aspiring Amateur Sarcasm at first, but six inexplicably earnest parroted reiterations of the exact same joke later, they have now officially become more incoherent, inscrutable, looney and unparseable than yours.
Posted 5/29/16

Ejanss wrote:


stars201 wrote:



Seriously, WHAT IS THAT??
You post that every single time there's a Trump thread, and nothing else--No punchline, no context, no wacky meme caption, no Photoshop pasteups, no crazy GIF animation, no context, no message, no...freakin'....NOTHING.
What, can we get a little hint, to help us out? Are we joking about the "Tangerine Tornado"'s fake tan (thank you, SNL), which has now become the default replacement gag to the "toupee" thing? Or is it just "Smug no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity expression because we're talking about him" from a supporter?

Honestly, I got....nothin'. And I flatter myself that I don't think I'm alone in that.
Like parents tell toddlers, use your words, dear, not your wacky graphic repostings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
2032 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

goodman528 wrote:


Fabricate wrote:


goodman528 wrote:



Trump will beat Hillary in a landslide. If I had the money to bet on this, I would put all of my money on Trump being the next president. Not because I like him, and certainly not because I support him. I hate everything Trump stands for. But he will win. Save a link to this post, and when Trump wins in November. Come back and tell me how right I was.


That's some confidence as the bookmakers have Trump at a 2/1 (33% chance) at best based on all current knowledge. That'd be a nice return.




Fabricate, you are a great guy. A really great guy. I haven't seen you around much, but my friends, they are all telling me Fabricate is a great guy. People are always telling me about what great things Fabricate has posted on the forum. People say Fabricate's posts are always so factual. So full of facts. Great facts. Real facts. Facts people care about. And so people tell me you are the best poster ever.

Now the bookmakers say Hillary is the favorite, but what do they know? They are always getting things wrong. When Trump first entered the race, they said his odds were very long, hugely long, it was so long I don't even know how many zeros they put on the end. But they don't know anything. They got Bush's odds wrong. They got Cruz's odds wrong. If the bookmaker entered the race, he would get his own odds wrong. So mark my words folks, Trump will win in November, and it won't be a close thing like Kerry vs Bush, oh no. It will be a landslide. A huge landslide of a win. The landslide will be so huge. Huge.


On a more serious note: yes, I absolutely think Trump will win. I think he will carry 40+ states, and possibly even California. Because on a fundamental level Trump understands what an election is more than anybody else. It's not about policies or facts, those things are irrelevant. It's all about building a brand, and Trump has built a tremendous brand. Trump's brand is "Make America Great Again", everybody wants to do that, regardless of who you are. Whereas Hillary's brand is what? By November the only word anybody will associate with Hillary will be "crooked". Nobody understands exactly what where the law stands on Hillary's E-mails, so nobody cares where the law stands, so if Trump can associate the image of Hillary as a criminal, then that is what Hillary is.

Trust me Fabricate, go and bet on Trump right now, do it. Bet as much money as you can afford. And come November just remember to come back and say thank you.


You put a smile on my face. The bookmakers themselves might not know a great deal, it's safe to say it's an initial assumption based on some sort of qualitative reasoning which is then refined constantly by new information that alters the perceived chances, or basically sheer weight of money which may or may not be 'smart money'. I guess I'm viewing it the same way that the prices of the stock market supposedly have all known information built into it, be it widely known or not.

I like the confidence of your analysis but smarter people than yourself would've probably tipped the scales in Trump's favour if that was the likely case.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong, I tend to overestimate my knowledge on a given subject quite often.
runec 
28334 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

goodman528 wrote:
It's all about building a brand, and Trump has built a tremendous brand. Trump's brand is "Make America Great Again", everybody wants to do that, regardless of who you are.


You do know that "Make America Great Again" is taken verbatim from Reagan's campaign, right? Nevermind that some variant of it has been used practically every election by at least one candidate. Up to and including Bill Clinton. So if America is not great now, and it wasn't great in late 70s, where precisely was it great? In 1984? ( >.> ). Bush senior? Clinton? It certainly couldn't have been under Carter, Ford or Nixon. How far back is this mythical place?

Appealing to the collective delusion of old Americans that things were somehow "better" when they were younger is one of the oldest tricks in the book of American politics. Its hardly new or unique to Trump. There's basically two fundamental types of rhetoric on the GOP side of things these days: That America use to be better ( somehow, somewhere ) and that someone or something is taking America away from you somehow ( usually someone brown ).

Its not new. Nothing about Trump is new. That's kind of the entire problem here. The GOP has been unwittingly setting the stage for the rise of a demagogue like Trump for years. Now they're surprised when all the fears and xenophobia they've been stoking for votes all this time has come back to bite them in the ass.




goodman528 wrote:
Whereas Hillary's brand is what? By November the only word anybody will associate with Hillary will be "crooked". Nobody understands exactly what where the law stands on Hillary's E-mails, so nobody cares where the law stands, so if Trump can associate the image of Hillary as a criminal, then that is what Hillary is.


The GOP has spent millions of tax payers dollars and wasted countless hours just to throw Benghazi on her to little avail. They've been trying to drag both Clintons through the mud for decades. Yet they're still here. Trump hasn't even begun to endure that level of scrutiny yet ( and he does not hold up to scrutiny well. Nor respond to it well. ). The people that will go on about the email thing are the same people that still believe Benghazi was a thing and they only believe Benghazi was a thing because someone with the last name Clinton was involved.

Its not going to sway anyone from one camp to the other. So as always, the general will rest on the swing/moderate vote. Which Trump will find challenging. Especially once the debates start. He can't flail through a presidential debate like a school kid or refuse to show up for them. Nor is he capable of controlling himself in the face of any criticism whatsoever ( he is a narcissist after all ). Nevermind from a woman.

I'll be sincerely impressed if he makes it through the presidential debates without saying or doing something utterly assholish.



52866 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
100 / M
Offline
Posted 5/29/16 , edited 5/29/16

goodman528 wrote:



Trump will beat Hillary in a landslide. If I had the money to bet on this, I would put all of my money on Trump being the next president. Not because I like him, and certainly not because I support him. I hate everything Trump stands for. But he will win. Save a link to this post, and when Trump wins in November. Come back and tell me how right I was.



What if Marcus Octavius join in? Marcus Octavius can take on Trump easily! After all he have many years of experiences in Politics!

17031 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / In a van down by...
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

JanusCascade wrote:


goodman528 wrote:



Trump will beat Hillary in a landslide. If I had the money to bet on this, I would put all of my money on Trump being the next president. Not because I like him, and certainly not because I support him. I hate everything Trump stands for. But he will win. Save a link to this post, and when Trump wins in November. Come back and tell me how right I was.



What if Marcus Octavius join in? Marcus Octavius can take on Trump easily! After all he have many years of experiences in Politics!



But does he have a big penis like the Trump does?
19345 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/29/16

Fabricate wrote:
You put a smile on my face. The bookmakers themselves might not know a great deal, it's safe to say it's an initial assumption based on some sort of qualitative reasoning which is then refined constantly by new information that alters the perceived chances, or basically sheer weight of money which may or may not be 'smart money'. I guess I'm viewing it the same way that the prices of the stock market supposedly have all known information built into it, be it widely known or not.

I like the confidence of your analysis but smarter people than yourself would've probably tipped the scales in Trump's favour if that was the likely case.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong, I tend to overestimate my knowledge on a given subject quite often.



Elections occurs very rarely, there is very little relevant information available, and the betting market depth is very small, compared to sports and racing, so I doubt many people spent time to build good predictive models for it. The way 538 (Nate Silver) does it is to use a weighted average of the polls to get the mean % for each of the two candidates, then assume a normal distribution centered on that mean, and variance is from the number of people sampled in the polls.

This election there are better models than Nate Silver, done by the Sanders and Hillary campaigns, because the democrats have spent millions since 2012 on digitizing census data and all historical voting data, and that data is not freely available to the public. I'm sure the republicans have built something similar too, or at least they are in the process of doing it right now. Now the people working at high levels within these campaigns would be the "smart money", but the interesting thing is they wouldn't bet on it. Would you risk ending your career for a few thousand dollars bet?

If all predictions were people's best guesses, then you would be right in believing in the wisdom of the crowd, and nobody would be able to beat the market. The interesting thing about politics, is that even more than any other market, there is systematic bias in everybody's assumptions, so it's entirely possible for the price to settle at a point that is completely different to the "real price". So the idea of a good election bet is quite plausible.
2032 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/30/16 , edited 5/30/16

goodman528 wrote:


Fabricate wrote:
You put a smile on my face. The bookmakers themselves might not know a great deal, it's safe to say it's an initial assumption based on some sort of qualitative reasoning which is then refined constantly by new information that alters the perceived chances, or basically sheer weight of money which may or may not be 'smart money'. I guess I'm viewing it the same way that the prices of the stock market supposedly have all known information built into it, be it widely known or not.

I like the confidence of your analysis but smarter people than yourself would've probably tipped the scales in Trump's favour if that was the likely case.

Or maybe I'm completely wrong, I tend to overestimate my knowledge on a given subject quite often.



Elections occurs very rarely, there is very little relevant information available, and the betting market depth is very small, compared to sports and racing, so I doubt many people spent time to build good predictive models for it. The way 538 (Nate Silver) does it is to use a weighted average of the polls to get the mean % for each of the two candidates, then assume a normal distribution centered on that mean, and variance is from the number of people sampled in the polls.

This election there are better models than Nate Silver, done by the Sanders and Hillary campaigns, because the democrats have spent millions since 2012 on digitizing census data and all historical voting data, and that data is not freely available to the public. I'm sure the republicans have built something similar too, or at least they are in the process of doing it right now. Now the people working at high levels within these campaigns would be the "smart money", but the interesting thing is they wouldn't bet on it. Would you risk ending your career for a few thousand dollars bet?

If all predictions were people's best guesses, then you would be right in believing in the wisdom of the crowd, and nobody would be able to beat the market. The interesting thing about politics, is that even more than any other market, there is systematic bias in everybody's assumptions, so it's entirely possible for the price to settle at a point that is completely different to the "real price". So the idea of a good election bet is quite plausible.


If I can look at each paragraph individually:

1. I concede the point about little relevant information available due to the relatively rare occurrence of the election. In terms of historic results then yes it pales to horse racing or general sporting events. For a basic comparison however, on Betfair, 11.5m~ GBP has been matched on the 'next president' market, while for example 1.7m~ has been matched on the winner of the Euro 2016 football/soccer.

2. I know little about predictive models, especially election based ones so I'll just admit that I wouldn't know what I am talking about. I agree they would be the real 'smart money' and they also probably would not bet on it for the reason you gave.

3. I don't really understand your first sentence, sorry. I would say that all worthwhile predictions are our best 'guess', hopefully based on significant information that is available to us. You could beat the market if your guess is accurate more often than the majorities guess.

As an aside, I do think wisdom of the crowd can be a very useful tool albeit based only on the success of certain fantasy football blogs. It's worth noting that in this example, it is the wisdom of a crowd that are themselves educated on the topic i.e. the general consensus of fantasy football analysts, not the general public. I suppose fantasy football is however different in that the aim is to beat other players not necessarily the market itself.

I wouldn't like to say I know the differences in how people are systematically biased towards the result of an election compared to their favourite football team winning.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.