Midterm Elections
- Thread starter eyephone
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
There is bias in all newsrooms, from choosing what to report, how much time to devote to each topic, and how to report on the topics. When the newsroom is full of educated metropolitan folks, the bias will lean left. Their journalistic responsibility is to be aware of this bias, and work to minimize it as much as possible.
Evaluating bias in "news" isn't a black-and-white conclusion. It's a question of extent and magnitude, based on how many people the news provider reaches multiplied by the level of bias in its coverage.
Yes, but now the "Freedom" Caucus has established the threshold for impeachment proceedings. If the Democrats take the House, you can expect these co-conspirators to be reminded of this precedent (or is it "president" as Trump would use in this context?).
Speaking of these Tea Partiers, ten years after the Great Recession, why does this caucus still exist? They promised us that these bailouts of banks and ZIRP would result in massive taxpayer losses and hyper-inflation. They were completely wrong. Rick Santelli from CNBC still spews the nonsense on a daily basis.
In the Republicans' defense, we are all currently living through the consequences of motivated poorly informed/educated citizens enthusiastically voting. There's a reason the founders allowed only a fraction of folks to vote - white male land owners.
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.
So we make students take a 40 minutes to an hour bus ride each way to be able to vote ? How many supposedly educated and wealthy (and thereby more ?deserving citizens?) people here would vote if that was your only option ?
As to being informed , it is statistically proven that Fox News watching demographic , or older non college white voters are the least informed or the most ?ill informed ?
of all politically active voters out there (hence they keep voting against their own interests ) . I don?t see anyone trying to make voting more difficult for them .
Don't mistake my snark above for disagreeing with your point. The Republicans are shameless and despicable for trying to prevent folks from voting. SCOTUS is supporting their effort too, making them accomplices in this.
The same opinion is not shared by all founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson supported property requirement to vote, versus Benjamin Franklin did not:
?Today a man owns a jackass worth 50 dollars and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the mean time has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers ? but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass??
It's interesting to note that James Sullivan may have proposed proportioning the vote based on asset holdings, per John Adam's letter to Sullivan:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-04-02-0091
"As to your Idea, of proportioning the Votes of Men in Money Matters, to the Property they hold, it is utterly impracticable. There is no possible Way of Ascertaining, at any one Time, how much every Man in a Community, is worth; and if there was, So fluctuating is Trade and Property, that this State of it, would change in half an Hour. The Property of the whole Community, is Shifting every Hour, and no Record can be kept of the Changes."
In the US we did not have personal income tax until 1861. Imagine if personal income tax was imposed earlier, would some of our Founding Fathers have proposed proportioning the value of your vote based on income tax paid in previous year? That is, if you paid $100,000 in income (and property?) tax, your vote is worth 100,000 units, versus another who paid $50,000 in income tax, his vote is only worth 50,000 units in the election.
Oh wow! 1%?
Pray stocks go down, that is how u add stocks either for trading or longer term.
But u knew that. U just have to find something to complain about.
I was just stating a matter of fact that if market thought 4 percent was self sustaining it would start pricing it in , the 1 percent down reaction seems that 4 percent gdp print is immaterial to earnings outlook
Pay attention to what is actually being said and you may learn a thing or two which may help you with your own finances . You won?t get this level of nuance from watching fox business news .
as opposed to launching knee Jerk attacks on people
A. I don't need to watch the business news to know the old sayings: Sell in May and Go AWAY, Buy the Rumor, Sell the News, or to figure out that "the market" isn't even down 1% or to know that it's a market of stocks. Just because some high flyers are down big time, doesn't mean the entire market is down. LOL!
Should have shorted this puppy which had a 1 for 250 reverse split if you could find shares, if not there were plenty of put options available. Then even someone on margin isn't worried about a 1% drop in stocks.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/HMNY/
Perspective
Well-known member
Soylent Green Is People said:
There is bias in all newsrooms, from choosing what to report, how much time to devote to each topic, and how to report on the topics. When the newsroom is full of educated metropolitan folks, the bias will lean left. Their journalistic responsibility is to be aware of this bias, and work to minimize it as much as possible.
Evaluating bias in "news" isn't a black-and-white conclusion. It's a question of extent and magnitude, based on how many people the news provider reaches multiplied by the level of bias in its coverage.
Perspective
Well-known member
eyephone said:
Yes, but now the "Freedom" Caucus has established the threshold for impeachment proceedings. If the Democrats take the House, you can expect these co-conspirators to be reminded of this precedent (or is it "president" as Trump would use in this context?).
Speaking of these Tea Partiers, ten years after the Great Recession, why does this caucus still exist? They promised us that these bailouts of banks and ZIRP would result in massive taxpayer losses and hyper-inflation. They were completely wrong. Rick Santelli from CNBC still spews the nonsense on a daily basis.
Why is one party so scared of actual democracy and wants to make it more difficult for people to vote
In Searing Ruling, Judge Says Florida Can?t Block Campus Early Voting
https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/...rida-233350457.html?__twitter_impression=true
In Searing Ruling, Judge Says Florida Can?t Block Campus Early Voting
https://www.yahoo.com/amphtml/news/...rida-233350457.html?__twitter_impression=true
Perspective
Well-known member
fortune11 said:
In the Republicans' defense, we are all currently living through the consequences of motivated poorly informed/educated citizens enthusiastically voting. There's a reason the founders allowed only a fraction of folks to vote - white male land owners.
Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.
Perspective said:
So we make students take a 40 minutes to an hour bus ride each way to be able to vote ? How many supposedly educated and wealthy (and thereby more ?deserving citizens?) people here would vote if that was your only option ?
As to being informed , it is statistically proven that Fox News watching demographic , or older non college white voters are the least informed or the most ?ill informed ?
of all politically active voters out there (hence they keep voting against their own interests ) . I don?t see anyone trying to make voting more difficult for them .
Perspective
Well-known member
Nice GDP number, albeit 25% below the promised 5%+.
Discussing GDP is wonkish. What does it really mean to the vast majority of folks? If your portfolio's doing well, and your income is strong and growing, do you think much about a low quarterly GDP report? If you're struggling in multiple low-paying jobs with a negative net worth and no reasonable prospects for improving your financials, do you care much that the quarterly GDP report is robust?
Politically, do you sell this as great news knowing that might insult folks struggling for whom it doesn't make any difference? If you sell a 4% figure as great, what do you do if the next quarter is 2%?
Discussing GDP is wonkish. What does it really mean to the vast majority of folks? If your portfolio's doing well, and your income is strong and growing, do you think much about a low quarterly GDP report? If you're struggling in multiple low-paying jobs with a negative net worth and no reasonable prospects for improving your financials, do you care much that the quarterly GDP report is robust?
Politically, do you sell this as great news knowing that might insult folks struggling for whom it doesn't make any difference? If you sell a 4% figure as great, what do you do if the next quarter is 2%?
Perspective
Well-known member
fortune11 said:
Don't mistake my snark above for disagreeing with your point. The Republicans are shameless and despicable for trying to prevent folks from voting. SCOTUS is supporting their effort too, making them accomplices in this.
momopi
Well-known member
Perspective said:
The same opinion is not shared by all founding fathers. Thomas Jefferson supported property requirement to vote, versus Benjamin Franklin did not:
?Today a man owns a jackass worth 50 dollars and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the mean time has become more experienced, his knowledge of the principles of government, and his acquaintance with mankind, are more extensive, and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers ? but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen, pray inform me, in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass??
It's interesting to note that James Sullivan may have proposed proportioning the vote based on asset holdings, per John Adam's letter to Sullivan:
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/06-04-02-0091
"As to your Idea, of proportioning the Votes of Men in Money Matters, to the Property they hold, it is utterly impracticable. There is no possible Way of Ascertaining, at any one Time, how much every Man in a Community, is worth; and if there was, So fluctuating is Trade and Property, that this State of it, would change in half an Hour. The Property of the whole Community, is Shifting every Hour, and no Record can be kept of the Changes."
In the US we did not have personal income tax until 1861. Imagine if personal income tax was imposed earlier, would some of our Founding Fathers have proposed proportioning the value of your vote based on income tax paid in previous year? That is, if you paid $100,000 in income (and property?) tax, your vote is worth 100,000 units, versus another who paid $50,000 in income tax, his vote is only worth 50,000 units in the election.
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
fortune11 said:
Oh wow! 1%?
Pray stocks go down, that is how u add stocks either for trading or longer term.
But u knew that. U just have to find something to complain about.
I?m about to laugh!
?Putin invites Trump to Moscow. Putin says phone calls beteeen the leaders wouldn?t suffice, and the leaders had to meet in person, according to Reuters.?
Source:https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...oscow-says-they-need-to-talk-in-person-2018-7
?Putin invites Trump to Moscow. Putin says phone calls beteeen the leaders wouldn?t suffice, and the leaders had to meet in person, according to Reuters.?
Source:https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.bu...oscow-says-they-need-to-talk-in-person-2018-7
Ready2Downsize said:
I was just stating a matter of fact that if market thought 4 percent was self sustaining it would start pricing it in , the 1 percent down reaction seems that 4 percent gdp print is immaterial to earnings outlook
Pay attention to what is actually being said and you may learn a thing or two which may help you with your own finances . You won?t get this level of nuance from watching fox business news .
as opposed to launching knee Jerk attacks on people
Ready2Downsize
Well-known member
fortune11 said:
A. I don't need to watch the business news to know the old sayings: Sell in May and Go AWAY, Buy the Rumor, Sell the News, or to figure out that "the market" isn't even down 1% or to know that it's a market of stocks. Just because some high flyers are down big time, doesn't mean the entire market is down. LOL!
Should have shorted this puppy which had a 1 for 250 reverse split if you could find shares, if not there were plenty of put options available. Then even someone on margin isn't worried about a 1% drop in stocks.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/HMNY/
?Foreign Affairs chair says Trump is ignoring sanctions on Russia for former spy poisoning
The Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee is chastising President Donald Trump for ignoring a deadline to decide whether Russia should face sanctions for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain with a military-grade nerve agent.
The chairman, Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., in a letter to Trump on Thursday that was obtained by NBC News, said Trump?s enforcement of existing sanctions that punish chemical weapons users ?is critical to deterring additional attacks.? He said Trump?s administration had already blown through the statutory deadline by more than a month, and gave the president a new deadline of two weeks to tell Congress of his decision.?
Source:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna894961
My comment: Is this a shift? More Republicans speaking out.
The Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee is chastising President Donald Trump for ignoring a deadline to decide whether Russia should face sanctions for the poisoning of a former Russian spy in Britain with a military-grade nerve agent.
The chairman, Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., in a letter to Trump on Thursday that was obtained by NBC News, said Trump?s enforcement of existing sanctions that punish chemical weapons users ?is critical to deterring additional attacks.? He said Trump?s administration had already blown through the statutory deadline by more than a month, and gave the president a new deadline of two weeks to tell Congress of his decision.?
Source:https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna894961
My comment: Is this a shift? More Republicans speaking out.
