I’ve got a few pages up that I that would be good for posting, but, just haven’t gotten around to it. Well, as disjointed they may seem, here they are!
— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) September 14, 2016
Little Chaser …..
2015 motor vehicle production
S Korea: 4.6M
Mexico: 3.6M https://t.co/SaNrB0YGur
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) September 14, 2016
So, yes, it’s a great line that has a grain of truth & will resonate, but it’s simply wrong. In other words, classic Trump.
— Scott Lincicome (@scottlincicome) September 14, 2016
Bigger chaser …….
The fact that we’re losing auto production to Mexico is irrefutable. The fact that the “American” companies are moving jobs there to sell those very same cars to the US is simply unacceptable.
Here are the cold hard facts. In many ways “American” companies enjoy many extravagances most other nations wouldn’t imbue. While Ford didn’t receive the “bailout money”, they did and still receive some other generosities. It wasn’t Mexico who bailed out the US auto industry. It isn’t Mexico who provides competition protection for the US auto industry. For instance, when a nation engages in unfair practices against an American industry, it’s our government who provides the arguments in the WTO and the various other bodies. But, their headquarters are only in the US. Or, in the act of moving from the US. If Ford doesn’t want to build small cars in the US for US consumption, then they can go screw themselves.
I challenge any diehard “free trader” to argue how good it is for the US to have a cheaper car to buy while we have less workers with gainful employment here. This isn’t good for America nor the American people. If they wish to move to Mexico, then, out they go, and let Mexico worry about them. All the while they can pay a tariff for the ability to access the largest market in the free world. More on this later …..
Hispanic activist Tony Yapias has been a vocal opponent of Donald Trump, as evidenced by this story from June:
Yapias, the director of Proyecto Latino de Utah, said Trump’s rhetoric is contributing to hatred against Latinos, so the advocate organized the rally against the front-runner Friday night. Yapias said the rally — attended by about 150 people, mostly of Hispanic descent — was about showing Trump that Latinos in Utah will not put up with his hate speech.
Tony’s brother James Yapias called for Trump to apologize to “all of our children” for referring to Mexicans as rapists and criminals during the campaign.
From Fox 13:
Well-known Hispanic activist Tony Yapias was charged with rape after he allegedly assaulted a woman who ended their four-year relationship a few months ago.
Yapias, 50, known as Adolfo Tony Yapias-Delgado, was formally charged in the 3rd District Monday with rape, a first-degree felony and evidence tampering, a class A misdemeanor.
Yapias is the director of Proyecto Latino de Utah.
The Davis County Attorney’s Office is handling the case.
Look, I’ve loved ones who are Hispanic. I can’t count the people I know who are Hispanic. They are people like any one else. There are good ones and bad ones. Trump’s argument is that we shouldn’t simply let anyone in who wants to be in. Why in the world would anyone argue against stopping rapists and drug dealers and human traffickers into this country. Are all illegals rapists and whatnot? Of course, not. Most are trying to escape such animals. Why let the rapists, human traffickers, drug dealers, and murderers in? I believe, as Yapias demonstrates, we have enough, already.
This morning, the press was informed that Donald Trump would address the “birther” issue, so the media showed up in droves to cover his speech. However, Trump had a few other things to get out of the way first:
Trump: I’m gonna discuss the Birther thing.
(media sets up cameras)
Trump: Nah, just kidding, here’s 8 straight hours of folks praising me.
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) September 16, 2016
Trump opening the mic to war heroes to talk about a real & serious issue: national security. Media got punked by pushing silly birther issue
— Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) September 16, 2016
Trump starts off with a riff on how great Trump hotel in DC is. The complete fusion of his business and his campaign.
— Chris Cillizza (@TheFix) September 16, 2016
Nicely done, Donald. Nicely done. Media is madz!!!!!!
Addendum: I had thought to write a post about the recent polls and Trump’s surge. But, in view of this weekends events of the stabbings in Minnesota and the bombs in the east, the would be dated.
I had also a thought to try and elucidate on the various polls and their methodologies. Not all of them do it the same. In fact, none of them do it the same! It’s pretty maddening. But, by the same token, I couldn’t tell you which one is better than the other. There are exceptions. Some are just awful. Almost all of them are weighted in some way or another. That is to say, the polls don’t entirely trust the respondents. For instance, let’s say you’re a young, uneducated Black man. You’re polled, and you state that you certainly will vote, that you’re registered as a Dim, but, fully intend to vote for Trump. It will not be entirely reflected in the poll. Why? Because history has demonstrated that young Black men tend not to vote, if they do, they typically will ultimately pull the trigger for the Dem candidate. The same can be said for Hispanics. Old White guys, OTOH, are believed in such instances, even if they really have no intention of voting. Why? Because they typically do. So, all polls are skewed/weighted to the direction of what history has told us about the various demographics of the vote.
I would, and have, railed against such skewing/weighting. The problem being the last two elections demonstrated that there is some validity in such skewing/weighting of the polls.
Lat, this is why the LA Times poll doesn’t make any sense.
Further, one should take great caution into reading of any poll concerning “minorities”. The sample data simply isn’t large enough. A typical poll polls about 1000 people. Depending upon the geography, Blacks make up a small percentage of the population. A true poll would poll people consistent with the population makeup. So a poll of 1000 people would poll about 100-150 Black people, about 200 Hispanics …. and about 50 Asians. The LA Times does about 3000 people, so triple that. Are 450 Blacks indicative of the whole in the US? I don’t care how random you are, it’s simply not. It’s beyond irksome to me, to begin with. The polls treat these people as homogenous. They’re not, nor more than White people are homogeneous.
For the polls, I look at it as giving a sense of direction, while realizing there are ceilings and floors. Yes, in a sense, that is “weighting”, as well. But, let’s not kid ourselves. We all know, without a shadow of a doubt, the floor for Hillary isn’t as low as the floor for Trump. Why? Because the Dims could run Hannibal Lector/Jeffory Dahlmer and still a good 50% of the Dims would vote for him. It isn’t that way for Repubs. So, for any Repub, especially so for Trump, the floor is lower than Hillary. But, then, there’s the “enthusiasm” factor. People can tell you that they support one or the other. But, there’s no real way to gauge their enthusiasm. A Lib media type recently made this observation …….. (paraphrasing) Trump supporters will turn out hell or high water. And, I firmly believe that. Will a Hillary supporter if it’s raining? Will they stand in line for her? Not like Trump supporters do for Trump. This has already been demonstrated.
After this weekend’s events, I firmly believe the race is Trump’s to lose. As I stated earlier, the debates will tell the tale. The Dims have made a fatal mistake in painting such a horrible caricature of Trump that all he has to do is appear like a human being, capable of grasping concepts. Then, he wins. IOW, they set the bar so low he can’t help but look better than they projected. All he has to do is to do it.
Sometime later, I’ll give a states breakdown, because it isn’t popular vote which matters. It’s the states.
That’s all I got for today! What do you think?