Oprah Winfrey - does speech provide clues about presidential run?

[amvet]

8 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Because it was the headline of an article.

If I had simply copied the headline it would have looked like this:

Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism

First you wrote, "The piece I cited didn't say that"

Now you write, "Because it was the headline"

 

Was it or was it not part of the piece you cited or only your opinion?

Edited January 10, 2018 by amvet

[tifino]

 

Imagine O.W. going on an around the country POTUS election speech rally...

 

... at the end of each, she reminds everyone to look under their seat for their mystery gift

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, amvet said:

First you wrote, "The piece I cited didn't say that"

Now you write, "Because it was the headline"

 

Was it or was it not part of the piece you cited or only your opinion?

I was replying to what you wrote which was "You keep insulting the average American",  Apart from the intellectual vacuity of categorizing Trump voters as "average Americans" (were Clinton voters not "average Americans"? What exactly to your way of thinking is an average American/) The article doest does not say say that all or even most Trump voters voted for Trump because of racism. I quoted a section of the article that you seem dedicated to ignoring. Here is that quote again: "Finally, the statistical tool of regression can tease apart which had more influence on the 2016 vote: authoritarianism or symbolic racism, after controlling for education, race, ideology, and age. Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump."

What about that quote don't you understand?

[amvet]

12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I was replying to what you wrote which was "You keep insulting the average American",  Apart from the intellectual vacuity of categorizing Trump voters as "average Americans" (were Clinton voters not "average Americans"? What exactly to your way of thinking is an average American/) The article doest does not say say that all or even most Trump voters voted for Trump because of racism. I quoted a section of the article that you seem dedicated to ignoring. Here is that quote again: "Finally, the statistical tool of regression can tease apart which had more influence on the 2016 vote: authoritarianism or symbolic racism, after controlling for education, race, ideology, and age. Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump."

What about that quote don't you understand?

1.  I don't know what "doest does" mean?

2.  Why did you write,"Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism." if you didn't mean that? 

3.  I think "Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump." means, Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism." and that insults the average Americans who voted for Trump.

 

An Average voter is the great majority of the American who voted for Trump or Hillary but

were not a member of minority fringe groups with less making up less than 5% of the population. 

Edited January 10, 2018 by amvet

[ilostmypassword]

3 minutes ago, amvet said:

1.  I don't know what "doest does" mean?

2.  Why did you write,"Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism." if you didn't mean that? 

3.  I think "Moving from the 50th to the 75th percentile in the authoritarian scale made someone about 3 percent more likely to vote for Trump. The same jump on the SRS scale made someone 20 percent more likely to vote for Trump." means," Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism." and that insults the average Americans who voted for Trump.

 

An Average voter is the great majority of the American who voted for Trump or Hillary but were not a member of minority fringe groups with less making up less than 5% of the population. 

You clearly don't understand how to read statistics.

[amvet]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You clearly don't understand how to read statistics.

In what respect?  What did I say that shows I don't understand how to read statistics? PS I do wonder what the difference between racism and symbolic racism is.  Just so I can know for future reference not to be non PC and call a person the correct term ie racist or symbolic racist. 

Edited January 10, 2018 by amvet

[ilostmypassword]

5 minutes ago, amvet said:

In what respect?  What did I say that shows I don't understand how to read statistics?

Because nowhere does it say that the average trump voter voted for Trump because of racism. Just that more trump voters voted for trump because of racism rather than because of a belief in authoritarianism. Also that Trump voters were more likely motivated by racism than were Clinton voters. If you've got a problem with that, take it up with the person who did the research. After you do some remedial study of statistics. Although I think that if you do that, you would no longer misunderstand the researcher's work.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

13 minutes ago, amvet said:

Just so I can know for future reference not to be non PC and call a person the correct term ie racist or symbolic racist. 

 

I wouldn't worry about it considering this ilostmypassword fellow is simply race-baiting you. 

 

 

[amvet]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

Because nowhere does it say that the average trump voter voted for Trump because of racism. Just that more trump voters voted for trump because of racism rather than because of a belief in authoritarianism. Also that Trump voters were more likely motivated by racism than were Clinton voters. If you've got a problem with that, take it up with the person who did the research. After you do some remedial study of statistics. Although I think that if you do that, you would no longer misunderstand the researcher's work.

Since in this case you are the one who brought it up and are vouching for its accuracy you become the person who did the research by proxy.  So I'm right to take it up with you. 

 

Some average Americans who voted for Trump you are accusing of voting for him because of racism or symbolic racism (I still don't know the difference).  I find that insulting as I'm sure most people who voted for Trump would find it insulting.  I think it is supposed to be insulting.  Calling someone a racist is insulting in America.

 

I would agree that there are more racists that voted for Trump than there are racist that voted for Clinton.  Any idiot could tell you that.  Bubba Clinton was our first black President by proxy as any black American can tell you so that just makes sense.  

 

But you only mentioned it to insult Trump supporters is my guess.  

 

I said that Oprah would emphasize her poor upbringing like Lincoln emphasized his being raised in a one room log cabin.  

 

I don't get what racism has to do with what I said? 

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, amvet said:

Since in this case you are the one who brought it up and are vouching for its accuracy you become the person who did the research by proxy.  So I'm right to take it up with you. 

 

Some average Americans who voted for Trump you are accusing of voting for him because of racism or symbolic racism (I still don't know the difference).  I find that insulting as I'm sure most people who voted for Trump would find it insulting.  I think it is supposed to be insulting.  Calling someone a racist is insulting in America.

 

I would agree that there are more racists that voted for Trump than there are racist that voted for Clinton.  Any idiot could tell you that.  Bubba Clinton was our first black President by proxy as any black American can tell you so that just makes sense.  

 

But you only mentioned it to insult Trump supporters is my guess.  

 

I said that Oprah would emphasize her poor upbringing like Lincoln emphasized his being raised in a one room log cabin.  

 

I don't get what racism has to do with what I said? 

I cited someone's research.

You decided to give a mind reading performance.

[Air Smiles]

9 hours ago, Dagnabbit said:

They both have zero experience.

 

Two wrongs don't make a right.

Which begs the question why you are backing Trump for re-election?

 

All potus coming to office for the first time have precisely zero experience.

 

However, Oprah has made a $3bn fortune from nothing and has never filed for bankruptcy that I can find, while Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and had his fortune handed to him + he has filed for bankruptcy 6 times so far, its even been said if he'd put his inheritance in a zero risk fund and done nothing he would have more money today than his investments and business ventures have produced.

 

Oprah is currently the richest self-made woman in America.

 

 

[amvet]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

I cited someone's research.

You decided to give a mind reading performance.

I have done no mind reading.  I only quoted what you said. 

 

l said Oprah would cite being raised in poverty as Lincoln had done and to put the gays and lady boys in the closet till after the election if you want to win and you wrote, "Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism."

 

What is racist about anything that I said? 

[amvet]

5 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

Which begs the question why you are backing Trump for re-election?

 

All potus coming to office for the first time have precisely zero experience.

 

However, Oprah has made a $3bn fortune from nothing and has never filed for bankruptcy that I can find, while Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and had his fortune handed to him + he has filed for bankruptcy 6 times so far, its even been said if he'd put his inheritance in a zero risk fund and done nothing he would have more money today than his investments and business ventures have produced.

 

Oprah is currently the richest self-made woman in America.

She is actually the 3rd richest self made woman.

https://www.forbes.com/self-made-women/list/

Edited January 10, 2018 by amvet

[saakura]

On 09/01/2018 at 11:31 AM, Dagnabbit said:

Is this the best and brightest that the US has to offer? Clinton, Trump, Oprah? 

No, they have George Bush.

[amvet]

5 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

Which begs the question why you are backing Trump for re-election?

 

All potus coming to office for the first time have precisely zero experience.

 

However, Oprah has made a $3bn fortune from nothing and has never filed for bankruptcy that I can find, while Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and had his fortune handed to him + he has filed for bankruptcy 6 times so far, its even been said if he'd put his inheritance in a zero risk fund and done nothing he would have more money today than his investments and business ventures have produced.

 

Oprah is currently the richest self-made woman in America.

That is not really fair as the type of bankruptcy that Trump used was a business tool used to organize repayment of debt.  Chapter 11 reorganizations. I imagine you don't know much about American laws.  

[Air Smiles]

4 minutes ago, amvet said:

She is actually the 3rd richest self made woman.

https://www.forbes.com/self-made-women/list/

 

In previous years she was #1 ...however the 3 women currently above her are all older so had more time to make money.  So it kinda depends on how you calculate these things...

 

But, it doesn't change the original point, Trump can make no such claim regardless of how his financial legacy is calculated

[Air Smiles]

4 minutes ago, amvet said:

That is not really fair as the type of bankruptcy that Trump used was a business tool used to organize repayment of debt.  Chapter 11 reorganizations. I imagine you don't know much about American laws.  

 

Bankruptcy is bankruptcy, ...doesn't matter how much you try to spin it Trump style.

 

Or are you saying the Washington Post doesn't understand American laws either?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-first-presidential-debate/fact-check-has-trump-declared-bankruptcy-four-or-six-times/

[amvet]

2 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

 

In previous years she was #1 ...however the 3 women currently above her are all older so had more time to make money.  So it kinda depends on how you calculate these things...

 

But, it doesn't change the original point, Trump can make no such claim regardless of how his financial legacy is calculated

It would have taken a dummy not to make money with the head start Trump had although a lot of rich kids lose daddy's money. 

 

Trump over Oprah will be his record in office.  So far he passed a tax reform and got Kim to the table and is stopping money to Palestine, Pakistan and starting a civil war in Iran.

[amvet]

4 minutes ago, Air Smiles said:

 

Bankruptcy is bankruptcy, ...doesn't matter how much you try to spin it Trump style.

 

Or are you saying the Washington Post doesn't understand American laws either?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-first-presidential-debate/fact-check-has-trump-declared-bankruptcy-four-or-six-times/

Did you read your link?  They said the same thing I did that Trump filed for Chapter 11. 

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, amvet said:

I have done no mind reading.  I only quoted what you said. 

 

l said Oprah would cite being raised in poverty as Lincoln had done and to put the gays and lady boys in the closet till after the election if you want to win and you wrote, "Racism motivated Trump voters more than authoritarianism."

 

What is racist about anything that I said? 

Nothing was racist about anything you said. But you did write this: "Oh, and stop trying to disagree critique and upset everyone who is not a member of the rainbow coalition.  That's why you folks lost to Trump."

I offered an explanation that wasn't just based on personal assertion which is what you did  and repeatedly do. You claim to know the reason Trump won but present no evidence. Repetition won't make it any more true. Unless of course you subscribe to this doctrine:

"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.

[amvet]

22 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Nothing was racist about anything you said. But you did write this: "Oh, and stop trying to disagree critique and upset everyone who is not a member of the rainbow coalition.  That's why you folks lost to Trump."

I offered an explanation that wasn't just based on personal assertion which is what you did  and repeatedly do. You claim to know the reason Trump won but present no evidence. Repetition won't make it any more true. Unless of course you subscribe to this doctrine:

"Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true.

My main point was how to elect Oprah who is a good choice compared to the last Democratic candidate.  I watch CNN nightly and have for many years.  I don't watch Fox news because it is too biased.  Today.  Oprah got a lot of air time on CNN about equal to how badly Trump sang the National Anthem at a football game.  I changed the channel to BBC because CNN is upsetting me now as much as Fox news in the past. 

 

My opinion about the last election is completely irrelevant. 

 

Ask yourself this.  There are two voters who will decide the next Presidential election.  Both voters have an IQ and education of the average 12 year old adolescent.  One party gives the voters girl scout cookies to vote for their candidate and the other party tells both that if they don't vote for their candidate they are racist dummies and they and their whole family are stupid and irresponsible morons.  Who do you think the kids will vote for?  

[amvet]

Just now, Air Smiles said:

 

With his previous and powerful legal department at his disposal, why hasn't Trump sued the WP for publishing as fact that 'Trump has filed for "bankruptcy" 6 times' now.

 

Do you suppose Donald's legal team have advised that the judge in any libel proceedings, will have access to a dictionary?

Why should he.  He's done nothing wrong.  WP has done nothing wrong.  Both don't agree with the way to discuss a business decision.  One counts a company another counts individual actions having to do with that company.  The point was not the number of times the point was that maybe you have learned that Chapter 11 bankruptcy is a management tool and not a cash bail out of a company.  A chapter 11 debtor usually proposes a plan of reorganization to keep its business alive and pay creditors over time.  You got fooled because of ignorance of American laws and not reading and understanding what you did read.  

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.   I think we can dispense with the discussion of bankruptcy.