4084 Why Trump?

Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Everything worth knowing leaves bruises.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Everyone I talk with wonders how Donald Trump is polling so high.  Most just shrug and say it must be because people love a spoiler, love comedy, want to see the explosions and radioactive fallout.

I was sort of thinking that too, until I looked into it a bit.

The transcript of Trump's announcement that he's running is at http://time.com/3923128/donald-trump-announcement-speech/.  It looks like he sent out a team of people to blue collar bars to ask people what they thought of the country, the world, and what needs fixing, and this speech is the result of that study.  He addresses all the concerns of the Republican conservative base.  He doesn't exactly cover the "hows", but he hit all the "whats" really hard.  No other candidate is doing that, not to that degree.

This doesn't mean that he really understands the concerns.  It just means his research team nailed it.  But the folks in those bars are cheering.

Secondly, and this may be the most important factor,

he's not a politician!

The American voters are sick and tired of politicians.  They'd love to get someone in there who will say enough is enough, and kick some tail.  They think Trump can do it.

----------------------------------

Whoa, I just realized I should make sure no one thinks this is an endorsement!  Nope.  Just speculation on why he scores so high in polls.
.

3354 Exacerbated exasperation

Sunday, September 11, 2011

Ad for Norwegian Cruise Line:
Most of the Earth is covered by water. And most of the water is covered by Norwegians.

------------------------------------------------------

I haven't had the TV or radio on all day, so I assume NYC is still standing. I don't see any smoke columns in the Northeast.

----------------------------

People whose livelihood depends on language don't seem to know the difference any more between "exacerbate" and "exasperate". More and more I am hearing the latter when they mean the former. Very tiresome.

----------------------------

I am also frustrated by polls that slant the questions. I saw one yesterday that's a prime example. The question was, "Do you agree with President Barack Obama’s plan to slash Social Security to 3.1 percent for workers? (Yes) (No)" Naturally, the response was overwhelmingly "No", and I suspect this will be reported as "The public overwhelmingly rejects...blah blah".

The pollsters know that the public are idiots, have zero reading comprehension skills, and will vote on the emotional impact of "slash Social Security to 3.1% for workers."

If the question had been "blah blah ... slash the Social Security tax paid by workers, thereby increasing their annual take home pay by an average of $1500 per year", which is the actual question, then I strongly suspect that the answer would have been different. Of course, that's slanting it the other way.

Idiots.

This is why I NEVER believe the results of polls.
----------------------------

I am currently reading Sisters, by Kathleen Thompson Norris, published sometime in the late '20s. It was one of the free book offers for the Kindle, and I selected it because it was one of the few I'd never heard of. (Reviews at http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6562314-sisters.)

You can read the reviews, folks love it or hate it. I'm not finished yet, so I have no opinion other than that I'm tired of the lavish descriptions of the beauty of Cherry, the youngest character. Ok, we get it! Also of the way absolutely everything comfortable is lovingly described as "shabby".

What no other reviewer has mentioned but which shocked me is the casual racism. Discussing the prospect of an excellent job in Mexico, the characters decide it's not a place Cherry would want to follow her husband, since no country where the native inhabitants are black, brown, or yellow is worth visiting, because if there were anything to recommend it, the inhabitants would be white.

Also, Chinese household help abounds, and their employers speak to them in babytalk pidgin.

All very casual and accepted.

That was then. This is now. But I'm still surprised that no other reviewer noted it as one of the elements that dates the book. It's the casualness that dates it. Mark Twain, for example, was not casual.

-----------------------------

I dislike people who chew with their mouths open. I despise those do it with crunchy things in movie theaters! I want to leap over seats and throttle them!

Close your damn mouth!
.

1793 Stupid Poll

Thursday, May 1, 2008

I forget where I read this, so I can't link to it, and the details aren't important anyway. It's been kicking around in my head for a few days.

Some group did an exit poll wherein they asked people if race made a difference in whom they'd be willing to vote for. An overwhelming number of people, something like 85% or 90%, said "No."

Then they asked the same people if they knew someone to whom race would make a difference, and a very large percentage said "Yes."

The part that bugs me is that the conclusion of the pollsters was that the numbers didn't jive, somebody must be lying, and therefore a lot more people were racist than were willing to admit it to the pollsters.

Huh? Therefore?

Let's take 10 people most of whom know each other. 1 is racist and the other 9 are not. If we ask them the first question, we get 90% No, which is true.

If we ask them the second question, and 7 of the 9 know the racist guy, then we get 70% or 80% Yes, which is true.

How could they conclude that most people were lying?

Sheesh. Buncha idiots.
.