Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

Measuring migration flows between Mexico and the U.S. is challenging because there are no official counts of how many Mexican immigrants enter and leave the U.S. each year.

Lel that's helpful

Wow, yeah, we should definitely avoid mentioning factors which make it more difficult to assess aspects of what we write about. Better just imply that we have good numbers and never actually say anything about it.

[Loud Whispers]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Trump, Feb. 1:

So if you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of him, would you? Seriously, OK, just knock the hell. I promise you I will pay for the legal fees, I promise, I promise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3fKpztpTY0

Top kek
Damn right, respect politics as more than tomato

Trump, Feb. 16: (referring to a supporter who assaulted a protester that was carrying a "Make America Great. Keep All Immigrants" sign

Alright, thank you. Who is that person who stood — that was so great. Who was the person that did that? Put up your hand. Put up your hand. I wanna — come on. Bring that person up. I love (unintelligible). Come on up here. So amazing.

Please where is source
What I found was this protester was swearing at the crowd, disrupting the rally and giving the middle finger to the crowd
Which is not protesting, that's just trying to shut everything down

Trump, Feb. 22:

Look, see, he’s smiling. See, he’s having a good time. Ah, I love the old days, you know. You know what I hate. There’s a guy, totally disruptive, throwing punches. We’re not allowed to punch back anymore. I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks. … He’s walking out like — big high fives, smiling, laughing. I’d like to punch him in the face.

Security from the event states that the protestor was not throwing punches or acting violently.

That guy's face went unpunched
Why you gotta give me false hope of Politicians punching people in the face
Anyways that guy went in screaming and disrupting the rally and

Trump said the protester had been “throwing punches.” By the time a POLITICO reporter spotted the protester being led from the floor of South Point Arena by security personnel, the man was not throwing punches.

Lel
Though I'm going to assume the unnamed sources aren't lying cos there's nothing wrong going on

Trump, March 9:

What’s more fun than a Trump rally, right? In the good old days, this doesn’t happen because they used to treat them very, very rough. And when they protested once, you know, they would not do it again so easily. But today they walk in and they put their hand up and they put the wrong finger in the air at everybody, and they get away with murder, because we’ve become weak. We’ve become weak, and we really have become weak.

Trump, March 11:

Part of the problem, and part of the reason it takes so long [to remove protesters], is nobody wants to hurt each other anymore, right, and they’re [the security officers] being politically correct the way they take them out – so it takes a little bit longer and honestly protesters they realize it, they realize that there are no consequences to protesting anymore. There used to be consequences. There are none anymore.

Chicago bants?
I don't get why they think interrupting Trump every time he tries to speak at one of his own rallies is ok lol, it's poor manners and it just makes him more powerful as he appears in front of all of his supporters under attack and fully in control over their challenge

Also personally I don't care as I was promised punching and didn't see any, and I would support much punching of people who try to take over other people's rallies, and when it comes to sympathy points punching is impermanent whereas people will threaten to kill his kids and news stations will release his kids address publicly in response

lik idkf

Also I thought you already had stop and search powers, though I don't see why you'd need those. I also thought you already had powers to search private residences. I also thought you already had profiles for all your people. You also already have border police searching and deporting migrants.

Stop and search is illegal. Entering a private residence without the possession of a judicial warrant authorizing you to enter and search that specific residence is illegal.

PICK UP THAT CAN CITIZEN IT'S ALREADY LEGAL

So eh, sorry to be the one to break this news to you citizen

Unless you're white because then this doesn't affect you at all and you get bonus liberty

Measuring migration flows between Mexico and the U.S. is challenging because there are no official counts of how many Mexican immigrants enter and leave the U.S. each year.

Lel that's helpful

Wow, yeah, we should definitely avoid mentioning factors which make it more difficult to assess aspects of what we write about. Better just imply that we have good numbers and never actually say anything about it.

If you know of it and avoid mentioning it whilst pretending you have the numbers that's called dishonesty, lying and statistics

[chaoticag]

Saying you don't have official sources of information typically means government records so far as I know, since they're the authority on this. It doesn't mean the data is not there, but if the US government already deports Illegal immigrants, then finding and identifying them would mean there would be no illegal immigrants I think. You can still use statistical analysis to find this kind of stuff though in the same way steam spy does through random sampling and some extrapolation.

[SaberToothTiger]

are we just descending to sex lies n' videotape?

are we?

and then i get fkin ninjaed

[Loud Whispers]

Arab spring 2: Yankee boogaloo

I WILL BE SO MOIST IF THE CIVIL HAPPENING IS WRITTEN IN COMIC SANS

Also the MoveOn lads who did Chicago are Soros funded
Top lel

Democracyspring seems to be down right now, but they're funded by MoveOn

What a coincidence :P
Also worth mentioning as was said in yuropol thread as Soros has his hands in both pots either side of the pond is that he's just one man. Highly influential, immensely so, but just a cog in the even larger machine. Still, a useful marker ;)

[mainiac]

To be completely clear, my argument was not about Border Patrol raping 80% of the women

Hey, somebody is doing the raping.

[Reelya]

Measuring migration flows between Mexico and the U.S. is challenging because there are no official counts of how many Mexican immigrants enter and leave the U.S. each year.

Lel that's helpful

Wow, yeah, we should definitely avoid mentioning factors which make it more difficult to assess aspects of what we write about. Better just imply that we have good numbers and never actually say anything about it.

If you know of it and avoid mentioning it whilst pretending you have the numbers that's called dishonesty, lying and statistics

But, they did explicitly mention it, which is where you got the quote. Then they say they're using the best available statistics from both governments.

What they said was "the data isn't perfect, but we have government estimates". So what is it that they "avoided mentioning", exactly? Seriously, if your only evidence of them "avoiding mentioning" something is a thing they literally just mentioned in the article itself, you're having a serious brain fart.

[Loud Whispers]

But, they did explicitly mention it, which is where you got the quote.

I know that, read what I was replying to

[mainiac]

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2015/11/appallingly-dishonest-pew-study-on-immigration-trend-from-mexico

If you want to say "that data doesn't cover 2015" then say "that data doesn't cover 2015".  Say it like it is, dont act like a nitpick overturns the entire premise.

[Reelya]

Also, the pew research is based on what admittedly imperfect data governments release.

Whereas that conservative link uses data from a right-wing "think tank" with a massive anti-immigrant bias.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Center_for_Immigration_Studies

Many of the directors of the Center for Immigration Studies are also on the board of directors for overtly anti-immigrant organizations.

And the articles claims this:

The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) has published another blockbuster report on immigration numbers, and their analysis foreshadows a troubling trend of growing illegal immigration

Whereas the actual report says this:

The number of immigrants in the United States is now enormous, but it must be recognized that most immigrants, including those from Latin America, are in the country legally. Absent a change in legal immigration policy, the immigrant population will continue to increase.

Well, there was an increase in legal immigration, but the numbers do not attempt to track illegal immigration in any way. That's not even a claim the anti-immigrant group who prepared the report try and make.

[Drakale]

If you want to say "that data doesn't cover 2015" then say "that data doesn't cover 2015".  Say it like it is, dont act like a nitpick overturns the entire premise.

Except it does?

[Frumple]

Not... really? Stuff like that only occasionally has major changes in pattern over the course of a single year -- '14 data is going to be about as good as '15 data, and the trend up to that point is going to be pretty solid to build a premise off of.

And so far as I'm aware, there's been no major changes indicative of a reversal, so the lack of '15 data probably isn't going to mean all that much. Mexican civil war's still about as bad, US isn't in much of a different place, most of the areas further south are about as as as they were (and no, that wasn't a typo or grammatical mistake)... so far as I can recall southland news, if anything the pressures to head back are marginally higher, on the net -- BRIC's a thing, and economic signs for those areas are... well, arguably better than they were a decade ago, anyway.

... also, when you're dealing with large scale statistics, especially with subjects as difficult to track as the one in question, you're almost always going to be lagging a year or two (or three, or...) behind. Doesn't make observations made off the data particularly wrong.

[Cruxador]

To be completely clear, my argument was not about Border Patrol raping 80% of the women

Hey, somebody is doing the raping.

And being a border cop is boring work.

[Geltor]

I did a search for 'israel newspaper endorse trump' but found nothing. Well, I found http://www.mintpressnews.com/jewish-leaders-plan-boycott-donald-trump-aipac-encouraging-hate/214889/

"Yisrael Hayom" which is arguably the largest (or at least second largest) newspaper tends to write in a way that endorses trump. its not surprising, however, since the newspaper is considered to be funded entirely by a right-wing affiliated wealthy family. the newspaper is always being nicknamed "bibis newspaper" for its very unbalanced portrayal of netaniyahu in positive light.

on the other hand, "Yediot Ahronot" which is the other major newspaper, speaks of trump much like the center-left media in the usa does. however, since the majority of israelis are right-wing affiliated, they would endorse trump due to his stance on islam and such.

[mainiac]

Except it does?

So your answer to the question of what to do if presented with a source is to deny the source and insist that a far less credible source is the truth.