RugbyRebels

Islamic terror attacks in the UK have caused our crime rate to jump 13%...

...according to Trump.

I shit you not:

Fuck twitter.

13% annually. What does that even mean? Is it inflation-adjusted crime? Fucking tool. Someone should ask him how many people have been shot in the UK this year.

IIRC correctly, that 13% stat is homicide rate - IF you include the Manchester and London terrorist attacks AND the Hillsborough tregedy.

Basically, our homicide rate is low enough that the extra 130-odd deaths from those 3 incidents (on of which was 28 years ago), then you get a jump in the stats. Of course, that extra wouldn't even be statistically significant if added to the US death toll.

IIRC there has also been an increase year-on-year for a few years now; of around 6% per year; and this year just finished would have been about the same absent those 3 events.
Which means that the bump for this year is about 6% (not 13%) - of which 3/4 is a result of a football tragedy, not islamic terror.


My apologies if I've got some of the figures wrong - it was news on in the background yesterday whilst I was doing paperwork.


ETA: 629 homicides in the year ending June 2017 excluding the above 3 events.
US murder rates for 2016 was 15,696
Population difference of 1(UK) : 5 (US)
Thus the murder rate per capita is 5 times higher stateside - though I think the UK figure is "unlawful death" (so murder AND manslaughter); whilst the US is murder alone

Fucking hell WT, I want charts standard deviations, and power analyses. Lift your game FFS.

Still, at least Trump has managed to get his nominees for any number of roles past the Senate overview, in that he's simply ignoring a requirement to have his nominees approved, and is calling them advisors rather then the normal full job title in the hope he can skirt the law. (Bigger picture the number of jobs now being listed as Senate confirmable is a joke, and no matter Trump is a buffoon the list should be drastically cut to stop wasting time for the Senate and the executive)

morepork wrote:Fucking hell WT, I want charts standard deviations, and power analyses. Lift your game FFS.

Stones' said we needed more vague and more opinion. What were you thinking...?.

WaspInWales wrote:There's a website where you can type in Twitter usernames and it tells you what the likelihood is that the account is a Russian bot. I can't find the website anymore and numerous web searches have proved to be fruitful.

10 gold stars to the first person who can find it.

Just to be clear, this is not a website that needs to connect to your Twitter account to check your followers, it just checks on username.

https://makeadverbsgreatagain.us/mlp/

10 gold stars to me...


Not sure how accurate the site is, or what algorithms it uses, but it certainly seems to identify much of Trump's base as bots and/or of Russian origin.

Man oh man is he digging himself a hole with this one. Just crude, shamelessly self promoting thin skinned childish bullshit all around. Fucking hell.

What's he doing today?

He is "calling out" the widow of a dead soldier (on Tiwtter, like a man) for lying about the nature of a condolence called he made to her after bullshitting the press about him doing it for every soldier. It's really, really ugly.

Still just calling that poor widow a liar isn't he? After reportedly struggling to even remember his name in the phone call.

I can totally see why Obama would choose not to make that kind of phone call.

Or has he one-upped himself yet again?

The thing is this probably means there's something even more awful going on behind the scenes that nobody is paying attention too.

Well, he does like to double down on anything and everything he takes heat for.

At this point, he might as well do absolutely anything his ego requires him to do - he's absolutely not going to loose any more support I'm afraid; everyone who's sod by him now, are quite happy with any double-think required to continue standing by him - whilst those who approve of all this shit will just continue to lap it all up, feeling very smug at the great thing they did in voting for him.

Impeachment isn't going to happen without his support dropping lower - which it isn't about to; and from what I gather the 2018 seats up for grabs are gerrymandered to hell (how can that even be a thing?) with basically no chance of the Dem.s getting actual control of anything.

The next chance the world has to get rid of this idiot is 2020, and the Dems will have to actuall try to woo the undecided voters, and pick someone who's not also toxic. Basically, give the "moderate right" no excuse for continuing to support the baboon.

Mikey Brown wrote:Still just calling that poor widow a liar isn't he? After reportedly struggling to even remember his name in the phone call.

I can totally see why Obama would choose not to make that kind of phone call.

Or has he one-upped himself yet again?

She went on the breakfast Noos (which I'm not too sure about myself) to say that the call was awkward and not really appropriate in tone and that Mr. Mensa couldn't at first remember her dead husbands name. He immediately launched a retort (on Twitter, like a man). You have to wonder how much TV this cunt actually watches every day. His entire world view seems based around TV.

The Dems can it seems go three ways. Pick a centre ground candidate in US terms and attract republican and moderate voters, pick a younger Bernie Sanders accepting they'll struggle on the centre ground but hope to raise overall turnout by energising much of their base (and the last turnout was low so it's doable when Trump isn't likely to turnout huge numbers) or steer some middle course that speaks to their base and provides more of a mandate if they take the Whitehouse. No indication from them as a group as to where they should go with any of that, ideally they'll not eat too many of their young finding out what they want to do.

It was the Al Smith dinner the other night, and fair play to Paul Ryan (for once):


On Trump's Cabinet
"Enough with the applause. You sound like the Cabinet when Donald Trump walks into the room."

On the dinner
"I don't think I've seen this many New York liberals, this many Wall Street CEOs, in one room since my last visit to the White House."

On Trump last year at the dinner
"I want to promise you, though, as I've heard a few stories about how the dinner went last year. So I want to put your minds at ease. You can relax about my remarks. I know last year that Donald Trump offended some people. I know his comments, according to critics, went too far. Some said it was unbecoming of a public figure. And they said that his comments were offensive. Well, thank God he's learned his lesson."

On Secretary of State Rex Tillerson
"I want to thank Patricia Heaton. You know, Patricia and I do go back a long ways. Patricia Heaton, she is a Hollywood Republican. A Hollywood Republican. That is an oxymoron. Which clearly was the word that Rex Tillerson was searching for."

On Schumer
"A lot of people, they ask me, you know, a guy from Wisconsin, what's it like to work on a daily basis with an abrasive New Yorker with a loudmouth? But you know once you get to know him, Chuck Schumer's not all that bad. I know why he's been so hard on the President, actually. It has nothing to do with ideology. You see, Chuck's mad that he lost his top donor."

On the headlines from the dinner
"When you read the papers tomorrow, everyone's going to report this thing differently. Breitbart's going to lead with 'Ryan slams the President amongst liberal elites.' New York Times is going to report 'Ryan defends the President in a state Hillary won.' And the President will tweet '300,000 at Al Smith dinner cheer mention of my name.'"

On the White House resignations
"The truth is, the press absolutely misunderstands and never records the big accomplishments of the White House. Look at all the new jobs the President has created -- just among the White House staff."

On Clinton during the election
"I'm from Wisconsin. Wisconsin is a fantastic place to visit in the fall. Looking back, someone probably should have told Hillary Clinton that fact."

On Steve Bannon
"The fact that you learn when you're speaker: I am now second in line of succession since Steve Bannon has resigned. Very cool, very close."

On Twitter
"Every morning, I wake up in my office and I scroll through Twitter to see which tweets I'll have to pretend I didn't see later on."

On former House Speaker John Boehner
"Every afternoon, former Speaker John Boehner calls me up -- not to give advice, just to laugh."

On Trump's insult to him
"You know, at one point, the President actually insulted me. I know that sounds kind of surprising. He described me as a Boy Scout who was boring to talk to. It didn't hurt my feelings. What hurt my feelings was when my wife agreed with him."

On Russia's President Vladimir Putin
"I've learned that in Catholicism you are guilty until proven less guilty. I learned that God is always listening. As is Vladimir Putin."

Very good from Ryan.

In other news, just found this excellent Twitter account from the man upstairs:
https://twitter.com/TheTweetOfGod

morepork wrote:He is "calling out" the widow of a dead soldier (on Tiwtter, like a man) for lying about the nature of a condolence called he made to her after bullshitting the press about him doing it for every soldier. It's really, really ugly.

That’s just f*cking class. Even if he did everything right (I doubt it but even if he has) you don’t get into an argument with a bereaved widow. The man has zero class; it s like watching a petulant toddler (although at least the child knows no better).

Mikey Brown wrote:Still just calling that poor widow a liar isn't he? After reportedly struggling to even remember his name in the phone call.

I can totally see why Obama would choose not to make that kind of phone call.

Or has he one-upped himself yet again?

British PMs used to write a letter of condolence. I’d suggest that is probably the best means of communication in that situation.

No irony behind those robot dead eyes. She's not there for her intellectual prowess I suppose. Melnarnia Trumpess spearheads an official initiative to combat......bullying. Classic.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... b3135c1c6c

“By our own example, we must teach children to be good stewards of the world they will inherit. We need to remember that they are always watching and listening. It is our responsibility to take the lead in teaching children the values of empathy and communication that are at the core of kindness, mindfulness, integrity, and leadership.”

“I think the press makes me more uncivil than I am. People don’t understand: I went to an Ivy League college, I was a nice student, I did very well. I’m a very intelligent person. The fact is I think, I really believe, I think the press creates a different image of Donald Trump than the real person.”

Um. Right on. The last sentence isn't even proper Engrish.

Yeah, it's all the press's fault for... videoing him saying or doing stuff; allowing him access to twitter, asking him the occasional question... that sort of thing.

It honestly doesn't matter what happens from this point on as Clinton's team has been linked with financing the piss-gate (sorry Mike) dossier.

Trump does/says untold amounts of 'shits' until it seemingly reaches the point of no return and then this happens.

It's back to square one.

Ignoring for a moment that the vast majority of his claims are lies, twisted, unsubstantiated or half truths, these kinda stories do give weight to his 'fake news' bollocks that he constantly cries about.

He should have a new slogan;

'Fake news, it works for me'.

Anybody read up on this Trump/Whitefish/Puerto Rico situation? Crazy conspiracy or yet another example of totally shameless bribery/profiteering at the expense of many?