This blog is dedicated to the memory of David Weintraub, who took on insidious astroturfers and won.

Sunday, October 4, 2015

Statistical Analysis vs. Zeitgeist Sniffing Blog Ratings

1. -  started by former wonkblogger Ezra Klein. Fairly standard issue news aggregating site with a crappy design starting from the fact the dominant colour is bright yellow.


Global Rank*Global rank icon 1,084 66
Rank in United States     United States Flag 337

2. - former Daily Kossack who became medjia famous when his use of statistical analysis backed into presciently predicting Obama's easy wins in 2008 and 2012.

Has a few critics who dislike his tendency to rely on historical metrics which may not necessarily predict what's gonna happen this time around, given that the people are mad as Hell and not going to take it any more. 

Also, his analysis indicates Hillary still comfortably ahead while admitting Sanders has a chance largely due to the 'Hillary Is Unlikeable and Untrusted' Law of Physics, which finds her trapped in a downward spiraling vortex or as Silver calls it a negative feedback loop. Bad news lowers trust and likeability which in turn reduce poll numbers reflecting the sheeple who subliminally digest the bad news and then in turn tell pollsters they no longer like or trust Hillary.

Global Rank* Global rank icon
 3,327 16
Rank in United States  United States Flag 763 

3. DFQ2 - according to Zeitgeist Theory, the negative feed back loop is exacerbated by the fact that Hillary scores zero on the mediagenetic scale.

Curiously, this same defect also skewers dynastic ambitions on the other side.

Or maybe this is simply another manifestation of 'Post Traumatic Boomer Distress Syndrome,' where an entire nation (including boomers ourselves) recoils from the "leaders" borne of this most wretched and wicked generation and vote for their mediagenic grandparents instead. Trump's campaign too is destined to die by PTBDS unless it ends up in "the exception that proves the rule" classification.

This doesn't make any of the older candidates bad people necessarily, just poor candidates in an era where mediagenics is the most important electoral characteristic in the successful candidate's tool kit. 

Of course, we hate their guts anyway.

How much is worth?

Estimated Worth:  $ 481

4. - this blog falls squarely inside the zeitgeist sniffing model. And surprise, it is being vanquished by the three other blogs in our ranking while tightly gripping the Snowden data. Or maybe should I say because they are holding out the data from John Q. Whiteysphere?

Wow. Just wow. Look at  the inversion in the numbers. Ranked relatively high worldwide with Booman Trib numbers in the US. Everybody who goes, goes through TOR? 

Doesn't the government own TOR?

Global Rank* Global rank icon 18,685 6,415
Rank in United States* United States Flag 124,938 


donkeytale said...

It was either go with the Alexa number or the net value and I found the latter far more impressive so went with it as a 2-0 eephus pitch.

At the height of its popularity Pffugee was never worth $50. Once Byron left it was done. I even drove Vox off. Or maybe Fairleft had more to do with that particular blogicide.

Eh well, I'm done.

socrates said...

Alexa uses a weird system or did where people are members of it. If they visit your website, voila-la, CNN or Rauhauser will mention you. This blog never hit the big time, unless one counts becoming a big fish in a small pond. Myself, sure, I somehow made a dent, and am indeed living off of that zeitgeist dent to this day.

Stats, schmats?

You didn't respond to one link I lifted off of Wikipedia condemning Nate Silver.

According to Alexa, during one DFQ2 blip on the zeitgeist meter registered us as perhaps baseball's AA phenom of a blog version. Mandy told me to maybe kinda sorta can it with the quirky writing style, that then I too could become a blog player.

What part of my internet is rigged presentation did you miss? As it takes money to buy elections, it is also the key indicator of who can become "famous" or a "player."

I inflated this blog's worth back then because I was basing it on the numbers coming out for Pffugee and My Left Wing. I did not realise at the time that both of those websites were then at the peak of their death spiral. They persisted for a couple more blogging seasons, but they were effectively cooked.

So while I was struggling to hit .250 and advance to the Red Sox' #1 farm team Pawtucket, I thought all was hunky dory because Pffugee and MLW were the Danny Ainge of the Toronto Blue Jays. Their defense at third base was okay, but they couldn't even reach the Mendoza Line.

It's all relative?

All the people and websites you mention except for DFQ2 have one thing in common. They are tools of the state apparatus.

I don't give two shites what Nate Silver did or didn't do in 2008. What is he doing now? What are his colleagues who he hired doing? Why doesn't he own the results of those mailed in efforts also?

You have still not covered the one angle that might have turned this entry into an instant masterpiece. What about social-psychology? Does media influence voting? Are they a reflection of society as you proffer or are they the tools who promote and benefit from a rigged society?

Ezra Klein? Paid fake.
Nate Silver? Paid fake.
The Intercept? Paid fake.

DFQ2? Leftier than thou on the correct side of every issue.

In this internet age, the lines are continually blurring between who is a paid fake and who is a useful idiot. There is also confusion over the phrase paid fake. Are those from the CIA? Do such people own decoder rings? Do you know where the tinfoil is when you need it?


socrates said...

I don't visit Vox. I agree the aesthetics of it are awful. The only reason I have visited 538 is because of the election. It seems to be the poor man's Grantland.

All those people are neoliberals. Ezra Klein? Check. Nate Silver? Check. The Intercept? Check.

Maybe the key factoid to take out of all this is there's really not much difference between libertarians and neoliberals, nor between paid fakes and useful idiots.

Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who also points out these things. He doesn't use the same terms of course.

This election will let us know how deep in the doodoo society is in regards to living in a fake, rigged existence. It is the proverbial elephant in the room. Are we doomed or can we start to vote our way out of this mess of a world?

A Bernie presidency would be new, uncharted territory. He would probably find room in his cabinet for Warren, Reich, and other leftier than thous. Bernie Sanders is a fluke of an opportunity. It will be extremely interesting to see how he does in next week's debate and how that may influence the polling numbers.

Oh to be a student in 2025 looking back on the herstory we are currently witnessing in be here now, zen time. This is the primary difference between DFQ2 and those garbage websites you cited. It is the primary difference between Bernardo and Hillary. It is about good versus evil. It is about Red Sox versus Yankees. People wonder, "Where's the beef?" We are talking about a fricken slaughterhouse, not one side of cattle Rocky Balboa is practicing on. We are talking about capitalism's death spiral.

donkeytale said...

The libertarian strain differs from the neoliberal in three ways: 1. Foreign policy 2. Personal freedom (IE drugs/sex/rocknroll) 3. Criminal Injustice (get tha police off our backs)

In these categories they are leftier than thou. The economic freedom to screw the people and eliminate the govt is of course worse than the other three are good.

I will tell you that in the college aged young person cohort, libertarians are a fairly large segment. In fact, my son is one. Rand Paul man. Although I think I see a glimmer of his feeling the bern.

donkeytale said...

Klein I think is a leftier than thou although I'm sure he enjoys a comfortable life style. The rightwing proclivities of Glenn Greenwald are well-documented.

Silver, I'm not sure. I really haven't a clue about him personally except he started out as a Kossack. He may or may not have been a Kos Kop.

Kossacks tend to say they are lefty libertarians, whatever that means. I think it is a Bay Area affectation. Wealthy high tech liberals.

Silver brings a different take with his analysis. Of course, lots of people will be paying attention to him as we run up to November 2016. Then a few months after the election people will loose interest and he will be forced back into bloviating.

That seems to be the weakness of his business model. Seasonal work.

I think he is funded by Grantland, isn't he?

I heard something about the Houston Astros GM. He is a former statistical analyst for some big time corporate structures, non-sports related. Possibly MIC. His only training for sports was fantasy baseball leagues.

Today, teh Astros are in the playoffs after his 3rd year on the job, where he decimated the major league team and rebuilt the farm system. He now has the youngest and least paid team in the playoffs.

He knows nothing about baseball talent, and went with his scouts decisions. His thing was, I will trade off all the tradeable major leaguers and take draft picks and young minor leaguers in return. The more of these I have the better my chances of building a competitive team and salaries will be rock bottom.

Its a game of probabilities more than aesthetics.

donkeytale said...

Houston's entire starting lineup makes less than AROD.

socrates said...

Yes, I certainly took liberties (no pun intended) painting a wide brush across political ideologies. It was akin to claiming Hitler as a socialist, yet not as severe of a case of verbal diarrhea.

Here are some new stats on Bernie and the Black vote:

"How Bernie Sanders is reaching out to black voters. Is it working?"

The money quote, imho:

There are signs that his outreach could be working.

Back in June, a Suffolk University/USA Today poll showed that only 2 percent of black respondents would be willing to vote for Sanders in the primaries, and 77 percent would support Hillary Clinton.

By Oct. 1, support for Mrs. Clinton had plummeted – among black respondents she was down 37 points, to 40 percent – and Sanders was up 15 points to 17 percent, according to the poll.

And Sanders' favorability rating among black respondents in the Suffolk University/USA Today poll had risen 42 percentage points since July.

There is other related news, but to harp on those would be knee-jerk, boring, medium as rote discourse. E.G., Bernie got his first congressional endorsement from a Latino dude from Arizona. It is akin to taking small chops at the paid fake tree. Kareem took a chop at Trump while praising Bernsies. It's all about getting in your cuts. Babe Ruth struck out a lot, no? But he also hit a lot of taters and produced.

What isn't showing up in coronation based stats?

Okay, so we see Bernie still has a lot of work to do with African Americans. But it has started. Going from two to seventeen percent in four or five months is huge. More importantly, imho, is the fact that Hillary's African American support has dropped from 77% to 40%.

It is still the proverbial we shall see situation, no doubt.

A seventh "debate" has been added to the schedule. It won't technically be a debate. Rachel Maddow is hosting it I think in between the first two debates. It is being hosted by a big chunk of Southern states. This is good news! Maddow loves Bernie. She said each candidate will approach the microphone one at a time and take questions from her. Maddow admits to being excited. She said no comment on whether or not she is nervous.

Some states are going to vote like garbage no matter what. What can one do but say fuck you to them?

Bernie is within twelve points of Hillsbury in California. We are not talking about a twenty point lead or wtf. And this is before there have been any debates. I suspect Bernie will win California. It is a must win, but I think he will take it. I believe this primary will look like the map used to or still does perhaps in regards to so-called red and blue states. Bernie is Bill Clinton in a way or Obama needing to gobble up all the historic democratic states. Now if Bernie can win some of the neurotic swing states such as Ohio, he is going to be the next president. Bet on it.

socrates said...

I have not been following baseball at all. I understand the moneyball or analytics development in sports. Teams other than the Yankees and Lakers are finding out that spending money is either impossible or not a guarantee. It sounds like Houston tanked it all and became a form of the Oakland A's or other small markets that make do with what they can. The big question is what happens when their phenoms become proven stars? How do they resign them? Is the team truly trying to win it all or are they the equivalent of Hillary, saying one thing and meaning another.

It's hilarious to see Hillary flip-flopping her way into the leftier than thou areas of policy opinions. It is as calculating as anything she's been up to. It is more of the same. But unfortunately for her, since she is dependent on Wall Street andSuper PACs to buy the election, she is still going against Glass-Steagall.

I also saw a quote from Bernie mocking her indirectly about how he has never needed to evolve like she does. And Martin O'Malley may be filling the role of pitbull Bernie's nice guy style refuses to cross into. I'm glad O'Malley isn't doing well enough to register many votes. I do like that he attacks Hillary in no uncertain terms. And Bernie does it also. He's just never going to be animated about it or get derogatory. He has a system for how he troll-busts his political opponents.

Counterpunch is looking more foolish by the day. They hammered Bernie as being a sheep herder, basically a paid fake or useful idiot for the coronation. They missed the memo that Bernie is a regular guy. He is not Kucinich or pick your random leftier than thou who blipped on the zeitgeist meter before being kookified. That's like comparing Cal Ripken to Lou Gehrig. Cal might have been a solid player. I suspect he was. But he was not a video game star. Kucinich is a nice guy, no doubt. But he is not in Bernie's league.

Sanders did what he had to do. He needed to solidify this race as being between two people, himself and Hillface. It does help Bernie that O'Malley, Chafee, and Webb are in spoiler roles and will not even get a whiff of political, playoff contention. This shows how strong a candidate Bernie is.

We were far ahead of the curve. We saw this happening and reported it. Mere weeks ago 538 was still saying nothing about Bernie while wondering if Hilltard can realistically lose the primaries.

We may only have 17 regular readers, but they each know to always trust DFQ2 content and political analysis.

Yes on 538 versus Grantland. They are both ESPN offshoots. I don't understand wtf happened with Grantland and Bill Simmons. I thought it was his baby. But he is on the outs.

It's the same garbage format, just toss in the analytics schtick.

socrates said...

The biggest lie is that the pun was not intended. That is the equivalent of saying, "That being said..."

I see the poll numbers as a half-full glass. It is all about trajectories and ceilings. I think 538 has shown themselves to be useless. I do respect yourself, though, and will keep an eye out for future Nate Silver analysis. Maybe my mistake was reading too much of Harry Enten. He is the Nomar Garciaparra of that website. Trade that clown! Trade Rondo. Yes. I said it. I think Simmons had some effective schtick based on Pat Ewing. It had something to do with addition by subtraction. Let me try to find it ....

Yay, this was easy to find. Don't say I never do anything for you.

Ewing Theory 101 (from 2009)

Ewing Theory Revisited (from 2013)

Simmons versus Silver is the equivalent of McEnroe versus Lendl or Kirk versus Spock. The mechanical, logical guy is the second banana. Simmons might be a blowhard, okay, he is, but I will take his emotional, Gonzo-wtf approach to writing as sports any day of the week over Silver's work.

I am on the side of Alan Watts and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. I say fooker you to positivism and society as hoax.

Hillary is garbage, period. Bernie is greatness, period. On trial are the American people, period. I am done posting for now, period.

socrates said...

I'm psyched for some Mexican lunch and the Celtics are on soon against Madrid, apparently the New York Yankees of Europe.

But first I wonder what's up with this?

"Matt Barnes drove 95 miles to ‘beat the s–t’ out of Derek Fisher"

Apparently it has been confirmed by Woj.

I'm glad I already got in early and predicted a fifty win (give or take a few) season for the good guys, regular guys Boston Celtics. They are stacked and very good. That is all.

donkeytale said...

It always seemed like Derek Fisher was a tough guy. I guess Barnes is younger and bigger?

There could be 6 or 7 guys named Matt Barnes in the NBA so now I guess I'll have to read the link.

OK, the guy is fairly psychotic over the loss of a woman. Been there done that. A total waste of the human spirit. It's over as Roy Orbison once said.

Fisher comes out of this with a few scratches. He's got the better of the two viewpoints as long as Barnes remains unarmed.

donkeytale said...

OK, you're on the Board for 50 wins this year for the Celts?

I'm sure Silver will offer up 538's prediction at some point. This will make for a scientific test between Statistical Analysis and Zeitgeist Theory. Excellent.

Granted it is only one test but we can also include The Bern and la Hillary Clinton Foundation and maybe Biden. Soon enough we will have a random sample, or wtf..

donkeytale said...

I missed the "give or take a few."

This sounds like hedging. Is it 47 or 50 that you predict?

socrates said...

I agree that's hedging with my Celtics prediction. The Celtics were at the bottom only two years ago. They used to be the Bernie Sanders of February, an afterthought. Look, as Bernie would say, the C's have established themselves as an at minimum mediocre .500 team. I am looking at the NBA electoral map and see a lot of easy wins.

Playoffs, schmayoffs. This is about the regular season. This is about a disciplined, statistical analysis including the zeitgeist factor. My proven yet unheralded schtick encapsulates both methodologies. Silver is always dependent on sniffing poll butts. He is waiting and waiting for that precise moment he can become the first Captain Obvious. That's all he is doing. Nate Silver is merely gaming a corrupt social structure for whose benefit? That would be Nate Silver.

50 wins in the West is the equivalent of 60 in the East. The C's will benefit from playing more games against loser teams.

They are well-coached and have great chemistry. Some teams are built for the playoffs. The C's are built for regular season games no one pays attention to.

The 2008 Big Three team marched through the regular season. It was supposed to take them a year or two to put it together. They got it done immediately and only a catastrophic injury to Garnett prevented the Celtics' fourth dynasty. I include the 70's as a dynasty even though they only won twice. I guess that is a subjective opinion.

A few years later that same team would stumble to a lower seed. They mailed in the regular season. It almost paid off with another title in 2010.

The Celtics this year start their playoffs with game one and it will last 82 games. They may or may not do well in the playoffs. No one can predict trades. No one can predict injuries.

Last year I said the C's would go 41-41. I figured it was a half-full glass all things considered. The glass this year is much more than half-full.

I have no clue about Washington, Chicago, Toronto, and I suppose Atlanta and perhaps Milwaukee. Those are the teams on paper who should be the ones targeting Cleveland.

Atlanta is the wild card. Was last year a fluke?

I can't pin down an exact number of wins for the Celtics. 50 is a nice round number.

Last year, Chicago won 50, Toronto won 49, and Washington won 46. That is the tier this year's Celtics will be in.

socrates said...

Sometimes I take a peek at the right margin. Maybe we should keep the greatest hits around for a little longer to then see what the non-skewed current instant masterpieces truly are. Blogger allows for 7 day, 30 day, and all-time greatest hits for a widget gadget thingie.

I had forgotten I fished out the following donkeytale masterpiece which had been viciously dumped into Google cache by Firedoglake. I thought I had only saved one of his troll wars entries.

"Of Stollers, Greenwalds and Silvers: Compare and Contrast"

Is Stoller even still around? The analysis on Silver and possibly Greenwald would appear non-timely in a timely way. Donkeytale is looking forward to not too distant statistical numbers emerging which will tighten the donkratification of the 538-DFQ2 controversy of 2015.

We also had some dialectical processing on Assange and Snowden, but that would be a digression. It's all about Bernie, no?

My gut is telling me that Nate Silver is living off of one small sample pool of a blowhard. What may have been a blind squirrel finding an acorn has morphed into Nate Silver is God or perhaps a witch according to that old piece which has been gathering dust.

I say he is a dickhead. I say that calling out winners and losers is a racket in itself which allows no room for the regular guy zeitgeist to be factored in. Nate Silver is the big banker who can f up and still get a few million (or more?) for a severance package.

Does anyone actually read FiveThirtyEight? And if so, who are those people and why are they such shallow, idiotic consumer bots?

socrates said...

This is good. Below that one a couple entries on the right is also "Matt Stoller and the Great White .35 of One Percent."

That might have been your blogging prime, that period when you became a player at Firedoglake. You seemed to finally have hit your ceiling of good writing and insights. We both seemed to go through the same process.

Like being 16 and finally driving. Wow! Yippee! Eventually everyone realises that driving sucks.

It's the same with the internet.

We are now reaping the benefits of already having experienced that learning curve.

socrates said...

I'm now in the comments. You nailed it and look very good in the prescient way. You called the country becoming more polarised with the trend being brownification or wtf and leftward political movement.

Bernie's correct about Obama. He built up a hope train and then said, thanks guys, we've got it from here.

One can see that now Obama has become a lame duck, he is speaking more like the grandparent than the parent who has to raise the kids.

Too little, too late.

Hillary should have read your stuff back in the Spring. Perhaps then she could have concentrated less on the coronation and more on moving to the left. Now she is in the battle of her political life. She is fending off criminal charges while finally paying attention to her own alleged base.

Only a few in herstory have had the ability to trash talk and then back it up. Muhammad Ali. Larry Bird. Rupert Pupkin.

Hillary felt so confident the nomination was cemented, she wasted months and money on fighting Republicans.

Pride goeth before the death spiral?

socrates said...

There was a guy disagreeing with your scathing attack on Stoller and plugging of Silver:

"I think the Democratic caucus isn’t progressive right now; and that it won’t be until it’s led by people, including the President, who haven’t been bought and paid for by corporate America. Somehow, I don’t see Nate Silver’s electoral analyses addressing questions like this."

That too has been the basis for my constant beating down of 538.

I don't think they even realise there is a zeitgeist, let alone a top of the zeitgeist. They probably think it has something to do with kooks and Alex Jones, hence irrelevant.

The concept of a top of the zeitgeist entered the historical Kimberlin thrilla in vanilla court records. He was upset with this idea of a top of the zeitgeist which I had occupied and you reported on as a real regular guy citizen journalist.

socrates said...

I feel my job here has been accomplished. I will continue to read the comments in that fished out from cache blog entry. Uhm, can you see comments at Kevin's shadowproof thief website? I never did. It seems like he only saved the main entries.

socrates said...

That entry with the comments is a definite time capsule masterpiece. Well done. You get the socratisation seal of approval.

dogbroth December 22nd, 2012 at 10:59 am 11
In response to letsgetitdone @ 6

What are we blogging for, if not solutions? End of corporatism?

End of the surveillance state?

Greenwald lost me with his affirmation for Citizens United.

Then I researched and found he got major funding from the Koch Brother’s Cato Institute. Okay, now I get his support for Citizen’s United.

His agenda, fairly well hidden, like his support for Ron Paul, became much clearer to me.

I have no problem with him. He should just be more clear about his agenda. It is not progressive.

Stoller, I think I already clearly laid out my criticism of his two pre-election and one post election piece.

Let me just state again: not impressed with him.

I like him just fine, OK? At least he’s an actual progressive.

dogbroth December 22nd, 2012 at 11:04 am 12
In response to letsgetitdone @ 2

And yes, I agree that Silver doesn’t address the quality of progressivism or the lack thereof. That’s a subject for gas baggerdom, not science.

However, neither Greenwald nor Stoller address how to achieve better quality progressivism, either. Stoller tried and clearly failed, at least recently.

GG doesn’t even try. He is all critique all the time. Usually the same critique, over and over, leading nowhere that I can determine.

socrates said...

"John Kelly" is probably some derivative of paid fakery.

I remember searching Twitter for people promoting Teach for America. Nearly every single one turned out to be a verified tool of that racketeering or one of its allies.

It is easy for me with my basic income life to critique. I do get what you were saying about Greenwald. That was the period of time when he got exposed and you made note of it.

I am not really trying to figure out Stoller. That would be too much work.

But the names Greenwald and Silver at least still carry a bit of blog juice.

And oh yes, I keep forgetting to re-look at my entry on Cenk Uygar. I ended up interacting with him at Twitter and believe he is a regular guy. I like the podcasts he does with The Young Turks.

donkeytale said...

Your attacks on Silver go hand in hand with fake leftist attacks on Silver in 2012. Verbatim. They were merely the grousings of loosers. Perhaps same this time.

Essentially, it is attack the messenger by attacking his work. Whatever. It is solid analysis and it does implicate the media. I quoted him directly. The relationship between the media and the zeitgeist is symbiotic. In fact, good media results from reflecting teh zeitgeist. This is what makes our schtick so powerful, if unscientific.

You don't read the comments well.

Silver doesn't actually have a message which is the substance of your shallow, redundant non-prescient criticism. You will brook nothing less than a Bernie fan boi in the media. However, that is the stuff of RT and Putin and adolescents. Sad to say, you are aping fairleft's love of a too coherent fantasy world over messy realism from which you recoil.

You prefer propaganda. So does fairleft.

Of course you will read Silver during this cycle, especially when game actually starts and people pay attention. He will put it out there and we will see again if he's prescient.

Something had to occur which led some looser Daily Kos blogger known as Poblano to become a hugely famous columnist for the New York Times, accurately predicting 2012 when most everyone called the election to close but leaning Romney.

You seem to imply this was some form of conspiracy. Yes, the conspiracy of moneyball being adapted to the sport of elections.

He may now be Captain Obvious to you but he surely wasn't in 2008 and especially 2012 where both righties and fake lefties predicted Obama's demise. Think Matt Stoller. Think Greenwald. Think fairleft. Those guys schtick from 2011-12 is laughable in its lack of insight or clarity. It is cliche pseudo intellectual garbage. You are in that territory.

They simply don't get it and now are paying the price for their bad moves and lack of prescience.

Stoller has disappeared, thankfully. He may be at AA Woonsocket at this point trying to re-develop some game. He has none. Probably playing for his community blogspot team on Tuesday nights.

Greenwald is an embarrassment and a sell-out to the internet oligarchy which has stifled Snowden or maybe more accurately, bought his silence. A massive and complete liar. GG went from his already oversized platform at The Graun to being basically disappeared on a boring blog that is not even in the top 100,000 in the US.

Snowden himself has also worked his way down the ladder thanks in large part to his allegiance to schtick thief Greenwald acquiring Snowjob's property rights (how much did Snowden receive is the question) while stifling the NSA/CIA formerly well paid stooge who lounges comfortably inside Putin's evil empire as a houseguest of the KGB. Fuck him. He's marginal and unimpressive, going nowhere, also.

At least Barrett Brown wasn't too scared to go to jail for his efforts. Brown is a Texan. He isn't afraid to face his shit like a man. In the end he will be somebody while Snowden and GG will be the sell-outs that they are.

Yes, you were wrong early and often, about these matters including dissing my masterpiece in tne beginning which stated the Infotainment Industrial Complex more threatening than the MIC. The govt is owned by the private interests. I think you banned me for it. LOL

While I was correct and prescient. You are correct on one point, I owned the Firedoglake zeitgeist.

Assange even disagreed with you and sided with me in his book about Meeting Google's CEO which I finally opened your eyes to my masterpiece about a year too late.

donkeytale said...

HAHA just kidding, this comment a troll parody in response to your passive aggressive criticism of my schtick in your Twitter feed.

Sorry for the stapling the truth to the inside of your eye sockets.

But it is all reality based. Just like the fact that Bernie voting record in the Senate matches Obama's for liberalism. And basically same as Hilary altho he's to their right on guns.

I have Bernie at 50-50. You think his chances are less than that. Zeitgeist Theory

donkeytale said...

To wit, Booman Tribune is at least as popular as the Intercept:

Global Rank
Global rank - 159,556

Rank in United States - 45,131

Wow. Just wow. LOL

socrates said...

My attacks on Nate Silver are reality based in contradistinction to some fixation you have on an anonymous coward named fairleft.

I suppose your take down of Matt Stoller was similar to mine on Alexandrovna.

Your major blind spot is an almost robotic allegiance to contrarian discourse.

Sometimes you are able to drop the ego false self and be real and groovy. That's who you really are deep down.

It's amazing you can't see how your drooling over Nate Silver is really not much different than say when I built up a Church of Snowden chapter.

You're a douchetarded, scumbag focker f*** face.

HAHA, just kidding.

socrates said...

That's just nuts when you say corporations are more dangerous than the military. C. Wright Mills spoke of an Iron Triangle which includes both. You missed that memo?

socrates said...

You say it is tied. I think it is too. This goes beyond statistics. You still don't get it. This sucker is still unfolding. What does 50-50 mean? Okay, the baseball analogy has gotten too difficult for crunching numbers. I think it is more like Texas Hold 'Em poker. It's about chip stacks. It's about who is dealing.

I also notice that I bring real numbers to the table, e.g. with the updated #BernieSoBlack numbers. I also provided links and ideas concerning Nate Silver not being all that and a bag of chips. You ignore those things.

I read those comments well. The people were KosKops or might as well have been. It was akin to a room full of cokeheads or Chris Mathews, just people talking over each other. You did well. You usually do. Truly.

socrates said...

I mean you don't get it that you can't do my own thinking. I have worked hard on this campaign. I do want to thank you. You were quick to the punch on Hillary. It's a big, fat fuck face world. Not everyone is into politics or is covering other social reality angles. You gave me the heads up that Hillary is the personification of garbage. You also got through to me that she is obese. .... I'm licking my chops over Tuesday's debate. And don't underestimate the greatness which is Rachel Maddow and the impact she could have with that fake debate thingie she is going to moderate.

socrates said...

Bernie's a genius. I am thinking Ali-Liston. He is a contrarian pool shark. He trolled Hillary's Super PAC into crossing a line. If you looked at the astroturf in online articles, you could see that the pro-Hillary wankers claim Bernie trolls Hillary all the time. Watch and learn from the greatness which is Bernie Sanders, my friend.

socrates said...

I've trimmed down my Twitter diet and it should be more user-friendly in the future. That probably made it easier for you to notice my playful "donkeytale" schtick.

donkeytale said...

Ignoring quickly googled bloviators with an agenda is easy because it's meaningless blather. In one you posted (Politico, that bastion of intellectualism) there was also an excellent rebuttal piece defending Silver on the British elections which the polls missed by a mile.

Silver called 2008 and 2012 well ahead of the pack in real time. He went from nobody DKOS (not even a front pager DKOS) to the NYT almost overnight. That is an unprecendented rise any way you slice it.

There is nothing to say and no way to attack his record without looking either stupid or jealous. Or both.

It is what it is. You hate because he doesn't come out and say Bernie is the man 13 months before the election. That's for us Zeitgeisters.

We also cant do his thinking for him. Obviously.

donkeytale said...

In fact, Silver was trolled on by Kos Kops too basically same way you are now trolling him.

You are too smart to act like a fairleft or a Kos kop so I must point it out when you do.

I did read your twitter which I took as a love siren. FYI there will be days maybe weeks when I go MIA but has nothing to do with my thoughts on any given subject. Just time constraints in real life.

donkeytale said...

In fact, polling itself may be a dying institution. That will be one of the interesting developments to watch.

I;m not holding out much enthusiasm for the debates. I actually believe that if each candidate gives an average to better than average performance with no obvious F ups, the net result will help Hilliary by comparison. It will break the negative feedback loop. It will show they are not that far apart on issues.

The greatest hope for Bernie is that she somehow falls on her fat fuck face and keeps the negatives rolling in. I dont see him gaining much on his own since he is already well defined.

And if the debate is sedate as opposed to the Trump circus it will be forgotten uickly unless HRC pulls a boner

donkeytale said...

I actually have free tickets to the Rangers-Blue Jays Monday night if Toronto wins Sunday.

socrates said...

Being stupid or jealous does not play into this. You are playing blog checkers, while I blog chess. Or maybe it's cheese.

Harry Enten is a tool. He is the elephant in the blog room.

That's good news for your baseball team. I still have no clue, but it sounds like you might not want to go the game because it'll mean the series continues.

I used to like baseball. It is kind of fun when your team is good. Otherwise, who cares? Basketball is a million times more fun to watch. I don't watch enough football. That is my blind spot. And I have no excuses with my team and Bernie's too if you think about it in the hunt yet again with a lot of drama.

Maybe it was finding out Tom Brady is a bag fan of Trump or wtf that has turned me off. I am under the impression Belichick is a liberal. But I imagine he is probably more of a neoliberal or doesn't really think about things the way most internet blowhards do.

I do not miss sports one bit. I have my one team and that makes life so much easier.

Look, I had a very normal upbringing with tons of sports and t.v.. Not normal. Normal is the wrong word. I got my fair share of medium consumption including sports. I repeat 2004 Red Sox a lot, but somehow that was a turning point for myself.

I used to watch the ABC soap operas too in high school and into undergrad. I also found a way to stop watching that.

Today is a great day. I had a wicked awesome walk. I have healthy food cooking. Let's start this over. Top of the early afternoon to you, laddie. I hope all is well.

And I stand by everything I have posted on Silver. The only reason I didn't respond is because you offered nothing in response. It looks like we have reached a stale stalemate. But that's okay. We don't have to watch Tom Brady. We don't always have to discuss the man/bro crush you have on Nate.

I did see that 538 has predicted 48 wins for the Celtics. So we will get no answers there.

socrates said...

I disagree with your debate analysis. You say we are still at the beginning. That is true. Everyone knows Hillary. Not many know Bernie. The ones who do like him a lot.

I am going to predict Bernie dominates the debate. He will make it known that he doesn't have to worry about evolving. Or it will get done at the Maddow event.

On this day at this moment, I am stepping forward and predicting Bernie wins the presidency. Bernie is the front runner. The stats so far are meaningless or need to be kept in perspective. It's all about trajectories. It's also about styles making the fight. The debates will matter. Sure Trump is a Tiger Woods type draw in another wise boring sport/game. Bernie has elevated the left t.v. side to the possibility of herstoric influence.

Dude, I am working from the angle of social theory. I'm hoping it'll be soon that Bernie starts kicking some serious polling arse. That is where we fill find out who was prescient. Maybe I am the dumbass. Maybe I am the homer. But there's also the we shall see schtick.

Bernie is the true warlock, not Nate Silver. It'd be fun to post about a future Nate Silver mea culpa we missed the boat on Berns. The odds for that are much better than the Celtics making it to the Finals. We also need info on the Mavericks. If they get the eighth pick or lower, it goes to Boston. So it'd be nice to know wtf is up with Dallas, if they are tanking or not or if they are going to suck no matter what they put out on the court. Then it becomes a matter of where will their pick fall. The C's have Brooklyn's unprotected #1 pick the next three years. And the Celtics are already a decent team. I predict great stuff for both the Celtics and Bernie Sanders. God bless the audience and the American people.

donkeytale said...

True, this will be Bernie's coming out party to many people, especially the minourities whom he needs at least 40% of their vote to have any chance.

The problem with debates are that there are many so no single one is generally that memorable in the long arc of the election process. Few debates in postmodern times are remembered at all.

There will also be 3 other candidates onstage who are lesser known at this stage than the Bern.

Mostly, in the absence of a complete F up such as Rick Perry forgetting the dept of energy in 2012, there will be telling moments but the opportunity for one candidate to dominate or loose his chances in the debate probably won't be there. The format isn't really win/loose although bloviators always try to make it seem so. More like who is up and who is down.

Most likely, 2-3 of the candidates will gain something positive while 2-3 may loose something although probably not a fatal error. And the actual results of the debate won't be known until polling picks up in the aftermath a week or two out. The instant analysis by bloviators, especially fan boi spin meisters such as yourself will be purely meaningless.

Hilliary will gain if she comes out unscathed, if the debate remains issues oriented as opposed to be an inspection of her email, her insider status and her donor base. She has been in a downward spiral for months and a "win" for her would be simply stopping the negativity.

Bernie has a great chance to gain ground, especially with the elusive black and brown voters. I expect that he will gain ground but domination is probably not even possible given the format.

The other three may or may not break out of the 1% ghetto, however they are wild cards who coul dhurt or help the favourites. Their presence could mute both Bernie and Hillary somewhat, dampening both performances into the grey zone where neither victory nor defeat is a factor for anybody on the stage.

donkeytale said...

LOL. I saw your twitter. Nice try, but you continue to spiral downward into 3F territory.

"Fact Free Fairleft."

The kindest way to put it is that 538 predicts 48 wins for the Celts and so do you.

What this says is you know more about basketball, a lot more, than you do the probabilities of presiditzial politics. You are engaged at the level of fan boi. And there's nothing wrong with that, but don't make it out to be more than bloviation, er I mean Zeitgeist Theory.

And you aren't even getting it that by smearing of Silver with links from the GOP, that's an argument you also can't win....even if Bernie wins.....because Silver hasn't even started with the poll driven analysis yet....and he looses only if he doesn't predict the winner.....same as me and same as you....only he is out there in the public eye....and we're snot.

We're playing a different game than he is: See the Headline Title of this masterpiece for d-tales.

LOL. Yur pffunny.

But keep trying....great, great infotainment value.

socrates said...

It's disturbing how you embarrass yourself over and over again in this thread, Jane, you ignorant slut.

Just kidding! Haha? I mean about the Dan Ackroyd/Jane Curtin part.

You said: The problem with debates are that there are many so no single one is generally that memorable in the long arc of the election process. Few debates in postmodern times are remembered at all.

That is some cringe-worthy, mailed in schlock. I suppose you missed the memo about the lack of debates this year due to a coronation being on the docket. But I appreciate your mistakes. It means my panties don't end up in a bunch, I can mail in a response back, and then be on my way to more coffee, cigarettes, and old movies.

Wasserman-Shultzie was interviewed yesterday by maybe Dana Bash. I swear life does become a blur, so there is a little bit of truthiness to what you say about these debates potentially meaning squat.

I guess you missed the memo on the Kennedy-Nixon debate.

Where's the beef?

John Kennedy was a friend of mine and you're no JFK?

Okay, the last one hurts my argument because Bush/Quayle won and it was a vice-presidential debate. A VP debate? Hey, let's forget about the next C's exhibition and watch Danny and Walter McCarty play horse. You're talking about a vp debate? Oh, that was me.

Saying debates don't matter or not much is the equivalent of saying nothing matters, never ever.

And you are going to mention Chafee, Webb, and O'Malley? Perhaps the third guy matters. He is the spoiler candidate. He continues onward in perhaps a subconscious effort to grease the tracks for a more realistic future run. Think Reagan who I believe ran and lost four times before people forgot he was such a phony.

We are in the Age of Aquarius, my friend. The rules are changing in real time.

Bernie is the personification of Ireland. Look, bear with me, this is first-hand testimony. If one has never been to Ireland, all they can picture are pasty looking catholics and leprechauns, maybe a U2 or Rory Gallagher tune. Maybe they think of the Lucky Charms commercial. But once you go to the country and live there, drink tea with the lads, throw down some Guinness, eat some cabbage and taters in fish and chip paper, the truth emerges. Those are real people with funky accents.

Who is Bernie before one moves to Vermont? Oh, he is that Jewish commie dude. That's two strikes. Not viable. And oh my, that maple syrup is good and Canada, what's up with that?


socrates said...

Hillary is the opposite. She is an established establishment fake. She is the corrupt onion whose skin or wtf is peeling off, so we can see the inner core full of maggots eating away at what is left of her soul.

Oh, you also forgot about Gerald Ford's gaffe about Eastern Europe.

You will retort that no hitters happen too. That is what a robotic contrarian does. To them it is not about sharing ideas and reaching a consensus. It's more like a Trump styled world. There are winners and losers. This is where a two word response might work best. Grow up!

Huh, I used right wing sources to attack Silver? I certainly did not. The greatness of my schtick is in my ability to not use douchebags for debate points.

Yes, keep mentioning fairleft. You are fortunate that Pffuggee, FSZ and MLW have been scrubbed. Then folks won't realise fairleft has been your best buddy over many years. Him and myself have next to nothing in common. Why you continue to prop up a meaningless scumturd like him is beyond the beyond. No one knows who he is. No one cares. You are using the most irrelevant of blogified insider baseball to "win" a debate.

Where are your posts about the five or whatever number of statisticians who did the same thing Silver did? Where are the churches built for those guys? Why do you prop up Nate Silver into being something other than what he truly is, a capitalist pig who makes money running a garbage website?

Silver and 538 already failed in this election no matter what happens. The longer Nate allows his even fatter pig co-hort Enten to drop bowel movements on 538, the Silver mystique crumbles even further.

I would say more, but you will probably ignore it anyway, while continually bringing back up some anon coward, boring blogger named fairleft who no one knows and no one cares about.

socrates said...

Some interesting stats are funneling into DFQ2.

Pageviews today
Pageviews yesterday

Stats for the week:
United States
United Kingdom

Are those spam bots? Is that the Russian intelligentsia?

Whatever the f that is, it is padding the triple f overall DFQ2 ratings. So it is perhaps a good thingie whether or not it's coming from Putin's economic/world peace initiative committee or from its more nefarious paid fake department.

And I am finding out that less is more with Twitter.

Feeding the Twitter is an art form in itself. Apply too much schtick and people turn it off. Tease with it, keep the peanut gallery hungry, and the medium becomes more of a factor. Less is more.

donkeytale said...

Re-reading my schtick in the debate run-up and actually viewing about half the debate (ultimately it was boring and vacuous like all debates) it appears I was once again right on target.

Bernie was great. He is the man. Did he win any more support? I think so, altho it will take a few weeks to know. The main thing here is he is pushing the zeitgeist left no matter what.

Hillary also probably gained, again just as I predicted by stopping the negative feedback loop. She got a huge politically incorrect assist from the Bern who defended her on emails.

O'Malley looks like a commercial actor. Webb and Bernie seemed very friendly with each other. Webb almost seemed like a throwback to a past century. Interesting character but no chance in this era. He probably should run as a gop moderate. Which I guess he is.

I still say 50-50 but that factors in a win in NH and a close second or win in Iowa to boost him forward. Debates are meaningless.


donkeytale said...

50-50 for Bernie meant to clarify.

No knockout blows delivered that much is sure.

Following your trend towards fairleftiness, I expect you will comeback in here blaming the media.

Or Nate Silver.

Or wtf.

But please. Take down that picture of the fascist pig in your lates entry for the sake of all things Maria Sharapova.

Haha, just kidding. I loves all females.

donkeytale said...

Well, except for Hillary. That hair helmet of hers was awe inspiring though.

donkeytale said...

You also forgot the Lincoln-Douglas debate.

That makes 3-4 memorable ones in the prior 150+ years, none since the forgotten VP one in 1988.

That would be 27 years ago.

donkeytale said...

My continual mentioning of "fairleft" is probably what is driving the demographics bus.

He has a huge following among his Russian paid-fake colleagues.

donkeytale said...

There were multiple Lincoln-Douglas debates. None of which we remember except from learning that they existed while ignoring the details in high school Amerikkkan history.

Best of 7 wasn't it?

socrates said...

I have figured out who is to blame for everything. It is Field Negro. I finally understand what Constructive Feedback means by calling him Filled Negro. The man does squat to investigate the glaring differences between the front runner and the challenger. It sounds like he has had his vote in Hillary's back pocket since she entered the race.

I think Field is the equivalent of fairleft for a "progressive" Black man. He is fixated on wingnuts and their various news outlets such as Fox News.

I am slowly forming these thoughts. They are extremely difficult to put into words.

I like that Gabbard woman politician who Schultzie is pushing around. That is a big story. It is of historic importance.

What the media doesn't cover is where the propaganda lies. I don't know why you keep trying to protect it especially seeing how much you promoted McLuhan (or co-opted).

Why wasn't there a question on David Brock, Media Matters, and DINO manipulation of elections? Why not confront Hillary over her use of a Super PAC in this very election. It is a cornerstone of Bernie's campaign to not take one cent from corporate interests.

You are smart enough to know what I'm talking about.

socrates said...

I had a post-debate hangover. In an ironic twist, (aspie?) Chris Matthews has cheered me up. He is going against the medium tide saying Hillary won. He thinks this will help Bernie and that debates are not necessarily about labeling "winners and losers."

Webb is cooked. Yes, he would make an outstanding Republican president. That is symbolic of the catastrophe which is modern American politics.

Chafee is another one and Lessig to a lesser degree. I finally read about the latter. He is a Harvard professor. He seems to be libertarian. Chafee was actually a Republican. And we all know Bernie caucuses with Democrats from their far left.

Hillary. Hmmmm. And throw in cognitive dissonance.

Webb is greatness for a Colonel Flagg styled tough guy wackadoo. He is the ideal Republican. You nailed it.

But he laughed about killing a man. That was an oopsies. And Chafee messed up by not admitting to his sin of voting for something he never even heard about.

O'Malley too like you say gives off the appearance of a bad actor. His style is pretty boring. He is definitely more polished than Chafee who reminded me somehow of a dorky 22-year-old Buddy Ebsen.

So yes, full circle, DFQ2 has nailed it that appearances count. Chafee is goofy and got busted on that voting thing. His response was a so-called epic fail. Webb was okay, but he went all McCain/Bob Dole stop lying about my record, and a don't fuck with me approach. Hillary and Bernie scored well for appearances. They seemed like nice people who one would feel safe with.

I agree with Trump that Chafee and Webb are distractions. Don't take me wrong, though. I respect Chafee. For all his goofiness, he is on the right side of a bunch of issues. But Bernie was also anti-Patriot Act, so he's superfluous. O'Malley? Sorry guy, but you're also superfluous.

It's amazing how so few Democrats are in the race with three of them not even being Democrats. On paper, it made sense for O'Malley to be the one to emerge. Bernie ended that notion.

And I agree with pundits who think this means Biden isn't running, that there is no "lane" for him.

I usually hate Chris Matthews, but I agree with his more open-ended assessment of what the performances actually mean.

Maybe it's good that there are only six debates. So that would be game one. Or a boxin match going six rounds.

Yes! The best sports analogy for the race would be boxing.

And probably one of those old-school 100 round fights in baking sun, not having to go to corners on knockdowns. We went with baseball as long as we could. Nine innings just doesn't cut the political mustard.

socrates said...

One should vote for Bernie over Hillary based on Citizens United alone. That's why there are only five in the race, six if you count the Harvard prof. It costs too much.

I am sticking with the idea that debates do matter. But that this was only one round or game one. The fight or series has barely started.

Or it's the board game Risk. We are ready to start the actual game after Hillary and Bernie secured the map. Or Monopoly. But it's not like there are many votes going to anyone other than Clinton, Sanders and Biden.

We need clarification from Biden. It is starting to backfire on him. We all lose family members. This has gotten quite ridiculous and makes him look bad.

Oh, you can definitely put New Hampshire into the Bernie win column. It's only a matter of by how much. Iowa currently looks to be a toss-up.

socrates said...

Hillary is against Citizens United, but that is a calculating move. By limiting debates, Hillary's flip flopping proclivities for political expediency somehow never reach the noggin of regular guys like fieldnegro.

He's voting for Hillary based on her vast right wing conspiracy schtick.

donkeytale said...

Right, ignore donkeytale prescience and slobber all over Chris Matthews. I said the same thing except I did it, uhmm, before the debates not after. Once again, "dfq2" nails the zeitgeist, if by "dfq2" you meant "donkeytale." LOL. S'ok. we are a great team. We both want the King of the Whiteysphere to ascend. Your take is from the fan boi position which brooks no reason, but with your trademark great enthusiasm, well-written and persuasively argued.

My take is analytical, coolly observed and hotly debated. Both schticks work, separately and in tandem. It so happens that you are on unfamiliar ground as an electoral bloviator. Your lack of understanding will only become more entertaining as the campaign season slogs onward.

I like Matthews too, although I never understood why and haven't actually seen his show for years. True story: I seldom watched Olbermann on MSNBC and when I did I found it all "blah-blah-blah," like tune out boring. The pacing was all wrong. His style of smug arrogance works for O'Reilly but not for a leftier than thou.

Honestly. I'm not a great Maddow fan either. She's OK but her pacing is wrong too. It all sounds like noise to me. Too much meaningless commentary, too subtle or something. Probably would make more impact as written rather than read on TV.

Ezra Klein's show was better. Klein is smart and youthful. Well-spoken without a ton of ego. I think he was more of a stand-in. This would be a few years ago when I last watched, maybe in the run-up to 2012.

Hayes not bad either.

Old fashioned blowhard Ed Schultz was perhaps the best of that channel, IMHO. Not sure why he left I guess too old, straight and ugly white man for the emerging demographic.

donkeytale said...

Don't look now but Silver nailed it again. His take was Hillary getting too much applause for what was a good but not great performance, and that Bernie also gains from a very solid debate performance.It is already a revolution that a major Demotardic candidate can stand on the stage and deliver leftier than thouism and be accepted and respected in the zeitgeist.

We haven't had that spirit here since 1969, as the song goes.

I'm still on record that Biden runs, although I understand the line of reasoning that goes he will stay out unless Hillary shows signs of imploding. The Bern could use a Biden run.

I'm also on the record that debates don't matter, that the zeitgeist is reinforced not changed by debates.

6 is enough, more than enough when there are only 2-3 contenders with any chance in hell and one of them isn't even in the race.

Mainly, it was the Demotardic brand that scored a victory not anyone candidate.

They just looked so reasonable and intelligent compared the the GOP clown show, whether they really are or not. Frankly, I wasn't impressed with Hilary but she didn't implode and Sanders gave her the biggest boost she could ever possibly expect from an opponent. He wa so magnanimous on the enmail issue he should be considered on the paid fake/useful idiot scale.

Filled Negro's maybe on to something. Bernie angling for a role in teh cabinet? Is that even possible? Certainly during 2012 it never seemed possible that Obama would put her in his cabinet but then he did, so who knows.

Not that the Bern is dead by any means. He will need to win NH and come damn close in Iowa or win. He will need to begin speaking Spanish and Ebonics and make it sound real and heartfelt.

The GOP will intensify attacks on Hillary now and that could indirectly benefit Bernie if they land any sold blows on her.

donkeytale said...

linky thingie:

socrates said...

We have definitely hit an equilibrium where it becomes less obvious you ignore my comments or take the ones you do address out of context.

You are the Hillary Clinton of fake left bloggers. Everyone else has pushed you to the left. It took you forever to see that Obama was a warmonger and capitalist pig. But you obfuscate this well by saying he was always a centrist.

Look also at your contradictions with usurping McLuhan's essence. You promote not only Nate Silver, but Journolist paid fake Ezra Klein. Do you ever vet anyone who doesn't write for Russia Today?

The big story so far is that the Black man symbolised by fieldnegro is an uneducated, brainwashed leech promoting elitist Blacks prospering off of capitalism. Has he even one paragraph on the differences between the two leading candidates? One thing Constructive Feedback, that's the guy's name who continues to this day to have entries on "Filled Negro," - one thing he mentions is that Field hasn't had one comment on Obama bombing Doctors without Borders. He even admitted on Twitter that the reason he is kissing Hillary's fat arse is because she is soooo good at talking about wingnuts. Game over. He's done. That shows how shallow he truly is.

I have stated throughout this political bloviating season, one in which I admit to being a novice, is that this election is a litmus test for how fucked up we are as an electorate. The chickens have not come home to roost. Malcolm X is basically spinning in his grave.

Perhaps it is when we don't go for homeruns is when this blog gets most entertaining. It is fun to discuss actual parts and parcels of the medium. Like Olbermann. Yes, he was greatness for quite a while. It was new and fresh. It was in our faces.

Now in hindsight one can see the racket of the two-party system for what it truly is. While I believe Keith is a sincere regular guy, but he was way in over his head. Maddow is pretty much the same person except for obvious differences in body parts and that one was a screamer and the other i snot.

Sometimes I make an awkward space typo. That should read as is not. But I wrote it and that's the way it will remain.

I try to watch Matthews. The problem with him is he never listens to the people he is interacting with. The best is when he doesn't even wait for the other person to complete their sentences. He just jumps right back in with something different.

MSNBC has made a hard right turn. They got rid of their professional Black afternoon rotation. Al went to the weekends. Dyson seems to be gone, gone. They are trying to compete with CNN. Getting rid of Ed Schultzie was apparently the first move in that direction.


socrates said...

I definitely agree with you that the Democratic Party won the debate. Bernie seemed to be a bit tired or wtf without his A game. But he slogged through it. And all the online opinion polls had him as destroying Hillary.

Nate certainly has made his bed as saying that Hillary is going to be coronated. Of course he doesn't use that word, otherwise he would have to respond to the widespread idea that 538 is all-in for Hillary Clinton.

I am not sure by what you mean that Nate Silver nailed it. It's more like he mailed it.

Yes, kudos to Filled Negro for coming up with the good point that Bernie could be lining himself up for a cabinet spot. He certainly does not burn his bridges. The same can't be said for Webb, Chafee, and O'Malley.

I can't believe how shallow fieldnegro is. It's such a letdown. And the worst part of it is his co-opting of Malcolm X. I am a bit wary of going back to Twitter because I am so disgusted with him right now. Maybe he has already blocked me for having the gall to say it's not a good reason to vote for someone because they are DINO's at the top of their divide and conquer skills.

I'm not giving up on Bernie, but I already know who is to blame if he doesn't win. And it's not lily-white bloggers who turned off Black people. It's brain dead Democrats like FieldNegro who are the problem.

donkeytale said...

Bernie was good in the debate. Your expectations for what a debate can accomplish were way too high. Obviously, as you ignored my gentle admonitions that the debate will help both Bernie and Hillary (unless she fell on her 3F face, which didn't happen, although I agree with Silver she wasn't all that good, she survived without a fatal error). Now you see that I nailed it again but you just can't admit it.

When you start depending on online polls for reference you have truly jumped the shark. This is beyond faileft and into Laura John territory when you do that.

Wait two-three weeks and see what the scientific polls say...especially in NH and Iowa. That will be a much better tell.

socrates said...

If it boils down to New Hampshire and Iowa for the current zeitgeist sniff, there are no worries there, Carnac the Magnificent, Jr..

I guess you are going to a baseball playoff game. I don't really follow it. I do have a Celtics exhibition game to get to. I may bump up the odds to 50-55 wins, if I may indulge in a margin of error. The Celtics are very good. They are in the second tier. They already jelled last year and the new guys are fitting in. Plus Brooklyn looks downright awful and we have their #1 pick three straight years. This is where Danny Ainge might have won NBA megabucks.

donkeytale said...

This essential medium message is provided free of charge from your friends at

The medium is the message definition

A statement by Marshall McLuhan, meaning that the form of a message (print, visual, musical, etc.) determines the ways in which that message will be perceived. McLuhan argued that modern electronic communications (including radio, television, films, and computers) would have far-reaching sociological, aesthetic, and philosophical consequences, to the point of actually altering the ways in which we experience the world.

IOW, The messenger/conspirator isn't the medium. LOL. Exactly the opposite.

You are hereby condemned to spend the remainder of eternity watching Sally Jesse Raphael reruns.

donkeytale said...

I went to the game. Before I got thru purchasing 2 hot dogs, 2 bags peanuts, a soda and a bottled water for my son and meslef ($38 never tasted so poorly) and finding, it was 3-0 Toronto.

By the end of third inning it was 7-1 Jays. Game over.

The Rangers then went on to also loose game 5 in Toronto.

I like this timely pivot away from political sports to athletic sports.

Good call

donkeytale said...

I'm warming to the idea that the Celts will have a great year now that I read it at 538 two months after you predicted the same.

HAHA just kidding. Take that Chris Matthews III.

I'm going all in with the Celts this year at least in the East.

Dallas also blows. So you will get draft picks and no longer are you stifled by Rondo's putting the "I in the word team."

socrates said...

Sullinger looks fat and David Lee looks old. Amir Johnson looks solid for a center. We could really use one more big big unless Olynyk can toughen up. There are too many big bigs, but we need one more center. Evan Turner is strange. He is like a Jordan Crawford and probably Rondo at this point. They will win and lose games for you. They are stopgaps. Rondo should give up the dream of being a starter and simply compete. I am not following the Kings, but on paper they should be like the Celtics and emerge a bit.

The Knicks look good for a starting five, but there isn't much there for a bench.

The C's will look average in spots until the team kicks in. This exhibition crap has no continuity. Stevens didn't even try to coach to win the last ten minutes.

The C's are interesting with one extra guaranteed contract to move.

Smart didn't play. I don't know why.

Maybe David Lee just had a bad game. He should come off the bench.

Sullinger can play, but he is fat. And teams know Danny needs to unload somebody, so they are going to offer peanuts for him.

I would start Olynyk/Zeller, Johnson, with David Lee the fourth big. Get rid of Sullinger. I am not keen on Crowder starting every game, but I'm not the coach. I like Jerebko better. I would also like to see Turner traded and also Bradley if possible. He is too short for shooting guard, especially now that we have point guard Isaiah Thomas.

Hunter and Young look inconsistent for shooting guards, but with potential. Smart is very good.

It really does seem like a 48-34 team like 538 predicted. They will beat most of the scrub teams. Stevens must be salivating at the prospect of finally fielding a menace of a roster. They will beat great teams who take the night off. They will compete with good teams. They should sweep Philly, Brooklyn and possibly even the Knicks. That's a lot of wins right there. I admit the C's are good because the East is so bad, especially the Atlantic. The Celtics will be competing with Toronto and Washington for best mediocre not a scrub team gravitas.

socrates said...

Terry Rozier and Jordan Mickey are also greatness for rookies. Rpzier is a huge upgrade on Pressey for third point guard. Mickey can play great defense. He's a shorter Bill Russell. If the fan base can have some patience, this team is going to be extremely difficult to beat in a couple years.

socrates said...

The Dallas pick may or may not be good. It's akin to a scratch ticket. If you get stuck with a loser, that is a financial and psychological drain on a team's chemistry.

Ainge though might have hit the jackpot. Brooklyn is similar to the Knicks. The question is will the Nets be ten games under .500 or 20 or thirty?

I think 1-7 is protected for the Rondo pick. Ainge ripped you guys off. Crowder got resigned to a hefty deal. He is a glue guy. He is good for the defensive identity.

I do have hope for Olynyk. I like the idea of Olynyk/Zeller and Johnson as the three guys getting most of the minutes and Lee for the change of pace. He's 32. Oh, and I probably will be interested in the Clippers and of course Cleveland.

LeBron is now on the clock like Tiger Woods. If they want all-time immortality, it's now or never.

socrates said...

Texas baseball teams have a lot of difficulty securing world championships because of the heat. You'd have to do what the Red Sox did who had historically been jinxed by the green monster. We bought the titles and got lucky. Baseball is over. 2004 ended it. That's your jumping the shark for sports. Tiger is what now, 10,000 to one odds to ever win another major? He choked. He was four away, what, five years ago? He got a brain glitch, period. He was like Knoblauch unable to toss a baseball ten feet.

I'm sure injuries are part of it. I am not blaming Tiger completely for choking. Is there any other explanation?

Tiger Woods talk is always good for ratings. I learned that over the years he will give a bump in the polls. Maybe the Ruskies are saying look at these two regular guys. Maybe we can decode this word they use, infotainment. Comrade.

socrates said...

Bernie has New Hampshire coronated into the good regular guy delegate pile corner. I read Independent and even some Republicans saying they have registered democrat for the primary to vote for Bernie. Maybe that will offset the Oprah vote. I assume Oprah is voting for Hillary?

socrates said...

I am going to predict Bernie also wins Iowa.

socrates said...

Bernie's going to every state and shaking hands. Nate538 doesn't sniff any of that. Or the Reagan vote. The coronation is on if one looks at how the debate was gifted to Hillary. I don't know what you're smoking. Hillary solidified the stupid vote. Bernie might have pulled something off with the magnanimous schtick. It may go undetectable to Nate Silver supercomputers.

socrates said...

Have the Patriots lost yet?

socrates said...

I checked. They are 4-0 and are the Sunday night game at Indy.

If any team could run the table, it's them. They are like the 49ers with Montana and Young, but it's Brady.

I don't follow it closely, but Belichick has a knack of putting a guy in and they do extremely well. I am going by the eye test. He might be underrated. It's a shame about all the bad press. Though like I said, Brady is a Republican, so I don't care about him. Like Schilling. He's a right winger blowhard. He got rid of the curse. It's like if Sean Hannity saved a baby from a fire. It's disturbing. Like liking Bill O'Reilly. Just don't do it. Just say no. I'm done.

donkeytale said...

That's my point. Silver doesn't do zeitgeist sniffing, pyrrhiod. He's all in on the stats, which are the polls. His trick is how he weights the polls for their herstorical track record of accuracy. And he publishes all of that too. It's very transparent.

The first post-debate poll in NH has Hillary erasing Bernie's lead in NH.

I feel like he went with his gut and probably off script with his email comment, but that was both the crowning achievement of Demotardic solidarity and also a huge gaffe from a political standpoint. I mean, I love him for it but that one statement alone caused his momentum to come thudding to a halt.

He actually gained a point or two in NH also, in keeping with my win/win prescience. Both Hillary and Bernie's increases came at Biden's expense.

Without Biden in the race I may have to downgrade Bernie's odds at winning but I'm going to stand pat for now.

See, here's the thing. I don't "like" O'Reilly but I admire his ability to do what he does, which is to have the top rated show on cable day in and day out for like what, 20 years in a row? Hannity is garbage, no infotainment value whatsoever

Bill is good schtick although it is total nonsense from a journalistic perspective and of course politically reprehensible. But it is watchable even if youre a sincere lefty who watches like we slow to watch a car wreck.

If you want RT in America then it is FNC. And guess what? I also admire artfully done propaganda like the Russians do so well. Their schtick in the Ukraine is amazing and now Syria too. Yes, Pepe Escobar is a good read too even tho I know he is a Russian paid fake. It's his true believer dupes/readers I go after, just like O'Reilly's watchers.

The Russkies are still denying that the Ukrainian rebels shot down that airliner using Russian missiles and they are doing so with a straight face. And no one can do boo about it. Nor wants too. At the end of the day the USSR and the US are allies, brothers in capitalism. Both need to fall and will eventually.

My stuff is subtle. It s not about personal like and dislike but about analysis and getting at a certain level of truth that resides underneath the table. You are more a black and white moraliser, Nancy Grace to my coolly intellectual David Frost. The combo works.

Although I admit at times you betray a certain anti-intellectual bent that makes me wonder if you truly have a college degree, I put it down to too many years watching cable news and Twittering.

I would prefer to see you back on the social theory beat as opposed to the electoral horse race. Showing your smarter side, IOW.

donkeytale said...

Yes, the Texas heat makes the game harder. Why they didn't put a retractable roof over the stadium is a question you will have to ask W, since he was the team's leader when they built the stadium.

The year the Rangers frittered away the championship (one pitch away in two consecutive innings in game 6) actually occurred in St. Louis in cool October (or is it November?) weather.

Just for the record, I am not a Rangers fan nor a Mavericks fan nor a Cowboy fan.

I'm a fan of the game. Being a fan makes no sense when you moved around as much as I have. Being a fan is for kids. When I was a kid I was a fan of the Dodgers, the Packers and the Warriors.

Today I remain loyal to the Pack only and this is mainly through a lifelong connection with my late dad, who used to take me to the Coliseum every year as a kid to watch Lombardi's Packers throttle the Rams.

TBH, I really couldn't care less about sports except as an occasional weekend time waster.

Belichek is crap as human being and so is Brady. If you want a leftier than thou head coach look no further than Seattle's Pete Carroll.

I hope to see a Green Bay/New England Super Bowl this year. That would be awesome from a DFQ2 perspective as well

donkeytale said...

Big men seem obsolete in this era of the NBA.

This is the age of John Wooden ball (circa 1964-65), a bunch of average sized guys moving the ball around the perimeter and simply out maneuvering the opponent on both ends of the court.

I'm looking for GS to repeat. They were head and shoulders better than anyone else last year by a country mile. (mixed metafur alert).

Celtics-Warriours final would be awesome.

Woods and LeBron are herstorical. Don't forget James has won some titles too. And he dragged some pretty average Cleveland teams to the finals both before and after his time in Miami.

Woods being black in a rich white man's game is the more impressive. His problem is self-imposed. He muscled up too much and created his injuries by being too physical at point of attack. Golf is a game of fluidity more than strength. The young kids today hit it as far as Tiger and look a lot more at ease in their swings.

donkeytale said...

I guess you could also call this the era of Red Auerbach ball too, as he and Wooden played very similar styles to similar levels of unparalleled success.

donkeytale said...

Also, for the record, I never pay to see these sporting events, except for the ridiculous food and parking costs. And even then, if there is time we bring our own food and drinks to the game. The other day was an exception as I was pressed for time and arrived in the top of the first inning. Too late as it turned out. When baseball is exciting it's very exciting. But that was an incredibly boring game, basically over in the 3rd inning. We left in the 7th to beat the rush. Of course, in Fenway you never leave because any comeback is always possible with that pop fly double/home run wall in left.

I haven't seen a live pro football game, literally since 1966. I hate college football and basketball. Never watch. I watched some of the NCAA game last year because it involved Wisconsin against Coach Krap, whom I also loath.

Criminals run the NCAA but its always the kids who get punished.

donkeytale said...

And seriously, please stop blaming the black man.


donkeytale said...

Bernie has done nothing but pay lip service to black issues and that only recently when the BLM chicks forced the issue. His sincerity isn't in doubt but his ability to govern in the US system is highly questionable.

Even he claims he needs a political revolution to get anything done and he's correct. Obama needed same but no one came out on the streets until OWS.

Minorities have real time concerns on the edge of a society that hates them. A little tweak here and there in politics makes a huge difference to them. They need substance not rhetoric.

As whities we have all the advantages regardless of who wins the WH or Congress. We have creature comforts and are innocent until proven guilty.

The difference is immense. Lecturing blacks on what they should do really makes you look foolish. Walk a mile in Filled Negro's shoes before going off on him. Srsly.

donkeytale said...

The chances of a political revolution in the US are nil, and the odds are more for a fascist police state.

That is what is so meaningful about the Obama elections and now the hand off to another Demotard supported overwhelmingly by a needy minority demographic.

Bernie's campaign is as herstoric as any in herstory. He is moving the conversation to the direction it needs to move. And yes, the medium is the message.

I agree that the internets has helped push this direction. We have helped push it.

AT the end of the day, though, when the chips are down, the real action will always need to be in the streets.

OWS shoed this. BLM shows this. The process unfolds. It is not about the messengers or even the message. It is about the process unfolding. Marx was right.

Bet on it.

donkeytale said...

McLuhan was right.

We are following in this tradition. The Medium is the Conspiracy.

donkeytale said...

Yes, in the abstract Obama's presiditzy is crap.

However, and please understand this point once and for all, NOTHING exists in the abstract.

As Buddha said, and Einstein confirmed, and please understand this once and for all, everything exists only in relationship to everything else.

Bernie gets this. I don't think you truly do. Bernie knows that Hillary is a better option than any GOP winner.

If Obama had lost in 2008 and 2012 we not only would have Citizens United and a gerrymandered GOP congressional majority elected with a minourity of votes (thank you GOP SCOTUS and Glenn Greenwald), we may as well be living inside a barbed wire fence or dead today rather than arguing about the relative merits of who is favoured to win the WH.

There is hope, Bernie is saying, there is hope in Demotardic electoral victory even if he doesn't win. By pushing the process forward he is winning, enlightenment gains and inch and oppression looses some power. Not much it is true. But the direction is like the tides. The shift is imperceptible to many but not to those who are in tune ("Buddhas") and paying attention.

Yes, Bernie is following donkeytale prescience as demonstrated since 2005. Yes, Marisacat was a self-defeating moron. Too bad she is now dead so I cannot spit in her ugly face.

The people need to rally under a banner, even a flawed one called the Demotardic Party, or we will continue to loose and loose bigtime to those who have continually allied under the GOP banner since Reagan.

The Whiteysphere is and has been consistently wrong on politics. Ralph Nader is a criminal and his mindless third party followers should burn in the hells of their own making.

I have been vindicated and the name of my vindication is Bernie Sanders.