What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

More Mnuchin:

They voted for Donald Trump, but Rose Schaffer says they're praying he doesn't choose Mnuchin as his Treasury secretary. "If he can't run his own little bank," she asks, "how can he handle a large thing for the United States?"
Click to expand...

Thing is, he ran it quite well since Mnuchin and partners made off with about $1.5 billion, and they still got the poor suckers they foreclosed on to vote for the campaign that Mnuchin was national finance director of.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

So I looked up the CDC data for gun deaths (Assault by handgun discharge; assault by rifle, shotgun, and larger gun discharge; assault by other and unspecified gun discharge) for 2013 and compared it to gun ownership percentage. The CDC doesn't provide data for Hawaii, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, or Wyoming. THe CDC says this about suppressed data*: Link
About suppressed data and unreliable rates:
Sub-national data representing fewer than ten persons (0-9) are suppressed for year 1989 and later years. See Assurance of Confidentiality for more information.
Click to expand...

Even with those exclusions you have an extremely low, but now positive correlation between gun ownership and gun death rate. R^2 = 0.03.

*I'm not sure if I can assume the following, but I was curious. If we assume that all suppressed data was the maximum of nine for all of the states, the correlation is positive, those less so and it's even weaker (R^2=.01).

The actual number from the suppressed data is included in the US total. That was 43 among those six states. So the nine assumption is already high. If you drop it down to seven per state, the correlation drops even further.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Drew S. said:
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/opinion/powering-australias-economic-surge.html
Click to expand...

That's not proof of anything you argued. You tried to claim that there's a significant correlation between suicide rate and the economy and that this is the reason for less suicides than guns. If that's the case then the expected decline in suicide rate due to economic uptick would have to be greater than that of just banning guns. That is not what this article states and of course it's an op-ed.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Kepler said:
Our president-elect is an actual moron.

Gonna be a long 1.261e+8 seconds, folks...

Think of it as killing 1,051,200 consecutive minors.
Click to expand...

Holy shytt.

I've never been quite sure what self-parody is, but that comes to mind.
 
trixR4kids said:
That's not proof of anything you argued. You tried to claim that there's a significant correlation between suicide rate and the economy and that this is the reason for less suicides than guns. If that's the case then the expected decline in suicide rate due to economic uptick would have to be greater than that of just banning guns. That is not what this article states and of course it's an op-ed.
Click to expand...

I didn't claim that at all. I said there could be other factors at play besides gun availability such as the economy, which in Australia's case has done very well in the 20 years or so since their gun ban.

Suicide is very complicated and just because someone didn't shoot themselves doesn't mean their life is perfect, or even that they're not completely miserable. Guns could potentially reduce the number of people that are successful committing it but there are other more important areas that should be addressed regarding it.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

dxmnkd316 said:
There was a comment on that story that just about killed me. It was something like:
Click to expand...

The best Comments on Deadspin, io9, and Jezebel are better than the stories. There are also stunners so lethal they make mookie seem like an optimistic cherub.

BTW, the comment was follows:

Pakistanis are one of the most intelligent people...a fantastic country, fantastic place of fantastic people.
Click to expand...
O RLY!?!?!

- India
Click to expand...

The immediate follow-up to which was:

Hahaha, that’s geopolitics for you.

*Shoots air into vein and waits for sweet death.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Kepler said:
Gonna be a long 1.261e+8 seconds, folks...

Think of it as killing 1,051,200 consecutive minors.
Click to expand...

No problem. We'll just get a really terrific goalie.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

MaizeRage said:
More Mnuchin:



Thing is, he ran it quite well since Mnuchin and partners made off with about $1.5 billion, and they still got the poor suckers they foreclosed on to vote for the campaign that Mnuchin was national finance director of.
Click to expand...

Works for me. The people who voted for Trump, or who didn't vote at all, should be the ones taking it in the shorts. Most likely they will be. Trump doesn't strike me as a guy who gives a hoot about fighting the culture wars. He seems more like a guy who'll enjoy sending the military on a bunch of new "adventures" while letting corporations do as they please. Both of these will end up screwing the very working class people who make up the bulk of his supporters. Which, truth be told, they kinda deserve. ;)
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

rufus said:
What?

What i'm getting at is Trump is not proposing that we spend a whole lot of money to improve infrastructure. His plan is to get private companies to do so via tax credits and other inducements. Like that's gonna happen.
Click to expand...

I know...that is why I called him a moron :D
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

St. Clown said:
I don't know. Mitt had to look at taking the Sec. of State job with a few things in mind.

1) Do I really want the job?
2) Is there anybody else being considered who's more qualified than me to take the job?
3) If I do not take the job, into whose lap would the job fall and could that person actually do a respectable job?
4) If he makes me apologize for the job, will I take the dose of humility for my own future glory or to better serve the country despite who my boss will be?
5) If I am seeking greater personal glory, how bad will my public profile be tarnished by having to publicly kiss the ring?
6) Can I actually handle having Trump as my boss for up to 4 years?

Personally, for his sake, I hope Romney knows that his name has taken a hit publicly but decided that the next best alternative for the job was someone like David Duke and couldn't let that happen to the USA.
Click to expand...

The man was the GOP nominee for Prez 4 years ago...now he is Chris Christie without the Type 2 Diabetes. I may not like his politics much but I did respect him overall but bending over to Trump proves he is a sellout just like the nominee before him.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

dxmnkd316 said:
So I looked up the CDC data for gun deaths (Assault by handgun discharge; assault by rifle, shotgun, and larger gun discharge; assault by other and unspecified gun discharge) for 2013 and compared it to gun ownership percentage. The CDC doesn't provide data for Hawaii, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, or Wyoming. THe CDC says this about suppressed data*: Link


Even with those exclusions you have an extremely low, but now positive correlation between gun ownership and gun death rate. R^2 = 0.03.

*I'm not sure if I can assume the following, but I was curious. If we assume that all suppressed data was the maximum of nine for all of the states, the correlation is positive, those less so and it's even weaker (R^2=.01).

The actual number from the suppressed data is included in the US total. That was 43 among those six states. So the nine assumption is already high. If you drop it down to seven per state, the correlation drops even further.
Click to expand...

Suppression doesn't apply. Data visible in tables is suppressed (not shown) when tiny numbers will allow someone to identify specific individuals (i.e., one person dying of a very rare form of death could be traced back to a specific individual). They have all the data and present all data when samples are large - i.e., homicide numbers.

Here's the CDC approach clarified in its cancer research:

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/uscs/technical_notes/stat_methods/suppression.htm

Beyond that, I'm not seeing the CDC state level data your looking at. The CDC homicide link I showed had all 50 states and considerable correlation. Again, factcheck agrees: In looking solely at the numbers of gun deaths and gun crimes, the data back up Obama, not Fiorina. But both politicians imply a causation that’s impossible to prove — that gun control laws lead to fewer or greater gun crimes or gun deaths.

In the end, I still don't see much of a debate on a deaths/guns relationship here. But, I agree...stronger gun laws is about all that can be done.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Kepler said:
Our president-elect is an actual moron.

Gonna be a long 1.261e+8 seconds, folks...

Think of it as killing 1,051,200 consecutive minors.
Click to expand...

That looks like when you run something through Google Translate, then translate it back to English then pick another language to translate it to then back to English one more time...
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Kepler said:
The best Comments on Deadspin, io9, and Jezebel are better than the stories. There are also stunners so lethal they make mookie seem like an optimistic cherub.
Click to expand...

I still think Ashley Feinberg's articles are basically distilled versions of the cleverness found in the comments. She's a national treasure. I think she might be the best writer employed by GMN since Tyler Rogoway left. Hamilton Nolan can also be an incredible writer when he wants to be.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

5mn_Major said:
Suppression doesn't apply. Data visible in tables is suppressed (not shown) when tiny numbers will allow someone to identify specific individuals (i.e., one person dying of a very rare form of death could be traced back to a specific individual). They have all the data and present all data when samples are large - i.e., homicide numbers.

Here's the CDC approach clarified in its cancer research:

http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/npcr/uscs/technical_notes/stat_methods/suppression.htm

Beyond that, I'm not seeing the CDC state level data your looking at. The CDC homicide link I showed had all 50 states and considerable correlation. Again, factcheck agrees: In looking solely at the numbers of gun deaths and gun crimes, the data back up Obama, not Fiorina. But both politicians imply a causation that’s impossible to prove — that gun control laws lead to fewer or greater gun crimes or gun deaths.

In the end, I still don't see much of a debate on a deaths/guns relationship here. But, I agree...stronger gun laws is about all that can be done.
Click to expand...

I get the whole suppressed thing. All I did was take the total for the US and subtract all of the other state data.

I'll paste the raw data from the CDC site you posted. I just ran a new search. You should be able to copy this data into Excel.

Code: 
"Notes"	"State"	"State Code"	Deaths	Population	Crude Rate
	"Alabama"	"01"	317	4833722	6.6
	"Alaska"	"02"	19	735132	Unreliable
	"Arizona"	"04"	251	6626624	3.8
	"Arkansas"	"05"	152	2959373	5.1
	"California"	"06"	1312	38332521	3.4
	"Colorado"	"08"	106	5268367	2.0
	"Connecticut"	"09"	66	3596080	1.8
	"Delaware"	"10"	38	925749	4.1
	"District of Columbia"	"11"	61	646449	9.4
	"Florida"	"12"	816	19552860	4.2
	"Georgia"	"13"	472	9992167	4.7
	"Hawaii"	"15"	Suppressed	1404054	Suppressed
	"Idaho"	"16"	14	1612136	Unreliable
	"Illinois"	"17"	576	12882135	4.5
	"Indiana"	"18"	298	6570902	4.5
	"Iowa"	"19"	24	3090416	0.8
	"Kansas"	"20"	79	2893957	2.7
	"Kentucky"	"21"	138	4395295	3.1
	"Louisiana"	"22"	446	4625470	9.6
	"Maine"	"23"	13	1328302	Unreliable
	"Maryland"	"24"	299	5928814	5.0
	"Massachusetts"	"25"	83	6692824	1.2
	"Michigan"	"26"	493	9895622	5.0
	"Minnesota"	"27"	76	5420380	1.4
	"Mississippi"	"28"	215	2991207	7.2
	"Missouri"	"29"	293	6044171	4.8
	"Montana"	"30"	14	1015165	Unreliable
	"Nebraska"	"31"	51	1868516	2.7
	"Nevada"	"32"	88	2790136	3.2
	"New Hampshire"	"33"	Suppressed	1323459	Suppressed
	"New Jersey"	"34"	298	8899339	3.3
	"New Mexico"	"35"	82	2085287	3.9
	"New York"	"36"	380	19651127	1.9
	"North Carolina"	"37"	412	9848060	4.2
	"North Dakota"	"38"	Suppressed	723393	Suppressed
	"Ohio"	"39"	447	11570808	3.9
	"Oklahoma"	"40"	178	3850568	4.6
	"Oregon"	"41"	54	3930065	1.4
	"Pennsylvania"	"42"	486	12773801	3.8
	"Rhode Island"	"44"	18	1051511	Unreliable
	"South Carolina"	"45"	244	4774839	5.1
	"South Dakota"	"46"	Suppressed	844877	Suppressed
	"Tennessee"	"47"	309	6495978	4.8
	"Texas"	"48"	912	26448193	3.4
	"Utah"	"49"	33	2900872	1.1
	"Vermont"	"50"	Suppressed	626630	Suppressed
	"Virginia"	"51"	233	8260405	2.8
	"Washington"	"53"	116	6971406	1.7
	"West Virginia"	"54"	43	1854304	2.3
	"Wisconsin"	"55"	115	5742713	2.0
	"Wyoming"	"56"	Suppressed	582658	Suppressed
"Total"			11207	316128839	3.5
"---"
"Dataset: Underlying Cause of Death, 1999-2014"
"Query Parameters:"
"Title:"
"2013 Urbanization: All"
"Autopsy: All"
"Gender: All"
"Hispanic Origin: All"
"ICD-10 Codes: X93 (Assault by handgun discharge), X94 (Assault by rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge), X95 (Assault by"
"other and unspecified firearm discharge)"
"Place of Death: All"
"Race: All"
"States: All"
"Ten-Year Age Groups: All"
"Weekday: All"
"Year/Month: 2013"
"Group By: State"
"Show Totals: True"
"Show Zero Values: True"
"Show Suppressed: True"
"Calculate Rates Per: 100,000"
"Rate Options: Default intercensal populations for years 2001-2009 (except Infant Age Groups)"
"---"
"Help: See http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html for more information."
"---"
"Query Date: Nov 30, 2016 11:25:27 AM"
"---"
"Suggested Citation: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Underlying Cause of Death"
"1999-2014 on CDC WONDER Online Database, released 2015. Data are from the Multiple Cause of Death Files, 1999-2014, as compiled"
"from data provided by the 57 vital statistics jurisdictions through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program. Accessed at"
"http://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html on Nov 30, 2016 11:25:27 AM"
"---"
Caveats:
"1. Data are Suppressed when the data meet the criteria for confidentiality constraints. More information:"
"http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html#Assurance of Confidentiality."
"2. Death rates are flagged as Unreliable when the rate is calculated with a numerator of 20 or less. More information:"
"http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html#Unreliable."
"3. The population figures for year 2014 are bridged-race estimates of the July 1 resident population, from the Vintage 2014"
"postcensal series released by NCHS on June 30, 2015. The population figures for year 2013 are bridged-race estimates of the July"
"1 resident population, from the Vintage 2013 postcensal series released by NCHS on June 26, 2014. The population figures for"
"year 2012 are bridged-race estimates of the July 1 resident population, from the Vintage 2012 postcensal series released by NCHS"
"on June 13, 2013. The population figures for year 2011 are bridged-race estimates of the July 1 resident population, from the"
"Vintage 2011 postcensal series released by NCHS on July 18, 2012. Population figures for 2010 are April 1 Census counts. The"
"population figures for years 2001 - 2009 are bridged-race estimates of the July 1 resident population, from the revised"
"intercensal county-level 2000 - 2009 series released by NCHS on October 26, 2012. Population figures for 2000 are April 1 Census"
"counts. Population figures for 1999 are from the 1990-1999 intercensal series of July 1 estimates. Population figures for the"
"infant age groups are the number of live births. <br/><b>Note:</b> Rates and population figures for years 2001 - 2009 differ"
"slightly from previously published reports, due to use of the population estimates which were available at the time of release."
"4. The population figures used in the calculation of death rates for the age group 'under 1 year' are the estimates of the"
"resident population that is under one year of age. More information: http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html#Age Group."
"5. Changes to cause of death classification affect reporting trends. More information:"
"http://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/ucd.html#ICD-10 Changes."
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

Handyman said:
I dunno seems like the Dems trying too hard to prove they can be "outsiders" as well.
Click to expand...

Well, when you're about to be in a complete minority for 2-4 years, it's going to be pretty easy to pretend.
 
Re: POTUS Elect Trump I: Get in pu$$y - we're gonna make American great again

St. Clown said:
I don't know. Mitt had to look at taking the Sec. of State job with a few things in mind.

1) Do I really want the job?
2) Is there anybody else being considered who's more qualified than me to take the job?
3) If I do not take the job, into whose lap would the job fall and could that person actually do a respectable job?
4) If he makes me apologize for the job, will I take the dose of humility for my own future glory or to better serve the country despite who my boss will be?
5) If I am seeking greater personal glory, how bad will my public profile be tarnished by having to publicly kiss the ring?
6) Can I actually handle having Trump as my boss for up to 4 years?

Personally, for his sake, I hope Romney knows that his name has taken a hit publicly but decided that the next best alternative for the job was someone like David Duke and couldn't let that happen to the USA.
Click to expand...

I think you give Mitt too much credit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top