I have had it with trashing Michael Moore

[jodymarie aimee]

He is brilliant and brave and a genius. Have you seen his films? When he was first to attack Bush for war...he received death threats and even the Oscars booed him. He puts himself out there very darn day for us. Those speakers at the march don't have a wall around them like Cheeto...some Trump nut could shoot any of them. My God, we do not attack each other. Nor demand 100% purity. That is what the Rs do. How's about this....pretend you are posting and the right wing is reading what you are posting...do you want them thrilled that we attack our leaders? No we stick together and RESIST.

[Snackshack]

1. Well said.

[dchill]

2. K&R.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

3. Yep. I can't figure out why so many here seem to hate him.

Either they're looking for a purity that no one has, or they're idiots, pure and simple.

Michael Moore is an amazing man who has done a great deal for liberal causes, and we should honor and respect him for that.

[kirby]

7. Same reason...

people on here hate some other person I won't name, they dare speak truth to power and reaching out to all 50 states.

[MrPurple]

97. Because the right has relentlessly targeted him for 30 years

[CrispyQ]

131. A lot of DUers turned on MM when he predicted, in September, that Trump would win.

5 Reasons Why Trump Will Win
by Michael Moore

http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/

snip...

I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but I gave it to you straight last summer when I told you that Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee for president. And now I have even more awful, depressing news for you: Donald J. Trump is going to win in November. This wretched, ignorant, dangerous part-time clown and full time sociopath is going to be our next president. President Trump. Go ahead and say the words, ‘cause you’ll be saying them for the next four years: “PRESIDENT TRUMP.”


snip...

Here are the 5 reasons Trump is going to win:

1. Midwest Math, or Welcome to Our Rust Belt Brexit. I believe Trump is going to focus much of his attention on the four blue states in the rustbelt of the upper Great Lakes – Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Four traditionally Democratic states – but each of them have elected a Republican governor since 2010 (only Pennsylvania has now finally elected a Democrat). In the Michigan primary in March, more Michiganders came out to vote for the Republicans (1.32 million) that the Democrats (1.19 million). Trump is ahead of Hillary in the latest polls in Pennsylvania and tied with her in Ohio. Tied? How can the race be this close after everything Trump has said and done? Well maybe it’s because he’s said (correctly) that the Clintons’ support of NAFTA helped to destroy the industrial states of the Upper Midwest. Trump is going to hammer Clinton on this and her support of TPP and other trade policies that have royally screwed the people of these four states. When Trump stood in the shadow of a Ford Motor factory during the Michigan primary, he threatened the corporation that if they did indeed go ahead with their planned closure of that factory and move it to Mexico, he would slap a 35% tariff on any Mexican-built cars shipped back to the United States. It was sweet, sweet music to the ears of the working class of Michigan, and when he tossed in his threat to Apple that he would force them to stop making their iPhones in China and build them here in America, well, hearts swooned and Trump walked away with a big victory that should have gone to the governor next-door, John Kasich.

From Green Bay to Pittsburgh, this, my friends, is the middle of England – broken, depressed, struggling, the smokestacks strewn across the countryside with the carcass of what we use to call the Middle Class. Angry, embittered working (and nonworking) people who were lied to by the trickle-down of Reagan and abandoned by Democrats who still try to talk a good line but are really just looking forward to rub one out with a lobbyist from Goldman Sachs who’ll write them nice big check before leaving the room. What happened in the UK with Brexit is going to happen here. Elmer Gantry shows up looking like Boris Johnson and just says whatever shit he can make up to convince the masses that this is their chance! To stick to ALL of them, all who wrecked their American Dream! And now The Outsider, Donald Trump, has arrived to clean house! You don’t have to agree with him! You don’t even have to like him! He is your personal Molotov cocktail to throw right into the center of the bastards who did this to you! SEND A MESSAGE! TRUMP IS YOUR MESSENGER!

And this is where the math comes in. In 2012, Mitt Romney lost by 64 electoral votes. Add up the electoral votes cast by Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. It’s 64. All Trump needs to do to win is to carry, as he’s expected to do, the swath of traditional red states from Idaho to Georgia (states that’ll never vote for Hillary Clinton), and then he just needs these four rust belt states. He doesn’t need Florida. He doesn’t need Colorado or Virginia. Just Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. And that will put him over the top. This is how it will happen in November.

Much more at link & worth the read. Too bad Democratic leadership doesn't listen to anyone outside of the corporate wing of the party.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

156. I started to read that some time ago, and stopped. It bummed me out too much.

I just couldn't, as intelligent as it was. But that's fine. Certainly not a reflection on MM! It was about me, not being ready to think that way. I did not have the courage to think about it.

But godDAMN, I would never dis Michael Moore!
He's brilliant and courageous and he's on OUR side! The People's side.

[CrispyQ]

157. Here's another great link.

It's to an excerpt from Moore's "Stupid White Men and other Sorry Excuses for the State of the Nation." It's from the chapter titled, "Democrats, DOA." Democratic leadership should read it.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Michael_Moore/Democrats_DOA_SWM.html

Have you seen "Where to Invade Next?" It's fantastic! I bought it & loan it to friends to watch.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

158. Thanks!

No haven't seen that movie.

I'm behind on movies in general!

[CrispyQ]

159. I heard MM had pneumonia when the movie came out & missed some key showings.

In my area I don't think it was played at the major theaters. Definitely check it out if you can! :

[BlancheSplanchnik]

160. Wonder if it's on Amazon Prime?

That's the extent of my tv watching.

[mrgorth]

4. K&R!

[still_one]

5. His speech started out great until he started to trash Democrats. Sorry you don't use the women's

march, and add division among Democrats in that forum.

Brave? Was he brave in 2000 or just stupid?

[LisaM]

11. It was like two different speeches!

Well, I'll remember the first part.

[Auggie]

12. He's trying to light a fire under Dems ...

don't take it literally.

[still_one]

21. That wasn't the forum for it, and his endorsement of DNC chair sure was literal. Let me make it cle

I think any of the candidates including Keith Ellision would make excellent DNC chairs

but this isn't the forum for that

[uponit7771]

32. +1, we have 3 damn good candidates for running the DNC... no need to trash either one

[uponit7771]

29. He can light a fire and be uplifting at the same time

[still_one]

173. When he started to rant against the DNC, Ashley Judd cut him off, before he could try and

divide the people at an event that was about unity, and her rap was powerful indeed

[Crash2Parties]

197. I thought he was rambling at that point;

at the time I assumed he was filling time until the next speaker got to the stage.

[JNelson6563]

206. I have seen him in person lots of times.

He actually lives in my area so has been to many local events. Give him a microphone and kiss the rest of the event goodbye. He is certainly on the side of good but has his flaws. He is actually one of the purists some complain of in this thread. He LOVES to hear himself talk, like, ridiculously so.

While I appreciate him trying to motivate right now I can't help but wonder how much of a role his decades of attacks on HRC played in this election.

I am of mixed feelings on MM. Consider him to more on our side of course but sometimes pretty unhelpful.

[delisen]

53. Like Trump apologists told us not to take Trump literally ? nt

[delisen]

56. Reality is if you attack supporters you may suffer backlash. Same for everyone n/t

[lapucelle]

178. The Kellyanne Conway defense.

Kellyanne Conway Complains "Don't Take Trump’s Clinton in Jail Remarks Literally"

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[joshcryer]

17. Far be it for one to react the same way the crowd did.

Far be it to have your own opinion.

And of course when Moore walls back his attempted takeover of a unity event, the people criticizing us for not liking it will not apologize. They'll forget it ever happened.

[BlueMTexpat]

187. Spot on! eom

[BlueMTexpat]

186. +1!

And then there were all the references to his FB site and his Twitter account - a bit of self-promotion, no?

He should have stopped when he was ahead. I was glad that Ashley Judd interrupted and practically steamrolled over him with her passionate delivery of "Nasty Woman."

http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/ashley-judd-nasty-woman-womens-march-video-watch-1201966160/

You dis Dems and fems at your peril, Michael!

[TDale313]

6. There are some vocal members here

Who can't stand hearing any critiques of the status quo. News flash: What we've been doing isn't working. They are now in control of all three federal branches of government and the majority of state governors' and state houses. All of this while not being supported by the majority of Americans. We can't afford to pretend it's all hunky dory.

[thejoker123]

15. I left this site years ago because

It was beyond an echo chamber. It was not just frustrating, but intellectually insulting and embarrassing. I posted as much, politely and rationally, and was promptly banned.

I just came back (with a new name) a few months ago. Haven't been on the site enough yet to see if things have changed.

[SidDithers]

37. What was your old name?...nt

Sid

[Scruffy1]

45. That's why I rarely post.

I don't see any reason to waste time on internet duels. No one ever wins an argument i think the media has been so stifling that a lot of Democrats have forgotten what it means to be a Democrat is to disturb the status quo.

[Hestia]

138. I think a large part of the problem is that those lived through the Depression, bringing forth

the New Deal have passed on. I remember my grandparents talking about it all, and how it was a great thing for the country. Heck, LBJ Democrats are passing on at alarming rates. A lot of people don't know the history of the Democratic Party and it our fault for not enlightening people until they get it - especially the younger ones.

I am so happy that PBO has said that will be one of his private citizens initiatives - teaching about Democracy and the Democratic Party. Some of it is his fault, but largely the DNC, for taking people for granted and assuming those votes would be there. Biden was hammering this point in the West Wing. Reach out to everyone!

Sorry for the thread drift...

I love Michael Moore's movies, not especially crazy for the man himself, but I too do not subscribe to this mythological Purity Test. It's easy to say when you are in your 20's. Not at all when you are in your 50's. Shit happens but so does Magic.

Fahrenheit 9/11 was a wake up call to the country - no, it's not just you who feels the way they do during Bush's (Cheney's) first years. I watched it in Dallas when we lived there and the gasps coming from the audience when they saw the protesters for the very first time. I think that movie sparked the beginning of Hope that helped to elect PBO.

[JudyM]

49. Stick together.

[melman]

143. Things haven't changed

at least not for the better. If anything, it's gotten far worse.

[thejoker123]

183. It's a shame, this site could have really

Been something special, influential. Instead it's largely a hangout for what seems like a few thousand. I mean I like it for the up the minute reporting and some of the people are great. But it could have been so much more.

[Crunchy Frog]

18. The status quo is what's brought us to our current catastrophe.

We'd fucking better be willing to criticize it.

[oberliner]

41. No, it's not

Hillary won the popular vote by 3 million, in spite of Russian interference and other shenanigans.

[Crunchy Frog]

59. Yeah, and what about the House, Senate, governeships, state legislatures, media

And all the factors that made it possible for Dump to steal the election, and have essentially no checks on his power.

This is the product of decades of work by the Koch bros and other monied interests, and the Dems have consistently refused to see or deal with what was happening, played appeasement games, gone along with the R agenda, done nothing about election irregularities, even after Bush II brazenly stole the election 16 years ago, and ceded vast parts of the country to them without even a fight.

This is not about a single presidential candidate. It's about the entire power structure of this country, which has pretty much been handed over to the RW lock stock and barrell.

I'm sure you'll come up with a very witty counter to this post, explaining to me why I'm all wrong. I won't bother reading it.

[oberliner]

63. Good points

There definitely needs to be some soul searching for sure.

I think the Senate is problematic in that smaller states are overly represented, and I think the House has issues with gerrymandering that work against Democrats.

But I do agree that Democrats ought to figure out more effective strategies for national success.

[Akamai]

192. I think Thomas Franks critiques are important but a post I made about this

Several hours ago was taken down as it was thought to be inappropriate and, I guess, to be a right-wing smear.

Sure not my intention, but some of the issues Franks raises are worth considering.

[Tatiana]

124. Amen and Hallelujah.

This is exactly the point. And just going along to get along will hand us more of the same... eventually leading to the complete destruction of America as well know it.

The installation of a permanent underclass is exactly what Republicans want. It is strikingly reminiscent of South African apartheid.

[mdbl]

181. So true.

It gets very frustrating how awful republicans can legitimize their lunacy all day on radio and tv and the Dems hardly call it what it is. i guess the congressional salaries and perks were just too great and they didn't want to jeopardize their cushy jobs which most ended up losing anyway.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

191. +1000,000!

[StubbornThings]

207. Very well said. nt

[pscot]

66. The House, the Senate, the Presidency and the Courts

have all fallen under Republican control since 2000, not to mention 2/3 of the states. The status quo hasn't worked out for us. If we don't recapture the Senate and make serious inroads in Congress and state races in 2013 Democrats may be out of power for a generation. We damn well better learn to pull together and quit sniping at one another over fractional differences.

[oberliner]

67. There are a lot of reasons for that

Some of them have to do with the fact that Democrats are concentrated in particular areas (such as cities). States like New York and California are underrepresented in government relative to their populations.

[pscot]

121. Republicans added to their historic 2014 gains

in the nation’s state legislatures with the addition of five state House chambers and two state Senate chambers in last week’s election, while Democratic control was reduced to levels not seen since the Civil War

Republicans are now in control of a record 67 (68 percent) of the 98 partisan state legislative chambers in the nation, more than twice the number (31) in which Democrats have a majority, according to the bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL).
“That’s more than at any other time in the history of the Republican Party,” according to NCSL. “They also hold more total seats, well over 4,100 of the 7,383, than they have since 1920.”

ALEC and the billonaire class have been beavering away at this for the last 20 years. Democrats haven't matched that effort and now we're way up the creek without a paddle and the creek is on fire. All I want to know is, what's our plan?

[oberliner]

136. Yes, indeed

It's depressing.

But as I said, the structure of the electoral system has not really evolved as the population has.

But I do agree with you that we need to come up with a plan to succeed under the circumstances.

[Ligyron]

139. Maybe we can run Hillary again.

I'm just waiting for someone to come up with that idea in a year or two.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

194. Please shoot me before that happens.

That would be the merciful thing to do.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

193. The sad thing is that the Republicans have said and done things ...

... that should have spelled the end of their party, yet the Democrats, through inaction and lousy strategy, have helped them revive into controlling all branches of government, and the majority of state governments.

The Republican Party should have been dead two elections ago, but the centrist ways of the Democratic Party turned many people off who would have otherwise voted for them.

It's an absolute tragedy, and now we have to endure a Trump Presidency because of their arrogance and incompetence.

I'm supremely pissed off.

[pscot]

212. As am I

The leadership decision to ignore 2/3 of the states was fatally misguided. You can't govern this country from the DC/Boston enclave. We've put ourselves in a box and we're stuck there. Where there is no vision, the people perish.

[uponit7771]

36. Critique and bashing are two different things, lets stop the needless bashing & lift up people

[Akamai]

195. Sometimes the truth is painful, at least in part. PollyAnna was a Disney

Movie and not a model for how a Democrat should behave if we want to portray the world as it is.

[uponit7771]

204. If its the whole truth so be it but 90% of the bashing is half truth which whole lie

[TrekLuver]

48. It's probably against the rules to bash the Democratic Party...there are a lot of rules

here to follow.

[alarimer]

162. Yes, the status quo has not worked.

We got an inkling of it when Bernie Sanders drew bigger numbers than anyone expected. His message does resonate and, to their credit, the Democratic leadership did listen. It wasn't quite enough for Clinton.

In my opinion, the Democrats need to go further and ditch whatever remains of the third way. And then run candidates in EVERY SINGLE ELECTION, whether they have a chance or not. They also need to not interfere when there is a progressive on the primary ballot. Let the people choose, then get behind whoever it is. They ditched Ned Lamont in favor of independent Lieberman because he was their pal. I've never quite forgiven them for that.

[LisaM]

8. Hey, we were really enjoying his speech!

We were pumping our fists and cheering. And then we suddenly felt like we were being attacked and lectured at. Too bad.

[still_one]

13. He went from a speech of unity to division. Stupid and unnecessary

[Squinch]

40. Yes, but we would be foolish to throw the baby out with the bath water. His "action plan"

was essentially exactly what we have to do. We need to call our congress people DAILY. We need to join everything that supports the things we support, we need to get involved in local politics.

He was right on all those things, and he promised to put a structure to those actions. If he can do that, he and I can fight sometime in the future over his lack of respect for the Democrats who have worked so hard to get us so far.

[bagelsforbreakfast]

9. Where to Invade Next was terrific...

I'd like to see Congress put on the hot seat as to why we cannot match the accomplishments of other countries it depicts.

[joshcryer]

10. Trashing?

Where?

[still_one]

14. This wasn't the forum to trash Democrats, the DNC, and endorse a DNC chair.

[joshcryer]

23. I don't see any such posts trashing him, though.

[still_one]

26. I have to go to the march, but for a speech that started so well, it ended on a divisive note

[Mosby]

144. Here's one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028508907

[joshcryer]

145. Wow, like two hours later, omg, mercy.

[sammythecat]

188. What

What's wrong with 2hrs later, or 10hrs later?

[fishwax]

16. I tend to agree, although I didn't think his speech today hit the mark

I thought he was going on a bit long, and that the energy kicked up when Ashley Judd took over.

But Moore has been and will continue to be an important voice in the good fight.

[Greybnk48]

19. He's always been accurate and relevant and brutally

honest. That's why some people hate him. I love the guy and I'm VERY grateful for everything he's done.

[bdamomma]

34. I like him too

some good advice.

First call Congress everyday 1 202 225 3121
Say No to DeVos for Education

I also gave a donation to Planned Parenthood.

[Greybnk48]

102. I'm going to see if I can volunteer

at PP next week. Their office is less than a mile from my house.

[Rex]

20. I've noticed binary thinkers always hate on Moore.

There is no middle ground.

[joshcryer]

24. I'm pleased he joined Planned Parenthood today.

[Rex]

25. He needs to be more involved that way.

IMO, he needs to move away from the politics side and onto more social issues.

[joshcryer]

39. Surprised he wasn't an endowment member with his disposable income.

[Rex]

43. He probably sees himself as a provocative film maker.

Like Coppola. My guess.

[QC]

113. And the Moore-haters here use all the usual right wing attacks on him.

He's rich, he's a commie, he's fat, he has a big house, etc.

Funny how that works.

[Rex]

116. I think it is jealousy.

That he is a real journalist, doing something active while they QB from a couch somewhere.

[QC]

123. Or serve as a tackling dummy on right wing fake news. n/t

[Rex]

163. That too. nt

[BlueWI]

168. This.

Michael Moore makes great left leaning films on timely, provocative topics, and gets airtime for liberal views in a way that few others do. If you're a Republican and don't like him, that's understandable. If you're a Democrat and don't like him, you might want to rethink your DLC mindset.

[Rex]

169. Yes, in a time when we are desperate for left leaning media. I don't always agree with him.

But he was right about this and for the right reasons. Those that want to stick their fingers in their ears will get left behind.

[BlueWI]

170. Agreed. He's not always right.

But who is? Moore is a humorist and provocateur, and he gets results, doing the work that all of us should be doing!!

[Rex]

171. He is far more of an activists than the folks I see poo-pooing on him all the time.

With never a nice word to say. Screw that agenda crap, we need more liberal voices speaking out.

[sammythecat]

200. Completely agree.

I'm glad he's around and doing what he does.

[TrekLuver]

22. I'm with just about anybody who is against this piece of Trash. But I can still differ

on opinions with them...bottom line let's stay united for the bigger cause.

[Rex]

27. Right on!

I can disagree and agree with someone, depending on the issue. I line up with MMoore on most issues.

[True Dough]

28. Did he ever take it on the chin

from some members here at the DU during the presidential campaign. He was forecasting a Trump victory and giving reasons why. That left some forum members incensed and they called him all kinds of names.

I don't believe there were many humble pie threads or posts after the fact though. Few acknowledged that Moore was right and they were unnecessarily harsh on him.

[stevenleser]

42. A US Presidential election is a binary event. It's not a brilliant Prediction, its candidate A or

candidate B. It's basically the same odds as flipping a coin and guessing heads or tails.

You are asking for humble pie because someone guessed the coin would land on heads and it landed on heads. That doesnt rate special mention, sorry.

[Rex]

47. Moore guessed the 'why' part about Trump voters early on.

While so many supposed experts got it completely wrong. Sorry.

[stevenleser]

50. Nope, that is your opinion. There is nothing empirical to suggest that. It's still a coin toss

prediction.

[Rex]

75. Like your opinion hold more weight than mine.

You can quit pretending it does.

[stevenleser]

78. Nope, this isn't about that. You made a contention, you need to prove it. Nice try. nt

[Rex]

79. Again you have no authority over this issue.

Nice try yourself there.

[stevenleser]

82. All DUers have the authority to ask each other for proof. That has been part of DU from early on.

That wasn't even a nice try by you.

[Rex]

84. Nope. I am right and you are wrong.

That was the only point you made. Sorry.

[stevenleser]

86. Nope, my only point was that our US presidential elections are binary so a prediction one will win

isn't a big deal.

[Rex]

87. Wrong.

Nope. Your point was exposed for the weakness that it was. Nope. Nope.

[stevenleser]

91. Nope, your idea was opinion, mine was fact. Two candidates, binary. End of story. nt

[Rex]

93. Wrong.

Nope.

[stevenleser]

100. Yep, see my #88. nt

[True Dough]

54. No, steveleser

I'm suggesting humble pie was in order because if you had said to me back in October, "You know, Trump is going to prevail on election day" and gave me your rationale, and then I turned around and said, "stevenleser, you are a big no-nothing jerk," well, I attacked you in an unfair way based on disliking your opinion.

That happened here on the DU in regards to Michael Moore. I saw many such posts.

Get it now?

[stevenleser]

58. Nope, it's still the same odds as a coin toss. Here is what Moore did NOT predict

Did Moore predict the Russian hack?

Did Moore predict wikileaks would work with the Russians?

Did Moore predict the FBI director would intervene on behalf of Trump?

Did Moore predict or deduce that the Trump campaign was conspiring with the Russians?

Those would have been predictions beyond a coin toss, and they affected the race in the end more than anything Moore talked about.

[True Dough]

92. So what?

Just because Michael Moore didn't foresee every development and nuance of the election doesn't mean he was any less prescient in correctly anticipating its conclusion, and it doesn't make his reasons any less valid.

Did countless polls predict a Donald Trump victory? No, they didn't. The vast majority of those polls had Hillary winning by a margin of 2% to 8% over several months. Many, many Americans put a lot of stock in those polls. Moore was one of the few, particularly on the Democratic side, who had the courage to call it like he saw it, and he was right!

[stevenleser]

101. The so what is, he predicted a coin toss. Congrats, he said heads and it was heads.

Thats so what.

[True Dough]

125. And he was one of the few to do it

Care to show your own posts where you forecasted a Trump presidency in October?

You keep comparing it to a coin toss, but it's not the same. This "coin toss" of an election was analyzed and scrutinized by pundits galore and by more polls than you can shake a stick at. The overwhelming majority of that analysis pointed to Clinton landing in the White House, some predicting a large margin of victory. So there was plenty of influence on how people thought that "coin toss" of an election would end.

Moore stuck his neck out. Went against the grain. Gave his reasons for it. Was correct. Got sh*t on by plenty of Dems.

Actually, you're probably one who ran him down. If I cared enough to search your post history, I bet there's something there. But I don't care that much. I've spent more time debating you on this than I should, really.

[Nevernose]

164. Or maybe they DIDN'T

Maybe he was right all along for his stated reasons: that Clinton was an amazing person (which he's been saying literally for decades), but has been smeared by an entire industry for 25 years. Plus, the professionals vastly underestimated the nation's and rust belt's desire for change.

A whole bunch of us predicted the same outcome for the same reasons a year ago. Although, to be fair, the fact that even TRUMP could win was shocking to most of us.

He made his predictions well before the Russian hacks and made them specifically about the rust belt. Instead of dismissing him, maybe we should be listening closer.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

198. So, in essence, you're saying it was more complicated than a coin flip.

With the proper strategy, platform, and candidate, the Democrats should have won the election despite some of your points (some being moot with the right candidate).

[still_one]

202. Exactly. Those were the major factors, especially the FBI/Comey interference. What you have just

presented is what is referred to as a black swan event

An event that deviates beyond what is normally expected, and cannot be predicted.

[fishwax]

69. that isn't how odds work

Just because there are (essentially) only two outcomes, doesn't mean that the two outcomes are equally likely.

[stevenleser]

71. That is why I said essentially. nt

[fishwax]

72. yeah, but it's not even close

[stevenleser]

74. Statistically it absolutely is fairly close, even taking into account the worst blowout elections

Assuming a candidate wins 60% of the vote vs 40% for their opponent and was trending that way all along, that isn't so far away from a 50-50 chance that you couldn't say "essentially a coin toss".

[fishwax]

90. 60-40 and 50-50 aren't "basically the same odds"

Those odds (and most people would have viewed 60-40 as overly pessimistic in the weeks before the election) aren't "basically the same." I mean, if you want to say essentially a coin toss you can. There's no law or rule that says you have to be precise in your language or accurate or anything like that.

[Rex]

95. Well yeah, but nope!

That is the extent of his ability to converse. Nope.

[stevenleser]

98. Sure it is, depending on application and in this one it is, I'll break it down for you.

Considering 60-40 vs 50-50, Candidate A has either a 60% or 50% chance of winning. The spread in a prediction for candidate A victory therefore differs only by a 10% chance in either scenario.

Similarly candidate B has a 50% chance of winning or a 40% chance of winning.

Again, this is the widest spread we have had in Presidential elections in the last 40-50 years.

Getting back to the initial contention I made about Moore, adding to the uncertainty is that you have no idea what events might come up. If one candidate has a lead, that could evaporate due to some unknown future event.

Moore made his prediction July 21st. http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/michael-moores-5-reasons-why-trump-will-win at that time, the polls were basically even: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh16gen.htm which further bolsters the idea that the race was a coin toss.

[Rex]

105. Nope. Completely wrong.

Nice try.

[stevenleser]

107. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

109. Nope. For obvious reasons. nt

nt

[stevenleser]

110. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

112. Nope.

[stevenleser]

114. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

117. Nope.

[stevenleser]

118. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

119. Sorry but that post is wrong.

So as you like to say NOPE.

[RandiFan1290]

208. So close! lol

Not sure if anyone remembers this:

[Rex]

215. That is great, never seen it but love the

Wonka meme.

[fishwax]

126. You've demonstrated that you can successfully subtract 50 from 60 and 40 from 50

but that doesn't really do much to support any of your assertions about odds.

In fact, your recent post actually amplifies an apparent confusion about probability.

Again, this is the widest spread we have had in Presidential elections in the last 40-50 years.

I'm not sure what this means, unless you're talking about the breakdown of the popular vote. And it's true that the 60-40 is fairly close to the biggest split we've had in the popular vote in the last 50-60 years. But that has nothing to do with odds. I mean, if Candidate A is polling at 55% and Candidate B at 45%, that doesn't mean that Candidate A has a 55% chance of winning.

I would wager that you probably know that. But, then, I would wager that when a relatively smart individual engaging honestly in conversation makes a wildly and obviously inaccurate claim (such as suggesting that simply because an event has only two likely outcomes, the odds must be basically like a coin toss), they would simply acknowledge the mistake and move on, rather than digging in their heels. And yet, here we are, dozens of posts into this subthread.

As Nobel Laureate Bob Dylan once said: "swallow your pride / you will not die / it is not poison."

As to Moore's predictions, he didn't stop warning of the real and present danger of a Trump victory on July 21st. He was saying it in September and October (and getting plenty of flak for it).

[Rex]

77. You cannot have a real conversation with that one.

Nope. Because he says so.

[stevenleser]

80. Nope, because I ask people to prove their assertions. You can't so you don't like that. nt

[Rex]

81. Thanks for proving my point.

Nope.

[stevenleser]

83. Nope, thanks for proving MY point. Which you do more thoroughly with each comment. nt

[Rex]

85. Thanks for again proving me right and you wrong.

Nope.

[stevenleser]

88. Thanks again for proving there is nothing to Moores prediction. You keep coming up empty. nt

[Rex]

89. Nope.

[stevenleser]

99. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

103. Nope.

Completely wrong, the other poster was right. However I never would expect you to admit to being wrong.

[stevenleser]

104. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

106. Nope.

[stevenleser]

108. Yep, see my #88. nt

[Rex]

111. Nope.

[QC]

122. Fox taught him well. n/t

[KG]

154. word.

[Lucky Luciano]

73. Nobody was laying even odds for the fuhrer winning.

Binary event yes - but not 50/50 like a coin flip.

Me trying to guess your birthday is also binary - either I guess right or I don't.

[stevenleser]

76. That's why I said "essentially". nt

[NickB79]

174. "Hey, I made you a ham sandwich"

"Well, it's actually a dog turd between two slices of rye, but it's essentially the same thing. Enjoy!"

[Ligyron]

141. No Sir, it is not.

Unless it's a coin with 2 heads and someon else gets to call it. Like the GOP.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

196. No, because many people thought that Clinton had the election in the bag.

He was one of the few who were cautious and explained rationally why this was dangerous thinking. He was lambasted for his efforts, and yet he was right, while so many were wrong.

It was way more complicated and nuanced than a simple flip of the coin. In fact, that binary thinking is what's causing the Democrats to lose election after election.

[QC]

214. +1

[grantcart]

30. You don't have to agree with everything MM says to

understand that his heart is in the right place and he is very intelligent.

[stevenleser]

46. I would agree with that. Smart, heart in the right place, but flawed to the point that he harms

almost as much as he helps.

[Plucketeer]

147. So...

when's your next progressive film debut? It's gotta be fantastic.

[stevenleser]

150. If that's your attempt to win logical fallacy of the day, it's yours. nt

[Plucketeer]

175. I WIN??? Oh Boy!

[eleny]

31. I thought he was doing well

Giving people direction for daily action and purpose. He was trying to let people know that they can do anything from calling their Congress members to running for office. All in all a positive message.

[mchill]

33. Second this!!

Michael Moore is the type of person that can bridge the gap to many Trump voters. He's the ultimate organizer too.

[GoCubsGo]

35. Yes. Please stop.

I don't always agree with him, but I also don't think he deserves all of the derision coming from some here. I mean, he is on our side, ffs. I wish people would stop eating our own.

[90-percent]

38. Long time fan

Loved him since Roger and Me in the early eighties, a forecast of what American middle class was to become over the next thirty reaganomics years. Loved him when he was cool, wasn't cool, semi-warm, cold and back to cool again.

He had two charming network shows in the nineties on Fox (!!!!WTF??? FOX!!!) and NBC. And he made a feature length movie Canadian Bacon, which was so charming and gentle and funny. Then the documentaries, which are as useful now as when they were released.

He's got the mind and temperament and wisdom to be a major figure in the RESIST! Movement we all better be working on figuring out how to do such a thing EFFECTIVELY, instead of an opioid Internet group hug.

My vote is for Michael. And Keith. And Thom. And Chris Hedges, and Joy Reid, and Amy Goodman and Jeremy Scahill and all non-corporate-prostitute public figures everywhere.

-90% Jimmy

[jodymarie aimee]

55. don't forget Bill Maher and Lawrence O'Donnell

Toure, Pap, Joe Madison, Greg Palast...on and on...we have lots of them. And one of the best things about the women's march is that MEN are there. WITH us.

[90-percent]

62. Oh, I know therre's a lot on the list I forgot

And one of my main info sources since Bush v. Gore had been DU posters and links, which was my gateway to becoming modestly well informed on what our Kleptocrats have been up to all these decades.

David Pakmaan, Lee Fong, hell, even Jesse Ventura two thirds of the time, Abby Martin, who was specifically targeted in the very recent govt intel report on ruskie election meddling.

They got psyops, the full force of our DEEP STATE, and Republican majorities all over this land. All we got is each other, so we better figure out how to become united for our common interests, instead of squabbling and primitive tribalism over FAKE NEWS.

-90% Jimmy

[MyOwnPeace]

61. GREAT reply..............

90-percent.
I'm with you - 100-percent!

[Quixote1818]

70. Agree, great reply. nt

[oberliner]

44. At a women's march, shouldn't men mostly be listening?

And making short, supportive statement about women perhaps.

[JudyM]

52. He is a strong feminist and his speech was important. We need to Hound congress and run for office.

Meanwhile, DWS on that stage! Standing near the mike as if she is in it as a leader for the people. See the problem? It's not just gender.

[oberliner]

64. It's not billed as a feminist march, it's billed as a women's march

For what that is worth.

[JudyM]

65. Many of us are happy for his participation.

[oberliner]

68. I'm happy for his participation

But I can understand why some folks might have been a little annoyed by some of his speech.

[TCJ70]

115. That's an odd attitude to have...

...what difference does gender make if the message is on point?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

51. His speech at the WMoW was terrific!

[Walk away]

57. He just bashed Democrats at a rally that is supposed to bring us together.

I can only assume that if the alt-left hates us so much more than Donald Trump, they don't want us.

[slumcamper]

128. No, he put center-right Dems on notice that the moment demands change.

The "Old Guard" has wielded power over failed strategy at all levels. I am sick and tired of milquetoast policy and strategy. We are in a struggle for the soul of America, for all we've gained, and for the future. If ever the events of a moment in history demanded soul-searching and change, it is now.

FWIW, I'm a 57-year old FDR Democrat who is growing tired and recognizes the need to unite and make common cause with the young energy of this party. Please join me.

[Walk away]

217. I have been an active Democrat for 50 years. Several members of my family work...

or have worked for the party for generations. I have watched the extreme left rise and fail at least 6 times in my lifetime. Mostly because instead of working with the party they spend most of their energy trying to destroy it.
A changing and growing party is great but a left wing, TeaParty, kill your own, approach leaves me cold. Maybe it will work but I highly doubt it. This is politics and not religion. People who confuse the two are in for a rude awakening.

[Iggo]

149. .

[heaven05]

60. yeah, he's been right on

and you are 100% correct...I always liked Ashley Judd...great passion...she's a 'nasty woman'...

[joshcryer]

94. 65 rec about a thread upset about a non-existent trashing of Moore...

...Sigh. Meanwhile an event is going on in Washington that will have more than a million people when all is said and done and there's not even one official thread about it with more than a handful of votes.

This is why we lose folks.

[Rex]

96. 71

[jodymarie aimee]

137. not that many, as it devolved for abit into 2 kids swatting at each other!!

kind of proves my original post, no? Proud to stand with the adults here. Very proud.

[slumcamper]

120. --and "the old guard of the democratic party has got to go"

As MM implored us to come to grips with, TWICE in the last 16 years we've won the election only to watch the other side walk into the White House.

NEVER AGAIN IN MY LIFETIME.

Thanks jodymarie for speaking truth to power. It's time for the old, tired guard to pass the torch and join young Democrats in sustaining the fight for the things we ALL believe in.

[truebluegreen]

127. Amen.

[malaise]

129. Very well said

Rec

[Barbara2423]

130. Well said.

We should stick together and support the democratic cause. n Stop fighting each other, that is what Republicans want us to do.

[SidDithers]

132. Too bad...nt

Sid

[secondwind]

133. BRAVA!!! KNR

[lillypaddle]

134. Some people hate anyone

who doesn't agree with them 100%.

[Blue Idaho]

135. He has one message. Period.

He's a man not a messiah - if he keeps his ego in check he's useful - when he doesn't he isn't.

[mopinko]

140. the time for purity is over for now.

purity and perfection are worthless goals in most cases.
reality dont work like that.

a flexible, open minded person know that they are unattainable, and focuses on what is important, and what will work.
the time for that is now.

[diane in sf]

142. Yes, and I'm tired of people trashing Bernie too. Hilary lost to vote suppression in swing states,

which the Democratic party had better start taking seriously. Which they should have been taking seriously since Al Gore and John Kerry had elections stolen from them in Florida and Ohio respectively.

[yuiyoshida]

146. He, Keith Olbermann and Bill Maher have fired up the base of late

That's appreciated by many!

[Iggo]

148. Me, too.

Not getting sucked into the PUMA bullshit.

Divided we fall.

[SaschaHM]

151. I'm not...

If he really cared about unity, he wouldn't have used the second half of his speech to bash Democrats. You can't have it both ways. Either we can be a unified party that accepts all or we can have both sides fight it out for dominance. I'll be damned if I'm going to take advice from an asshole who was spreading false information about Hillary during the primary.


"Do you want them thrilled that we attack our leaders?" DU does this daily for our congressmen anyway. Remember when Booker was being bashed 24/7 for the last 2 weeks. Schumer and Pelosi a time before that.

[JustAnotherGen]

152. He's not a leader

We are. Not them.

[Skittles]

153. I LOVE Michael Moore

I am a long-time fan - I went to hear him speak at a college many moons ago (wearing a Michigan t-shirt in his honor!), and would have stayed to meet and greet (he is so gracious to his fans), but it was really late and I had to go to work really early the next day.

[sammythecat]

216. Me too.

I don't get the hate at all. I love the guy and what he does. Long may he live. I say that because he's getting older now and I don't think he takes care of himself all that well. I worry about his health. He's one of a kind and I don't want to anything bad to happen to him.

[MelissaB]

155. Thank you for this!

Moore is a fantastic leader.

[alarimer]

161. They don't like him because he was the first to warn that Trump would win.

This was a month or so before the election and apparently he was hearing things that were being ignored by pollsters or the campaign. And it turned out he was right. But he wasn't a cheerleader; he was willing to say the unthinkable.

[zentrum]

165. Hear, hear!

[Lotusflower70]

166. Me too

I Iove Michael Moore. I know some people are pissed because he ended up being right but it's not his fault the dumbasses didn't listen.

[nini]

172. I have had it with trashing {Insert Name Here}

this is our number one problem right now and I admit I am guilty of this myself.


Our leaders need to be conscious of this themselves when speaking out. We're on the right track but still have to find our common ground to really kick butt.

[El Supremo]

176. He's great except for...

the San Fran cap.

[underthematrix]

177. Look I don't like or trust Michael Moore but

do you trust and like every one in your family. Let's stop whining and bashing. We got a NAZI in the WH and White Nationalist Party in Congress. If you want to do something meaningful go get in the face of your GOPer House or Senate member and tell them unless they vote against repeal of Ocare they won't be collecting a taxpayer govt check for long. Call 'em write 'em and show up at townhall meetings. Ride their asses HARD.

[BlueStateLib]

179. Michael Moore wants to throw the democratic leadership and half the party out of office

[SMC22307]

180. Well, considering we fully control only six states...

maybe they need to be thrown out! There's a huuuuge problem and many on DU seem to be in total fucking denial about it.

[BlueStateLib]

209. A better strategy is to go after Republicans rather trying to defeat Democrtats and

attacking the Democratic Party.

[otohara]

182. Who Get's To Stay Michael Moore?

will he put out a list?

He helped get rid of Hillary and Al Gore

John Lewis is old - he must go right?

[spooky3]

184. I don't always agree with him, but I always believe his heart is in the right place.

(and that I am sometimes wrong!)

[Generic Other]

185. People been trashing him on DU since the Bush era

But lots of us have his back.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

189. Who here was trashing Michael Moore?

Were they DU members, or are you speaking in general?

[betsuni]

199. Suggesting that the march was the wrong time and place for saying the leaders of the Democratic

Party need to be thrown out isn't "trashing." That's criticism. I sense a double standard.

[sarah FAILIN]

201. I've loved him since I saw Roger & Me

He knows how to make me cry for my fellow man

[HassleCat]

203. He does criticize our party.

He says we need to make changes. Change is not fun. Change means some people have to be pushed out after years of dedication and loyal service. That kind of thing is jolly good fun for Republicans, but they enjoy being assholes, And we're not them.

[AngryAmish]

205. It appears you have had it with trashing Michael Moore.

Wee, that.

[Oneironaut]

210. Sorry, but the Democratic party does need trashing.

It needs a literal trashing of the status quo, and new faces. We're losing badly because people don't trust us anymore. Michael Moore is absolutely right.

[otohara]

213. The Left Trashing Hillary Worked Out So Well

by the time AlterNet & Salon and even that POS over at TYT tried to turn around all the garbage they said or printed about her, their audiences became furious.

The comments of sellouts and - cool aid drinkers...became the norm.

Was Moore right on Al Gore?

[JHan]

218. "trashing" for what purpose?

For "newness" ? You don't throw hard working people under the bus because we need "new faces". You don't alienate those who have toiled in the fields because the trend is "newness".

We just need strong allies, whether they've been there, toiling in the fields, or just arrived fresh. The standard shouldn't be what Michael says or nebulous ideas of who represents the status quo and who doesn't. The idea of some kind of bonfire-of-the-vanities purging of the democratic party is .... frankly... disgusting.

[Soxfan58]

211. Michael Moore

Uses his movies as one of the few forms of true investigative journalisim left.

[andym]

219. Michael Moore was prescient about how the rust belt might support Trump

He was right on that there were a lot of disaffected voters who would vote for Trump as a show of dissatisfaction with the role of the government in contributing to their loss of livelihoods. In the end these voters contributed to Trump's surprise victory. Without them, even with Comey, Democrats would have taken the Senate and Presidency. Of course, without Comey, the Democrats would have also taken the Senate and the Presidency. But his analysis of how some traditional rust belt voters were thinking is obviously correct.