Trumpian Bullshit Detector...

[Nickdfresh]

AP FACT CHECK: Trump botches murder rate

Associated Press
CALVIN WOODWARD
Associated PressFebruary 8, 2017123 Comments
15789
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's dark view of violent crime in America rests largely on a bogus claim: that the murder rate is higher than it's been in nearly half a century. Actually, the murder rate is down sharply in that time, despite a recent spike.

On Tuesday, he told a meeting of sheriffs: "The murder rate in our country is the highest it's been in 47 years, right? Did you know that? Forty-seven years. I used to use that — I'd say that in a speech and everybody was surprised because the press doesn't tell it like it is." He circled back to add: "The murder rate is the highest it's been in, I guess, from 45 to 47 years."

THE FACTS: The murder rate in 2015, the latest year for which figures are available, is actually among the lowest in half a century. It stood at 4.9 murders per 100,000 people, a far cry from the rates in the 1970s, 1980s and most of the 1990s, when they were typically over 6 per 100,000, peaking at over 10 in 1980.

It's true that 2015 saw one of the largest increases in decades, up 10 percent from 4.4 murders per 100,000 people in 2014, but even with that rise homicides are not on the order of what the country experienced in previous decades.

Trump has misrepresented crime statistics on several occasions. He stated last month that Philadelphia's murder rate has been "terribly increasing" even though it dropped slightly last year. The city's murder rate rose in the previous two years but remained substantially lower than in past decades.

He also incorrectly claimed that two people "were shot and killed" in Chicago during then-President Barack Obama's farewell speech on Jan. 10. Although Chicago has experienced a surge in murders compared with previous decades, no one was fatally shot in Chicago that day, police records show, much less during Obama's speech.

EDITOR'S NOTE _ A look at the veracity of claims by public figures

YAHOO LINK (https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-fact-check-trump-botches-murder-rate-082659982--politics.html)

[Von Halen]

Gonna be a long 8 years for fags like you NickDickless!

[Nickdfresh]

Gonna be a long 8 years for fags like you NickDickless!

But you'll get over it!

Von DaveHagarfan

[DONNIEP]

Doesn't matter what the "rate" is now - it's about to come waaayyy down in shit holes like Detroit and Shitcago.

[Nitro Express]

Doesn't matter what the "rate" is now - it's about to come waaayyy down in shit holes like Detroit and Shitcago.

Most of the crime is driven by drugs. Cut the drug importation and you quell a lot of the crime. The real challenge is digging out of the hole in those cities. Like helping a drug addict they have to want the help and need to be willing to do their part to change. You have broken homes. You have low educational levels. You have corrupt local politicians who want to keep all those people on the dole. Probably the best thing the federal government could do is start a CCC type program like Roosevelt did. Put them to work doing the kind of work low educated people can do and then add in education in the program. I don't know how many of these people are even literate. I mean you have to start at the low end and build them up. If you can give them hope and get a vision in their head where they want to be down the road they can work towards it but it takes years to get there. But then that's true with playing basketball well or even getting good at making music which some of them are good at but you don't get good at those without working it. Turning those cities around is going to take 20 years. It's not a quick fix and it's going to be a real challenge and they have to want to fix themselves and if that will isn't there we are pissing up a rope.

[Nitro Express]

Murders in the US rose 10.8% last year, the biggest single-year percentage jump since 1971, according to data released Monday by the FBI.

A third of the murder increase was driven by upticks in just ten larger cities: Baltimore, Chicago, Houston, Washington DC, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Nashville, Kansas City, Missouri, St Louis, and Oklahoma City.

Baltimore saw the greatest increase in murders, with 133 more people killed in 2015 than in 2014, pushing the city to its highest-ever murder rate. Some of America’s largest cities, including New York and Los Angeles, saw their murder numbers remain near historic lows in 2015.

[Nitro Express]

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation the murder rate has spiked in the US. Now folks. I have a background in statistics. I studied statistical quality control in college. It's all based on the sampling. The sampling determines the end result and so you can have some statistics that will show a decrease in crime if the sampling skews that way. Statistics are often used to deceive or fool people into believing a certain political or selling point. They might be true statistics but the sample doesn't reflect what the issue really is. Like my statistics professor said,"I'm going to teach you how to lie and tell the truth at the same time." You really can say anything with statistics and unless you know how they were actually derived they are meaningless.

[Nitro Express]

Gonna be a long 8 years for fags like you NickDickless!

They will love it. They will have something to always talk about.

[Von Halen]

Statistics are often used to deceive or fool people into believing a certain political or selling point.

As you saw from this most recent election, it works. The fools were fooled. Now they're spending their days and nights crying like bitches.

[vandeleur]

As you saw from this most recent election, it works. The fools were fooled. Now they're spending their days and nights crying like bitches.

Or crowing like a dog with two cocks , mixed metaphor but you get my point ;)

[FORD]

Most of the crime is driven by drugs. Cut the drug importation and you quell a lot of the crime.

Fat chance of that happening with Jefferson Davis Beauregard Sessions IV as Attorney General. Remember, this is the guy who thought that smoking weed was what made the KKK "bad people".


Probably the best thing the federal government could do is start a CCC type program like Roosevelt did. Put them to work doing the kind of work low educated people can do and then add in education in the program. I don't know how many of these people are even literate. I mean you have to start at the low end and build them up. If you can give them hope and get a vision in their head where they want to be down the road they can work towards it but it takes years to get there.

You would need a Roosevelt type of President to have these Roosevelt style programs. Unfortunately, we ARE back in 1933, but we got the reincarnation of Germany's leader from that year, not the guy who saved THIS country. Cheetofuhrer isn't going to have a public works infrastructure program of any kind.

[Nickdfresh]

Most of the crime is driven by drugs...

It is but so is poverty which all forms one giant vicious circle...

[Nickdfresh]

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation the murder rate has spiked in the US. Now folks. I have a background in statistics. I studied statistical quality control in college. It's all based on the sampling. The sampling determines the end result and so you can have some statistics that will show a decrease in crime if the sampling skews that way. Statistics are often used to deceive or fool people into believing a certain political or selling point. They might be true statistics but the sample doesn't reflect what the issue really is. Like my statistics professor said,"I'm going to teach you how to lie and tell the truth at the same time." You really can say anything with statistics and unless you know how they were actually derived they are meaningless.

You have a background in bullshittistics...

[Seshmeister]

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation the murder rate has spiked in the US. Now folks. I have a background in statistics. I studied statistical quality control in college. It's all based on the sampling. The sampling determines the end result and so you can have some statistics that will show a decrease in crime if the sampling skews that way. Statistics are often used to deceive or fool people into believing a certain political or selling point. They might be true statistics but the sample doesn't reflect what the issue really is. Like my statistics professor said,"I'm going to teach you how to lie and tell the truth at the same time." You really can say anything with statistics and unless you know how they were actually derived they are meaningless.

Actually after 28 thousand posts here you have a background in bullshitting. :D

I had started to forget about the whole 'Nitro the incredible bullshitting man' thing for a while there as you were at another short lived site telling them what cunts we all were, because you do sometimes get called out on BS here. :)

Murder statistics are not a sample because they count all the people who are murdered, they don't just fucking estimate how many it was based on a survey.

How does that telephone poll go?

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No sir I have not.


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No


Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. I don't believe I have

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. No

Q. Have you been murdered?
A. Yes! I mean no

[Terry]

Most of the crime is driven by drugs. Cut the drug importation and you quell a lot of the crime. The real challenge is digging out of the hole in those cities. Like helping a drug addict they have to want the help and need to be willing to do their part to change. You have broken homes. You have low educational levels. You have corrupt local politicians who want to keep all those people on the dole. Probably the best thing the federal government could do is start a CCC type program like Roosevelt did. Put them to work doing the kind of work low educated people can do and then add in education in the program. I don't know how many of these people are even literate. I mean you have to start at the low end and build them up. If you can give them hope and get a vision in their head where they want to be down the road they can work towards it but it takes years to get there. But then that's true with playing basketball well or even getting good at making music which some of them are good at but you don't get good at those without working it. Turning those cities around is going to take 20 years. It's not a quick fix and it's going to be a real challenge and they have to want to fix themselves and if that will isn't there we are pissing up a rope.

I think your ultimate point is, sadly, spot on.

To be sure, people struggling within the confines of poverty have a tough row to hoe. A lot of decisions to make with a limited amount of resources. There are also plenty of people above the poverty line who are living week-to-week in terms of paycheck-to-paycheck: nothing in savings, so if a huge life event happens (loss of job/income, health crisis, etc.) they are financially fucked pretty quick. And I can't even imagine how tough it would be to break out of the cycle of generational poverty. Well, I suppose I can imagine it, but that isn't the same as saying I would be able to do so myself were I in that situation.

A massive public works program might be a step in the right direction, and I could see many possibilities in, say, an infrastructure program that hires unskilled muscle laborers and provides them opportunities to learn how to operate construction machinery and get training and licensing to do so on the job. However, along with FORD I tend not to think Trump is going to reintroduce a modernized version of the WPA or some huge federally funded worker program that would actually put millions back to work.

And I also think it must be said that in terms of longstanding low-income areas in our larger cities, the federal government can't do all the heavy lifting for the citizenry. The cycle of poverty in these areas may well be generational, but I'd agree 100% that more people living in those areas need to instill that sense of hope that their circumstances can get better in themselves and have the will to begin to work to make it better for themselves. The work will be slow and arduous, and setbacks will happen, but it would seem to be clear that the people who live in those areas will have to take the initiative. Especially now, because I don't see a contemporary War On Poverty as one of the societal goals being produced out of the current Administration.

It comes down to personal responsibility as being the ultimate starting point.

[Nitro Express]

The problem in Washington is the Democrat and Republican establishments want to keep things just the way they are. They don't give a shit. The establishment media machine is painting Trump to be the worst thing that ever happened but he has little to do with the problems. He hasn't been there long enough to cause any. I just see a court system and a partisan establishment trying to obstruct everything the guy tries to do. They don't want change. I can tell you the Republicans and Democrats in the congress sure as hell don't want to do a federal work program. Trump might actually be for it.

[Terry]

The problem in Washington is the Democrat and Republican establishments want to keep things just the way they are. They don't give a shit. The establishment media machine is painting Trump to be the worst thing that ever happened but he has little to do with the problems. He hasn't been there long enough to cause any. I just see a court system and a partisan establishment trying to obstruct everything the guy tries to do. They don't want change. I can tell you the Republicans and Democrats in the congress sure as hell don't want to do a federal work program. Trump might actually be for it.

Mmmm, I think some Democrats in Congress - mostly those in safe seats in deep blue states - would be willing to sign on to a federal work program. Moderate or center left Democrats in purple states, no way.

I'd agree totally that as to where we found ourselves by the time 2016 rolled around, Trump had virtually nothing to do with the problems by virtue of never having held office.

As to change, it depends on how one defines it.

Put another way: doubtless there is plenty of blame to go around for both major political parties as to the gridlock, hackery, lack of purpose beyond re-election, hoarding of lobbyist dollars, etc. The general citizenry is also to blame for feeding into the false narrative that the only choice to be had is that of a Republican or Democrat, as well as being fairly disengaged from the political process beyond merely voting on election days.

The answer to the problems we face is Donald Trump? Looking at who he has surrounded himself with and the policies he is pushing thus far, I disagree.

I will allow that Trump still has the capacity to propose policies I would agree with, or policies that would be helpful to America in the broadest sense possible, for the widest number of Americans. I won't discount that capacity as of yet. As you say, he hasn't been in there long enough to have a large degree of blame placed upon him, yet. By my standards, what he has done thus far (and the way he has done it) hasn't been impressive. To give him credit, he certainly has demonstrated the will to actually try and deliver on what he promised in the campaign. However, if I thought the bulk of his campaign ideas were terrible (which I did), watching him trying to put them into practice isn't changing my mind on the substance of what he is trying to do.

On the other side of the coin, I would imagine Trump voters would be somewhat pleased their candidate is trying to deliver on what he promised them, and I would also imagine Trump and the people he has surrounded himself with think they are off to a great start. Perhaps when keeping their objectives in mind, they ARE off to a great start in their minds.