Dalal.Holdings Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 "Does it concern you that the very first press conference by the President's team was centered on "crowd size for the inauguration" instead of anything important?" Presumptuous and misleading question. The conference was on truth in news reporting, as evidenced by two examples of dishonest reporting. But it was clever of you to miss the forest for the trees purposefully in order to get the little jab in about it being unimportant. Some people think truth in news reporting is important. Maybe you don't. Except for the fact that it was Trump and team being dishonest about crowd sizes, not the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalal.Holdings Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I think its great he is holding the media accountable. The majority of the media is liberal so this should be expected. Why shouldn't they be called out? Since everyone likes to put these discussions in an investing framework: Imagine listening to a conference call where the CEO states that revenues increased by 25% YOY whereas a simple calculation shows there was actually a decline of 10%. The CEO not only stands by his numbers when challenged, but is pissed that analysts are questioning him. Then, in response further queries, the company's general counsel (or VP investor relations) states that the 25% increase is an "alternative fact". I just don't get how any rational person/investor could not be alarmed by this behaviour. Yes, there's always spin. But generally in the world's respected democracies the spin is not with regards to readily established facts. All this said, my biggest fear is that Trump's narcissism makes him very manipulable. He is clearly preoccupied with his own grandeur to a degree incomprehensible to the average person. Fortunately there are some smart people around him to help guide the ship. Bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shalab Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I don't know why the crowd comparison is headline news ( 2009 inauguration to 2017 inauguration ) unless you want to discredit the new President. One should also remember that papers sell to their audience and all major cities in the coasts are democrat oriented. Also some of the mainstream media painted his inauguration speech in negative terms. I didn't feel it was negative but was combative. It felt he called out Obama (all talk, no action) and there wasn't a need to do it. That said, the response of his team presenting "alternative truth" doesn't make sense. I think its great he is holding the media accountable. The majority of the media is liberal so this should be expected. Why shouldn't they be called out? Since everyone likes to put these discussions in an investing framework: Imagine listening to a conference call where the CEO states that revenues increased by 25% YOY whereas a simple calculation shows there was actually a decline of 10%. The CEO not only stands by his numbers when challenged, but is pissed that analysts are questioning him. Then, in response further queries, the company's general counsel (or VP investor relations) states that the 25% increase is an "alternative fact". I just don't get how any rational person/investor could not be alarmed by this behaviour. Yes, there's always spin. But generally in the world's respected democracies the spin is not with regards to readily established facts. All this said, my biggest fear is that Trump's narcissism makes him very manipulable. He is clearly preoccupied with his own grandeur to a degree incomprehensible to the average person. Fortunately there are some smart people around him to help guide the ship. Bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tengen Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I don't know why the crowd comparison is headline news ( 2009 inauguration to 2017 inauguration ) unless you want to discredit the new President. One should also remember that papers sell to their audience and all major cities in the coasts are democrat oriented. It's only headline news because Trump chose to make it so. Then he doubled down by sending out his press secretary to lie to the public. It seems ridiculous but I have to wonder if something more sinister is going on. See https://twitter.com/rascouet/status/823035518313267202 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 I agree with this thread = ambush 20ppy did you vote for Trump? from your tone I'm assuming you didn't I'm an Independent, and after reading enough of the wiki leaks material that was released from the Democratic Party. I will have a hard time voting for a Democratic again. The corruption and absolute contempt for the middle class is absolutely disgusting. I could care less about Donald Trump's deficiencies. He has smart people around him and he will adapt to the job. I'm sure in an unconventional way which will keep the powers that be on their toes. A large number of small business owners that I deal with are very much looking forward to the future. Enough with the non-stop roadblocks to try and conduct normal business operations. No one expects him to get all he spoke of done. Just an honest attempt is all anyone can ask for. Not meant to be an ambush at all. I'm glad Hillary didn't win, but I was equally worried about Trump. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but that leash is pretty short. My question is asking how long is the leash for those that supported him? And is it ok to ignore ethics and transparency, if it achieves the promised longer-term goals? Those answers would be different for each person I would presume. Cheers! Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsad Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 "Does it concern you that the very first press conference by the President's team was centered on "crowd size for the inauguration" instead of anything important?" Presumptuous and misleading question. The conference was on truth in news reporting, as evidenced by two examples of dishonest reporting. But it was clever of you to miss the forest for the trees purposefully in order to get the little jab in about it being unimportant. Some people think truth in news reporting is important. Maybe you don't. I absolutely agree with you on the "Martin Luther King" bust report in the media. Just a petty, waste of time effort by the media. But can you explain why they spent nearly 4 minutes of a 5 minute and 46 second press conference on the crowd size? You don't believe that was even more petty and stupid than the Martin Luther King bust reporting by the press? Try something for me and let me know if this changes your perspective on the press conference. Every time Spicer says "Trump" or "President", replace it with "Kim Jong-Il" and "Supreme Leader". If those same comments came from North Korea, you would think it was effing crazy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amz62uUYPeo I agree with you on the importance of news reporting. Not sure why you took a shot at me as well in your post with the "Maybe you don't" comment. All that aside, I believe you would agree with me that accuracy in reporting by the President and his staff is even more important than the reporting by the Press, correct? And disclosure of the President's finances, business relations, etc is as important from a conflict of interest perspective as well, is it not? Cheers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardGibbons Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Yeah, I think this thing where the president creates "alternative facts" (i.e. lies) and people interpret it as "calling out the press" is particularly disturbing. I mean, the evidence is right there. Everyone can see it. Yet people on this thread interpret these blatant lies as "calling out the press", for no reason I can understand. I understand partisanship, but not at this extreme, not even close to this extreme. Like, do you actually want to live in a country where your president lies openly to you? Do you actually want to live in a country where the government literally controls the media? It's very odd to me that anyone can look at these "alternative facts", and actually claim that it's a good thing. On the other hand, it has helped me with one thing. I look at all these countries that are communist, fascist, dictatorships, Venezuela etc. and I think, "how did that country end up that way? Why did the people so easily surrender their free press and freedom?". Then these threads come along and help me answer that question. (Mostly with variants of, "I don't care if he puts everyone in the country in shackles as long as he improves the economy.") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tede02 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Yeah, I think this thing where the president creates "alternative facts" (i.e. lies) and people interpret it as "calling out the press" is particularly disturbing. I mean, the evidence is right there. Everyone can see it. Yet people on this thread interpret these blatant lies as "calling out the press", for no reason I can understand. I understand partisanship, but not at this extreme, not even close to this extreme. Like, do you actually want to live in a country where your president lies openly to you? Do you actually want to live in a country where the government literally controls the media? It's very odd to me that anyone can look at these "alternative facts", and actually claim that it's a good thing. On the other hand, it has helped me with one thing. I look at all these countries that are communist, fascist, dictatorships, Venezuela etc. and I think, "how did that country end up that way? Why did the people so easily surrender their free press and freedom?". Then these threads come along and help me answer that question. (Mostly with variants of, "I don't care if he puts everyone in the country in shackles as long as he improves the economy.") Wow, well said! It never ceases to amaze me how even the most intelligent and successful people can take on the utmost warped views of reality as soon as politics enters the equation. I've learned that regardless of political affiliation, there's always a segment of people who will back their candidate even when they (the candidate) want to argue that the sky isn't blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mephistopheles Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I mean, the evidence is right there. Everyone can see it. Yet people on this thread interpret these blatant lies as "calling out the press", for no reason I can understand. And this is particularly concerning on a message board of "value investors" and supposed Buffett and Munger disciples; you know, people who are supposed to look past the circus and at the raw facts. I don't know why the crowd comparison is headline news ( 2009 inauguration to 2017 inauguration ) unless you want to discredit the new President. One should also remember that papers sell to their audience and all major cities in the coasts are democrat oriented. It's only headline news because Trump chose to make it so. Then he doubled down by sending out his press secretary to lie to the public. It seems ridiculous but I have to wonder if something more sinister is going on. See https://twitter.com/rascouet/status/823035518313267202 I saw that, it's frightening. Well as has been stated here, hopefully he's just a silly loudmouth and lets his cabinet do all the work for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTShine Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 "Does it concern you that the very first press conference by the President's team was centered on "crowd size for the inauguration" instead of anything important?" Presumptuous and misleading question. The conference was on truth in news reporting, as evidenced by two examples of dishonest reporting. But it was clever of you to miss the forest for the trees purposefully in order to get the little jab in about it being unimportant. Some people think truth in news reporting is important. Maybe you don't. This resonates with me. Also, Trump seems to understand how his moves will be interpreted by the media and he may have wanted the discussion filled with a Spicer news conference instead of us talking about 1) Women's Protests 2) the Supreme Court picks he's working on No mention of Mnuchin either. The list goes on. The media, and people in general, feed on petty chaos. Trump understands this better than most. We will see if he uses his skills for the betterment of our world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doc75 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Also, Trump seems to understand how his moves will be interpreted by the media and he may have wanted the discussion filled with a Spicer news conference instead of us talking about 1) Women's Protests 2) the Supreme Court picks he's working on A Trump advisor implied that this was indeed a pleasant byproduct of the nonsense inauguration messaging. There was no indication it was a purposeful distraction, but let's assume that this was Trump at his "best", moving the discussion away from important topics. How in the world is this a good thing? Do you really applaud this tactic? Again: Spin is everywhere. Outright lying + doublespeak such as "alternative facts" is at a whole different level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paarslaars Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Like, do you actually want to live in a country where your president lies openly to you? Do you actually want to live in a country where the government literally controls the media? Well, would you like to live in a country where the media can freely manipulate the news for their own gain without sanctions? Because that is what they have now... I don't think one is better than the other for the people but the right winged goverment in control of the media would be better for us investors (at least short term). On the plus side: on this first day Trump was able to get more fat women out walking than Michelle Obama could in 8 years. ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onyx1 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Like, do you actually want to live in a country where your president lies openly to you? Outright lying + doublespeak such as "alternative facts" is at a whole different level. I saw that, it's frightening. I'm all for this truth crusade, but when the White House claimed the following, where was the outrage? "If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan". "The Ft. Hood shooting is not terrorism, it's workplace violence". "Benghazi was the result of a You-Tube video". "11,000 inter-agency documents from 2008-2012 related to the GSE's will destroy the financial markets if released". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer16 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I think the reason he is acting the way he is that he has different views of his personal life/perspective (his "brand") & his business or Presidential decisions. The press in there normal unaccountable way is mixing the two & in the process creating propaganda. If you look at Donald's and pretty much alot of other actors/personalities you this dichotomy. They are great actors/business people but their personal lives a pretty close to a train wreck. What Trump is reacting to is attacks on him as a person (his "brand") & he reacts in a fashion consistent with actors/personalities. Look at the issues discussed here, they are all personal attacks on his brand & have little or nothing to do with real issues. When he says he wants to hold the press accountable it is for personal attacks, nothing more. If he uses this rationale to defend poor decisions then the press & others have a point but we are not there yet. Also, the US has a very weak Federal government compared to other places on earth so absent a coup d'etat what the Federal government does has very little direct impact on folks lives which is good. If you look at the Trump Organization as business entity I think it is successful. He has built a brand around a cult of personality and made decent business decisions about real estate. IMO what Trump's core competancy is selection of people around him. So despite his unusual personality, he has a successful business & family life. What I find interesting is that folks were OK with Obama building a brand around his cult of personality, he was probably one of the largest we have had since Kennedy. IMO he made some terrible decisions but his "brand" saved him. That is why I think he was shocked when his policies were not a popular as he was. I do not sweat the cult of personality comments, this is with us in part due to the current culture. What I would have issues with is bad decision making being masked by a "brand". We had that with Obama, we may or may not have it with Trump, we will see. As to the taxes, I see the same issue (personal vs. business decisions). If we are going to be transparent lets take a look at medical records also. Why do we focus on taxes versus medical records as medical conditions could have a larger impact on the President doing his/her job versus the amount of taxes paid? Again this is side show & illustrates the press is against Trump no matter what. This will really hurt when if there is a real scandal as they have called "wolf" on things that do not matter. What may happen here is the destruction of the liberal press. I see this at NBC as they have hired 2 female conservative hosts & if they are successful others will follow. In the end this may lead to a more balanced press which is in everyone's interest. Packer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalal.Holdings Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Like, do you actually want to live in a country where your president lies openly to you? Do you actually want to live in a country where the government literally controls the media? Well, would you like to live in a country where the media can freely manipulate the news for their own gain without sanctions? Because that is what they have now... I don't think one is better than the other for the people but the right winged goverment in control of the media would be better for us investors (at least short term). On the plus side: on this first day Trump was able to get more fat women out walking than Michelle Obama could in 8 years. ;D Are you joking!? Do you know what the first amendment is? The press does not have power to listen to your phone calls, launch missiles, drone strikes, and send special forces to your door. The president does. I'm not sure why so many people in here are so butthurt and scared of the media, it's the president who should be held to a higher standard. As for reporting of "facts", the last president literally had certain news orgs claiming he "wasn't born in the u.s.", birth certificate wasn't real (peddled by the CURRENT president), "wanted to take everyone's guns away", etc etc and we never saw this level of butthurt from him!! The fact that this president makes his very first press conference about this is very telling. And the reactions on this thread reveal which investors are loyal to the truth and which don't really care much for it. Sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 As investors we incorporate the political view only so much as it is a generator of change; direction, magnitude, etc. We view personalities as probability generators; the more predictable the personality the higher the probability that the change will occur as envisaged. With Trump it means we need a change in mind-set, & to think in terms of option strategies under high volatility. Domineering leaders are nothing new in the west. The US had FDR, Reagan, Kennedy; the UK had Churchill & Thatcher; Canada had CD Howe (Minister of Everything) & Trudeau (father). It is only shocking to us today – because we haven’t had this for quite some time. There was a time when western journalism was a respected profession, today we are simply calling it what it is - junk. News is entertainment, fake news is cheaper to produce (& sells better) than real, & the cost to producing & distributing propaganda it is far cheaper than it has ever been. Of course the solution is the profession taking a hard look at itself, calling the emperor on his lack of clothes, & continually making clear-cut examples of what the profession does, and why it is a worthwhile societal institution that should be trusted. Black swan events are inevitable, & with Trump – quite possibly more likely. The US has a long history of assassinating controversial presidents, when the changes weren’t going well. It is also quite acceptable to bet on tradeable ‘days to impeachment’ pools – as entertainment. We live in interesting times. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalal.Holdings Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 FDR, Churchill, Reagan, etc do not compare to Trump on the level of distortion of truth and downright lying. You can look at other leaders in Europe during the 1930s to get an adequate comparison to Trump... Some people here would really benefit from reading George Orwell: "alternative facts" might as well be from the Ministry of Truth. Don't make yourself so easily fooled by propaganda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobBob Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Oh! The irony! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhdousa Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 And this is particularly concerning on a message board of "value investors" and supposed Buffett and Munger disciples; you know, people who are supposed to look past the circus and at the raw facts. This hasn't been a "value investing" message board in a few years. It's basically a politics board with some investing thrown in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkbabang Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I don't want this to get into a huge political discussion and will delete all posts that degenerate into one. But I just wanted to get an intellectually honest answer from anyone who voted for Trump: Questions: - Does it concern you that the very first press conference by the President's team was centered on "crowd size for the inauguration" instead of anything important? - Does it concern you that the team has now said that they won't release the tax returns regardless if the audit is completed? As investors, we all respect and want transparency through disclosure, so is this not antithetical to our intellectual frameworks as investors? Cheers! I didn't vote for him, but I think he was far superior to the alternative, so I'll answer your questions. 1) It's silly, but doesn't concern me. I do hope he starts doing something that matters soon. 2) I don't really care how much he makes or what he pays in taxes. I'm not sure why politicians are expected to release such personal financial information. We learned for instance in the 90s that Bill Clinton donated underwear to charity. Did we really need to know that? I still have no idea what this guy is going to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DooDiligence Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. I will not engage in rancorous political debate on COBF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis Wiedower Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 My question is asking how long is the leash for those that supported him? It never ceases to amaze me how even the most intelligent and successful people can take on the utmost warped views of reality as soon as politics enters the equation. I've learned that regardless of political affiliation, there's always a segment of people who will back their candidate even when they (the candidate) want to argue that the sky isn't blue. Cognitive dissonance is the answer (and to Parsad, the leash is long). Everyone is guilty of it in different aspects of their lives, but people tend to forget that and get nasty when the other political party is doing it. Mistakes Were Made (but not by me) is a really interesting book about cognitive dissonance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottHall Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 And this is particularly concerning on a message board of "value investors" and supposed Buffett and Munger disciples; you know, people who are supposed to look past the circus and at the raw facts. This hasn't been a "value investing" message board in a few years. It's basically a politics board with some investing thrown in. It's a good thing, too. I think the rally since the crisis has shown value investing to be a fraudulent practice based off of wrong inputs and no one can really know the value of a business. We all know the value of the United States and it is so important to get the right man in the Presidency. We finally have a White House we can be proud of again and I do not blame anyone for taking victory laps. It's a great thing for America. Where the problem arises is with all the namby-pamby, tootie fruity protests like the Women's March, where millions of people are now attempting to discredit our incoming President on the world stage before he has had the chance to Make America Great Again. We must remain diligent and not allow these radicals to take us off course when we are so close to seeing through our plans of the first American National Bankruptcy. No one understands the knife's edge that America is on like Donald Trump and it is time that those of you who haven't supported him buck up and put nation before ideology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SharperDingaan Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 I don't want this to get into a huge political discussion and will delete all posts that degenerate into one. But I just wanted to get an intellectually honest answer from anyone who voted for Trump: Questions: - Does it concern you that the very first press conference by the President's team was centered on "crowd size for the inauguration" instead of anything important? - Does it concern you that the team has now said that they won't release the tax returns regardless if the audit is completed? As investors, we all respect and want transparency through disclosure, so is this not antithetical to our intellectual frameworks as investors? Cheers! I didn't vote for him, but I think he was far superior to the alternative, so I'll answer your questions. 1) It's silly, but doesn't concern me. I do hope he starts doing something that matters soon. 2) I don't really care how much he makes or what he pays in taxes. I'm not sure why politicians are expected to release such personal financial information. We learned for instance in the 90s that Bill Clinton donated underwear to charity. Did we really need to know that? I still have no idea what this guy is going to do. Politicians live in fish bowls (ie: the people have a right to know), & it's a bruisers sport (the smear the other guy to win). The 'media' view is that they are the 'gate-keeper' between government & citizenry, they 'interpret', and to sell papers; they 'spin' according to whatever is appealing to their customer base. Of course the people don't need to know everything, and also don't need an 'interpreter'; its an extremely condescending view, & the media is being called on it. The Trump 'brand' is very vulnerable here, & it is hard to see how it ends well. If he's impeached the 'name' is clearly not going to be worth what it was; and if he doesn't deliver - all 'branded' items become targets, everywhere in the world. Charming. SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest cherzeca Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 @rk "I still have no idea what this guy is going to do." i would say i have no idea what this guy will get done. Trump's R majority in senate is thin and guys like mccain, graham and rubio are unreliable (though i see they will endorse tillerson). i think trump thinks he can will the senate to follow through trumpian leadership, but he is going to find out that presidential leadership involves more back scratching than his form of leadership is used to. we have gone from no drama obama to a guy who likes to stir the pot. media actually loves this, so this is going to be a circus for next 4/8 years. now you know why ringling is closing shop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts