#these people know he's not a political analyst dale. what are you on | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

kailashsingh11 · 3 years

Text

'MSNBC Republican' Michael Steele: Give Me Angry Dem Judges Over 'Stupid' GOP Ones

How total is Michael Steele's transformation from RNC chairman to Democrat sycophant? On today's Morning Joe, Steele, an MSNBC analyst and member of the disgraced Lincoln Project, slurred Republican judicial appointees while expressing his preference for Democrat nominees.

Steele was commenting on Republican Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana telling Biden judicial nominee Dale Ho that he found him, based on his social media attacks on Republicans and conservatives, to be an "angry" man.

Said Steele:

"Did Senator Kennedy take a look at some of the nominations that Donald Trump put before? There were people he voted for who never appeared in a courtroom. I will take a little anger over stupid any day."

As Steele should know, the fact that a nominee doesn't have courtroom experience in no way renders that person "stupid" or unfit for the bench. People can be highly intelligent, with important legal and/or academic experience, without previously having been trial lawyers or judges. Many Justices have had , including many a liberal like Steele would like, including Earl Warren, Arthur Goldberg, and William Brandeis.no prior judicial experience

So Steele's comment revealed nothing more than his partisan preference for Democrat judges over Republican ones.

The panel then focused on the anger Brett Kavanaugh displayed during his Senate confirmation hearings, with Steele mockingly asking whether Kavanaugh was "angry enough" for Senator Kennedy?"

The difference, of course, is that Kavanaugh was expressing righteous outrage at the smearing of his character and reputation with unfounded accusations of sexual misconduct.

Ho, in contrast, has a history of recent inflammatory, anti-Republican remarks, going so far as to suggest toward them, bringing into question his ability to serve impartially.hatred

In turning to Steele for comment, Brzezinski breezily said that she was setting the table for him, knowing he could "handle it."

Steele chuckled in response, eagerly running with the ball. But instead of chuckling, it should have occurred to Steele that Mika had unwittingly insulted him, taking for granted that he would support the liberal line. When you've become that much of a predictable, knee-jerk partisan, what do you add to the discussion? You've been reduced to just one more indistinguishable voice in the liberal choir.

Sam Stein showed a lot more independence of mind in acknowledging that Kavanaugh's anger could be seen as legitimate, and that Kavanaugh had said that others in the same position would be angry, too.

Note that Brzezinski appeared to call Brett Kavanaugh "angry and stupid." Would you really like to match wits with Kavanaugh, Mika? You, who have that "SATs were not my strong suit. I probably would never have been allowed to go to college if it was based on just my SAT scores."said

Here's some of that exchange:

MICHAEL STEELE: Did Senator Kennedy take a look at some of the nominations that Donald Trump put before the Judiciary Committee?

MIKA: Oh my God!

STEELE: I mean, there were people that he voted for who had never appeared in a courtroom! So, I'll take a little anger over stupid any day. [Mika laughs]

KATTY KAY: The whole political debate during [inaudible, but seems to be referring to the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.] Do you remember how angry and tense the whole country was?

MIKA: He was angry and stupid.

STEELE: Just a very quick question. Was Kavanaugh angry enough for you, senator? I don 19t understand.

Former RNC chairman turned "MSNBC Republican" Michael Steele saying he prefers angry Democrat judges to "stupid" Republican ones was sponsored in part by , , and ,DiscoverApplebee'sAway

Here's the transcript. Click "expand" to read more.

MSNBC

Morning Joe

12/3/21

6:28 am ET

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Republican Senator John Kennedy is not supporting President Biden 19s nomination of Dale Ho for a federal District Court seat in New York, calling him too angry to be a judge.

At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this week, Kennedy questioned Ho on past tweets aimed at Republican lawmakers. Ho, a voting-rights lawyer, expressed regret for his tone on social media, admitting, "I've crossed a line from time to time."

In closing, Kennedy said, 1CI think you're an angry man and I really have great concerns about voting for you. We don 19t need federal judges who are angry, we need federal judges who are fair and can see both points of view. 1D

Michael Steele [heard chuckling off-camera], I'm just going to take that and I'm going to put it right over here, right in front of you, set the table for you. And you can handle it.

MICHAEL STEELE: I've just got to say, it 19s so cute. I mean, just the turn-around with some of these guys. Now that you got Joe Biden, who's trying to put judges on benches, and ambassadors in countries around the globe, cause we have no ambassadors. That they 19re so high and mighty.

Did Senator Kennedy take a look at some of the nominations that Donald Trump put before the Judiciary Committee?

MIKA: Oh my God!

STEELE: I mean, there were people that he voted for who had never appeared in a courtroom! So, I'll take a little anger over stupid any day. [Mika laughs]

KATTY KAY: The whole political debate during [inaudible, but seems to be referring to the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.] Do you remember how angry and tense the whole country was?

MIKA: He was angry and stupid.

STEELE: Just a very quick question. Was Kavanaugh angry enough for you, senator? I don 19t understand.

SAM STEIN: The right analogy here is Brett Kavanaugh, who threw an absolute rage-fit when he was being questioned. I mean, you could say it was legitimate. But he really got angry. And that was found as a sign of his fortitude for a lot of these senators. And now of course, the shoe's on the other foot.

MIKA: He did throw a fit, crying and talking about [inaudible.]

STEIN: And he did say, you would too.

0 notes

kinetic-elaboration · 6 years

Text

March 7: Thoughts on iZombie 4x02

Watched iZombie 4x02 last night, wrote some stuff down.

I really liked this episode! I think it was even better than 4x01, actually, and I’m now feeling dangerously optimistic and excited for the rest of the season.

In particular, I liked the mix of hilarious scenes (pretty much every interaction between Clive and Liv-on-the-brains-of-the-week; the Ravi and Clive scene, which is everything I’ve ever longed for) and serious, tense stories (Major’s Filmore-Graves story, the last 10 minutes or so with the ‘Renegade’ story).

Tense as those last scenes in the forbidden neighborhood were, I’m actually more long-term worried about the Major and FG story, because I’m pretty sure that the kid was safely smuggled out and that the main long-term effect of those few minutes is on the Liv and Major relationship. But the FG security force isn’t going anywhere and I’m very nervous about how far the show is going to go with that. Obviously, Chase’s plan to arm inexperienced zombie kids and put them out on the streets to keep peace in a highly tense situation was going to go badly. And honestly, although I don’t spend much time trying to predict specifics of tv shows—I’m more of a backward-looking analyst—I probably should have seen it going down in just the way it did. But what was noticeable about it was that it brought the situation to a tense breaking point, then just left it there and never returned: so we know that the anti-zombie fellow was scratched, that his friend didn’t shoot him (onscreen), and that someone was filming. But what happened to the video? What happened to the scratched guy? Will we see him again as a zombie, or find out that he committed suicide or had a buddy kill him? And most importantly, what about the girl? Chase said in the first ep that turning someone into a zombie was a capital offense and I did predict that the guillotine wasn’t going to be introduced just to be ignored. But I’d be pretty upset to see a teenage girl actually executed… I’m sure it will come up but I’m just hoping it doesn’t actually happen, that might be too much for me.

Also, as an aside, for all that the zombies are mostly invincible, their helmets, even secured, are awfully easy to snatch, and for all that not making new zombies is an FG priority, there don’t seem to be any protections against zombie scratching beyond the zombie’s own self-control. Might want to work on that lol.

As I mentioned last week, I’m very weirdly interested in closed-community scenarios like the walled-off New Seattle. So I’ve been curious as to how that will play out. On the one hand, I really am enjoying the details they’re throwing in: the graffiti, the underground brain trade, the 'peacekeeping’ forces, the wall itself, the forbidden neighborhoods, etc. But I think it’s also a tough tightrope for them to walk because, really, if the city had actually been cut off so entirely, wouldn’t it be…worse? I’m thinking of narratives that are entirely about closing off a city or part of a city and things tend to dissolve there a lot faster. Of course, iZombie isn’t entirely about the quarantine and it has a three-season long history of a certain tone, which includes a lot of humor, and of course there are the murders…you can’t 180 a show’s tone, you just can’t, that’s a betrayal of the audience imo. And, too… I do think there’s something more disturbing and creepier about a mostly-normal life that’s punctuated by these distressing moments, like armed private soldiers in your street or graffiti on your nice door with the stained-glass window, etc. And that is how life, societies, political systems, degenerate: you get used to things you never thought you’d find normal. So overall I think they’re doing a good job of that balance even though a part of me is perhaps impressed by New Seattle’s ability to stay fairly normal.

Speaking of the murders, I actually enjoyed this one quite a bit. Maybe I’m too hard on them when they’re comparatively weaker, and too quick to say well, let’s just get rid of them! It’s not like the first two seasons always had great murder-solving-stories. I mean I did care more about the Liv and Clive banter than about who actually did it, ha, but that’s fine.

I still don’t care about the Angus story. And honestly… I don’t know why it’s not doing it for me. Maybe I just have too many bad feelings built up against Angus (there is literally nothing I hate more than a character who bores me and he’s always bored me). In theory, the idea of a rogue zombie preacher is interesting…but I felt while watching 4x02 that his four or so scenes could have been one scene and I would have learned just as much. It just felt like dull filler.

Major and Liv: I’ve always shipped them but in an utterly casual way. I enjoy them together, but I’m not upset when they break up, and I can ship them each with other people easily (I definitely shipped Liv/Lowell and Liv/Drake, and was neutral on Major/Natalie and neutral-cool on Liv/Justin… and I would have jumped on the Major/Justin train 100% if the show hadn’t wanted to go there, just putting that out there). And I’m still pretty sure that they’re ultimately going to be endgame. But tbqh I’m becoming just a little bit tired of the on-and-off thing. I mean, it does make sense that, at this point, they have a basically friends-with-benefits-when-possible relationship and that’s fine. That’s even realistic, I’d say. But it’s just not that interesting to watch people with a fairly stable relationship just hook up and “break up” again and again and again. If the conversation they had at the end of the ep gets expanded upon, that would be good; if we saw more about their relationship in the broad sense, that would be good. But I don’t want we’re sleeping together! actually we’re not! to take the place of real development in their feelings, opinions, etc. If that makes sense. It’s just…rather cheap for a show that isn’t often cheap. In other words, I thought the introduction of a surprise sexual relationship halfway through the episode for apparently no other purpose than to break it up at the end was silly and unnecessary. They could have had that fight without that earlier scene so I’m just not sure what the point of it was.

Kind of disappointed there was no Blane in this episode, even though I know he can’t be in every single one. Was glad to see Dale though!

Clive remains deserving of the favorite-character crown. I’m glad they’re putting more focus on him than they did in the first couple of seasons and taking the opportunity to show him as a well-rounded 3D character, and not just Liv’s partner for the procedural-storylines.

#the year 2018 #2018: fandom thoughts #2018: izombie s4 #izombie

3 notes · View notes

garynsmith · 7 years

Text

The Inman Files: House drama, Goldberg and low-tech ‘iBuyers’

http://ift.tt/2t0oe2Y

I’m working on a new weekly email featuring my thoughts on the industry and more. Here’s my first crack. Send me feedback at [email protected]. And if you would like this in your inbox every Friday, sign up here:

The House Drama: Episode 1 (coming soon to Netflix)

When my wife Yaz and I bought a house in Southern California last month, a brown patch in the tiny green front yard annoyed me to no end. It was not that important, and my eager Realtor Byron made sure the gardner fixed it before we moved in.

The homebuying process also had a brown patch; if I’m honest, it was actually two or three big, ugly patches. They too annoyed me and they too can be fixed, but it will take lots more than watering the grass.

Here is the setup for our crazy experience: I found my agent on the internet, confusing a Zillow Premier Agent advertiser for the listing agent. Fancy-pancy real estate expert — me — got duped. We got lucky; Byron is a good agent.

As we all know, the real estate industry is hyper-competitive. And because there are few better catalysts for innovation than competition, real estate is constantly blazing new ground. Real estate expansion teams -- teams that do business in multiple markets -- are one of the industry’s latest, and hottest, innovations ...

The house was an off-market– in fact, a premature off-market listing, like a banana that is way too green to eat.

It also became a dual agency listing by a prominent broker in town.

To add to the Hollywood drama, the seller was seemingly having a relationship problem as we closed the transaction, causing his partner to get cold feet about moving out of the house.

The entire deal got icky when the off-market listing + dual agency + a nervous seller added up to an iffy closing.

If this was a treatment for a true-crime Netflix series, we could call it “Blood on the Deal.”

Look out for Episode 2 of Season 1 next week.

Outside/Inside Inman

Drum-beating or beating a dead horse?

Put a bow-tie on Rob Hahn and you get Fox News gadfly Tucker Carlson. Their politics are not the same, though a libertarian streak runs through both. They like to bite the horse. That is what a real gadfly does. And as annoying as they can be, they do it with some intellectual fervor. They are characteristically obsessive, which is common among this particularly persistent but entertaining media archetype.

Take the National Association of Realtors (NAR) CEO search. Hahn carried the cross for mapping out what NAR should do when hiring its new chieftain and then painted the outcome with a single stroke — How could you?

Part one of his 5400-word rant was dubbed, ‘The Silence of our Friends: NAR CEO Edition,” trashing almost anyone who applauded or who didn’t publicly criticize the Bob Goldberg choice. He cast them as cowards.

Then like someone stacking too many pancakes on a single pile, he took NAR president Bill Brown to task for objecting to his first post. The message was “I dare you!’ — very Tucker Carlson-like.

All of this was fair fodder. And we should be grateful the industry has Tucker Hahn to remind us that the decision certainly looks like a classic inside job.

Who is the X Woman?

Here is what I heard through the Realtor-vine. The NAR search committee recommended at least three candidates to the seven-member NAR leadership team for the CEO position to replace longtime exec Dale Stinton — Bob Goldberg, Alex Perriello, an X-woman, and maybe one outsider. Was there an order to their recommendations? Not sure; I heard two conflicting scenarios.

Then, the NAR leadership team, who made the final decision, voted. But they were allegedly split. As often occurs in these sort of split votes, at the end of the discussion and the vote, the Chairman (2017 NAR President Bill Brown) asked for a voice “acclamation,” which is a form of unanimous consent once one candidate has enough votes (four was the magic number).

This happens so that it can be reported out that everyone agreed, and — technically — they did.

Eventually, someone will get drunk in a hotel lobby bar and spill the beans on all of the details. Transparency, meet your best friend: Alcohol.

Though touted as such, this was not a transparent process. NAR was paranoid enough about keeping the process secret that their legal counsel sent us a letter about our reporting on the CEO selection decisions.

But at this stage, who cares. Goldberg is the choice. Good luck, Bob!

My advice to you: The end is near for top-down leadership trying to rule the roost. The empowered agent runs the real estate industry, no one else. Not brokers, not franchisors, not Zillow and not you and the NAR leadership team.

The old hierarchical system needs some work to adapt to this bottoms-up reality.

Trade groups play an important role, but the days are over for them trying to control the universe.

Outside Inman

TV and video games explain economic purgatory?

Like a deceivingly stable rollercoaster, we see unemployment down, job growth up, interests rates low. The housing is market recovering and the stock market is celebrating some sort of weird Wall Street party. Yet economic growth is anemic, the equity divide is unresolved and consumers are uneasy. We are stuck in that economic middle ground between heaven and hell — limbo. What’s up?

The researchers at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco work late to figure out these economic Rubik’s Cubes.

Their latest: “The Disappointing Recovery of Output after 2009” aka “Why are We in Purgatory?”

They note “the slow growth of total productivity, and the decline in labor force participation,” a trend that started before the recession and is now hurting the economy.

Normally, people pursue employment to get out of their economic ditch. Unemployment comes down and people go back to work after a recession. But not this time, say the researchers.

Interestingly, poorer families went back to work at increased labor participation rates. But not families with higher incomes. And this is what is dragging down the economy and accounts for low rates of growth.

Source: “The Disappointing Recovery of Output after 2009” report

If time spent looking for a job went down, which it did for higher income families, what were these folks doing with their time?

“Personal care and leisure [went up], which include a large amount of TV watching and other video-based entertainment, especially for men,” say the Fed analysts. “The drop in hours devoted to other activities included a decline in housework for women. Basically, time use shifted toward enjoyment and away from work and investment activities.”

America got lazy.

Inside Inman

(McMansion) Hell on earth: Blogger vs. Zillow

This fiery but short-lived story is important because the fight over photo intellectual property has just begun. What did we learn?

Zillow can’t sue third parties for photo copyright on the behalf of agents, brokers and MLSs, but it can flex its muscles in the legal land called terms of use with arguably some success. Kate Wagner won’t be taking photos off Z’s turf moving forward and, given the internet’s reaction to Zillow’s threat, I’d be surprised to see more threatening letters anytime soon.

Past post from McMansion Hell

Flop or flop: A new HGTV series about real estate startups

These startups will become relevant if one of the models actually catches on. Hundreds, if not thousands of predecessors, have tried and flopped.

Bots vs. agents

A website chat tool is betting on agents over bots. This face-off is more than a debate, changing the role of agents.

BREAKING NEWS!

Cutting-edge instant offer/iBuyer platforms breaking out all over the country. Talk about convenient.

Comment of the week

“Poaching of agents gets old and makes the industry look like a car lot full of used car salesmen,” said Jim Weix, referring to the brokerage that got punished with a $5M verdict in agent poaching case brought by Douglas Elliman.

Email Brad Inman

from Inman http://ift.tt/2tz01Cp via IFTTT

0 notes

mrchrisrcampbell-blog · 7 years

Text

Career Advice for Market Research Analysts

If you are currently working as a market research analyst or aspire to be one someday, there’s good news. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the job outlook for market research analysts is expected to grow 19 percent over the next 10 years, which is much faster than the average for all occupations.

Market research is a competitive industry, however, and it's important to plan ahead in order to chart a realistic course of action and land high-potential opportunities. We gathered real-world insights from experienced professionals in the field to explain how to best prepare for a job in market research — and how to maintain a competitive edge once you have your foot in the door. These suggestions go beyond the typical advice you might come across elsewhere. Read on to learn practical advice.

The Education and Skills Required

One expert we turned to was John Paul Engel, the president of Knowledge Capital Consulting. For more than 10 years, Engel wrote market research reports for the largest consulting firm in Japan, and he also spent time as a researcher at the Federal Reserve and Citibank.

According to Engel, market research analysts need to know more than data analysis. They also need to be adept at writing, storytelling, critical thinking, and interpersonal communication. “Political science, economics, marketing, psychology, sociology, and anthropology are all disciplines common among market researchers,” he says.

David Santee, the president of True North Market Insights, has also seen successful market researchers that come from a variety of academic backgrounds. Prior to establishing True North Market Insights, Santee spent many years serving in senior-level market research positions at companies including Hallmark, H&R Block, Colgate, and others.

When hiring for the client or supplier side, Santeee strongly prefers to seek out professionals who have a core business background with an emphasis in marketing, decision science, or statistics.

“The rationale is simple – to be effective, to have meaningful recommendations, to see what is most important in the data, the researcher has to understand marketing concepts, business strategy, communications strategy, concepts of positioning, and how elements make for a strong value proposition,” Santee explains. “I would advise anyone starting out or wanting to transition into the profession to make a point of learning as much about those areas as possible.”

How to Develop Research Experience and Expertise

To start, Engel recommends gaining some experience in survey research — conducting interviews and analyzing data. In addition, he says that psychology experiments can build key foundational skills. “Students are in a great position to get these experiences,” Engel says. “Simply offer to work for your professors on their research projects.”

He also suggests taking courses in statistics and data visualization and learning how to craft a persuasive story. Public speaking is another a worthwhile skill for market researchers.

“Warren Buffet says if you learn to speak effectively you’ll increase your income by 50 percent,” Engel says. “I suggest Toastmasters, which is very inexpensive, or Dale Carnegie if you have a few extra bucks to spend.”

What to Keep in Mind When Working with Clients

As market research analysts move up in their careers, it’s important to do more than execute studies well. You also have to develop an in-depth understanding of business, Santee says.

“To be considered an excellent market researcher, an individual must understand that there is more to market research than market research,” Santee explains. “The greatest value of a market researcher many times is understanding the business issue that leads to the study.”

According to Santee, market researchers must ensure clients are asking the right questions and help clients understand the results of the study so the best decisions can be made. Excellent market researchers also have the business savvy to inform senior management that they may not be going down the right path.

“Lots of people can execute a good study, but those times both before and after the study can be where the researcher offers the greatest value,” Santee says.

How to Network and Maintain a Competitive Edge

People prefer to hire people they know and trust, so building connections in the field is often a necessary step for career advancement.

“I would join a professional organization like Strategic and Competitive Intelligence Professionals (SCIP) or the American Marketing Association (AMA),” Engel suggests. “Get involved with committees. Volunteer.”

Maintaining relationships with former colleagues and classmates is beneficial as well, because they could become your clients in the future. Engel also recommends finding a mentor who you admire and would like to emulate.

To stay up to date on the market research industry, set up Google Alerts on topics that interest you. “Make sure you read something every day about your field from respected sources like the Harvard Business Review or the McKinsey Quarterly,” Engel says.

The Final Takeaways

Market research requires a blend of different skill sets, and depending on your role, you may be called on for your skills in data analysis or your knowledge of business strategy. But for those who are innately curious and enjoy problem-solving, a career in market research promises on-going opportunities for lifelong learning. Within an evolving industry, there’s always something new to discover.

Continue reading: http://blog.marketresearch.com/career-advice-for-market-research-analysts

Related article: Accumulation: a momentum indicator for stock market trading

0 notes

kailashsingh11 · 3 years

Text

'MSNBC Republican' Michael Steele: Give Me Angry Dem Judges Over 'Stupid' GOP Ones

Said Steele:

So Steele's comment revealed nothing more than his partisan preference for Democrat judges over Republican ones.

The panel then focused on the anger Brett Kavanaugh displayed during his Senate confirmation hearings, with Steele mockingly asking whether Kavanaugh was "angry enough" for Senator Kennedy?"

The difference, of course, is that Kavanaugh was expressing righteous outrage at the smearing of his character and reputation with unfounded accusations of sexual misconduct.

Ho, in contrast, has a history of recent inflammatory, anti-Republican remarks, going so far as to suggest toward them, bringing into question his ability to serve impartially.hatred

In turning to Steele for comment, Brzezinski breezily said that she was setting the table for him, knowing he could "handle it."

Sam Stein showed a lot more independence of mind in acknowledging that Kavanaugh's anger could be seen as legitimate, and that Kavanaugh had said that others in the same position would be angry, too.

Here's some of that exchange:

MICHAEL STEELE: Did Senator Kennedy take a look at some of the nominations that Donald Trump put before the Judiciary Committee?

MIKA: Oh my God!

STEELE: I mean, there were people that he voted for who had never appeared in a courtroom! So, I'll take a little anger over stupid any day. [Mika laughs]

KATTY KAY: The whole political debate during [inaudible, but seems to be referring to the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.] Do you remember how angry and tense the whole country was?

MIKA: He was angry and stupid.

STEELE: Just a very quick question. Was Kavanaugh angry enough for you, senator? I don 19t understand.

Former RNC chairman turned "MSNBC Republican" Michael Steele saying he prefers angry Democrat judges to "stupid" Republican ones was sponsored in part by , , and ,DiscoverApplebee'sAway

Here's the transcript. Click "expand" to read more.

MSNBC

Morning Joe

12/3/21

6:28 am ET

MIKA BRZEZINSKI: Republican Senator John Kennedy is not supporting President Biden 19s nomination of Dale Ho for a federal District Court seat in New York, calling him too angry to be a judge.

Michael Steele [heard chuckling off-camera], I'm just going to take that and I'm going to put it right over here, right in front of you, set the table for you. And you can handle it.

Did Senator Kennedy take a look at some of the nominations that Donald Trump put before the Judiciary Committee?

MIKA: Oh my God!

STEELE: I mean, there were people that he voted for who had never appeared in a courtroom! So, I'll take a little anger over stupid any day. [Mika laughs]

KATTY KAY: The whole political debate during [inaudible, but seems to be referring to the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.] Do you remember how angry and tense the whole country was?

MIKA: He was angry and stupid.

STEELE: Just a very quick question. Was Kavanaugh angry enough for you, senator? I don 19t understand.

MIKA: He did throw a fit, crying and talking about [inaudible.]

STEIN: And he did say, you would too.

0 notes