Hey gralinds_of#$%$, you claimed there was a "second differtiall equation" [sic] that proved Obama was bad.
I asked you for that "second differential equation" [sic]
Where is it,, mental case?
" a glaring dumb error like deleting three zeros from an annual reports dollar amounts when it's footnoted some twenty times"
You are like a parody of yourself.
"Our analysis of Broadfin Capital’s 13F holdings in companies worth at least $1 billion shows that the seven qualifying long positions held by the fund at the end of 2015 delivered a weighted average loss of 32.1% in the first quarter. Considering the magnitude of the losses suffered by the fund’s stock picks, in this article we are going to focus on its top five equity holdings going into 2016 and analyze how they have contributes to the fund’s poor performance in Q1"
You just know that cpt is now very carefully scrutinizing the data, checking to see if any zeros have been left off.
"Trump will be the next president. The formula has never been wrong in its projection. "
You can explain over and over to the rodent why he is wrong...so he just repeats himself.
Rodent, it is not even clear Trump will get the nomination (although I think his chances are good for that). So if he does not get the nomination, are you going to try to wiggle out of your claim that "Trump will be the next president"?
And again, it is Freudianly amusing that you reject climate science as being based on "models", and accept some clearly incorrect model regarding who will be president.
Here is a better model for you. In all 8 elections since this was tested it worked. It was developed by the Dean of Models at South Wyoming Community College The winner of ever presidential election in the past approximately 28 years had a name, first name or last name, that started with a "B". This model is far stronger proven than your beloved "model". So why aren't you thinking Biden will be our next president?
Hitler: "I think it is lost. We will not believed if we try saying the people who died in the concentration camps died merely from undiagnosed iron-overload. As convincing as it might at first seem, I do not think it will work. How many #$%$ did we terminate?"
Goebbels: "I have a report here from Himmler summarizing a report from Eichmann. 6,000 were killed."
Hitler: "What? What? This is not right. Show me the original report from Eichmann you basher of the Aryan race!"
Goebbels: "Mein Fuhrer, I have always been loyal to you and the cause. Even before the Party existed I was a member of Fuhrer's Evil Enterprises. Here is the report."
Hitler: "It was 6,000,000, not 6,000. Look at these footnotes. Himmler left out three zeros despite all the footnotes. Mr. Three Zero Gestapo Man left out three zeros despite twenty or so footnotes."
000,6 syas eH .tTODAY IN HISTORY
71 years ago today
Berlin, Germany April 30 1945
Goebbels: "Mein Fuhrer, it is not good. The Russians are 2 kilometers from Berlin..."
Hitler: "The Russians are a bunch of anonymous hacks..."
Goebbels: "The Americans are 15 kilometers away..."
Hitler: "*American* soldiers are COMPLELY incompetent. Where is General Rommel? Send him here. He is a great poker player."
Goebels: "But...but.. I can't"
Hitler: "Is he in Hawaii? Why are my generals always in Hawaii when things are falling apart? At least when the Japanese go to Hawaii they bomb Pearl Harbor."
Goebbels: "Rommel is dead. You ordered him executed for his role in the plot to use your peanut butter knife to cut bread."
Hitler: "Yes, yes. I order so many people executed. I love doing that. But what I really love is fancy dancing. Fancy dancing and evil just seem to go together."
Goebbels: "The BBC reports that our V-2 rockets are ineffective. Churchill calls them a 'toy'"
Hitler: "The V-2 rockets are not toys!!!!!! They are not toys! They won this year's Edison Award.
Churchill and his aliases talk basher garbage meant to confuse best ignored. More worthless basher garbage meant to confuse and best ignored."
Goebbels: "Werner von Braun is a genius--making long rang rockets from converted dental cavity detectors!"
Hitler: "Where is Goering? Did I have him killed yet?
Goebbels: "He has fled to America. He plans to blend in with the populace."
Hitler: "Blend in? He weighs 400 pounds. Where is he going to blend n?"
Goebbels: "A town in the American state of Pennsylvania called Coatsville. He fled with his wife and his infant daughter Pat."
budman/budwoman yesterday: "The U.S. government released their initial GDP growth rate of our economy for the 1st Quarter of 2016 - it came in at a sickening growth rate [1/2 of one percent]... Don't let them pee on your leg and tell you it's raining out. The GDP figure doesn't lie. "
budman/budwoman today: "Average GDP growth per quarter is a meaningless statistic. What does that tell you about the economy during those times? Rubbish"
It is as if the male side of budman/budwoman argues with the female side
Happyconman, who previously argued that stock market performance was THE indicator of a president's success (back during the beginning of the Obama Administration when stocks were going down) now, since stocks are up, decides that GDP growth is really what is important.
But previously he argued that the economy was SOLELY in the hands of the House of Representatives, so if there is a GDP problem, why would he blame Obama rather than the republican House?
"And vote for a Clinton? That pressured a subordinate woman in an employment environment to have "sex"? "
How did you determine he pressured them?
"Of course, the idiot rody cannot see even by using a second order differential equation that the slope or the rate of change for GDP growth is negative"
Looks like grapefruit read a Wikipedia article about calculus!
He decided to nonchalantly point out that the rate of change is the slope, LOL. He read something about second order differential equations. And I think he (incorrectly) thinks the slope is proportional to the second derivative.
Grapefruit, which second order differential equation are you referring to?
P.S. The person you were responding to was not me.
Anyone notice the coincidence of Ted Cruz waiting to just after Coatsville voted in the Pennsylvania primary before he announce that Fiorina, a very thin lady, had been chosen by him to be his running mate?
"Sick puppy surrounds himself with sick puppies. "
Speaking of puppies, I hear that in Coatsville, a mysterious epidemic of puppies being eaten is going on.
" Is it just me or, does it seem as if everybody who holds an office of responsibility in this company appears to have *NO* idea what they are doing other than to cash their fat pay-check every week?"
I suspect that they all know the best beach resorts in Hawaii.
cpt: "BUMP! BUMP! BUMP! Kind of rimes with TRUMP! TRUMP! TRUMP!"
Way too much Fox News
Greg supported Sanders because he considered Sanders to be against the Wall Street fat cats, and for the Coatsville fat women.
Rodent Brain says sarcastically: "Sure was a lot of public Rep support when Reagan came along, right?"
What does "come along" mean? Trump did not just come along. Reagan had been a very strong vote-getter in all of his elections. He was a proven vote-getter in California before he went national. In 1968 when Nixon easily won the nomination Reagan actually got way more primary votes (although this was badly skewed because his home state was one of the few states with primaries)
Interesting though is the Jimmy Carter goof-balls thought Reagan would be the easiest Repub to beat in 1980. In 1976 he was just about tied with Ford in delegates going into the convention, and the party bosses in their smoke-filled rooms swung delegates to Ford because those geniuses thought Reagan could not win a national general election. The reality though was that Reagan was consistently a suburb vote-getter.
Rodent Brain: "Moron, better to compare Trump to that of "'oser"'Ronald Reagan, not 'President' Goldwater. "
Reagan was usually ahead in the polls, unlike Trump.
You are not getting the concept. The person ahead in the pols is ahead. The person behind is....oh forget it, you cannot understand.
"At least you figured out that Goldwater, didn't win last night."
Unfortunately, you did not realize that Trump did not show any signs of beating Hillary last night.
" Does that mean it can never be wrong? Of course not; but so
far it has not over a long period of time. That's a pretty powerful stat"
The formula has NOT had much success at all in making predictions. As could be Freudianly expected, while hyping some goofy formula by some guy who did not even have the job you attributed to him, you reject things that really do work--polls taken by "liberal" organizations like NN, Fox News and the Wall Street Journal. You found one instance when the polls were wrong--Michigan--and instead of realizing that they are right around 100 percent of the time you use the outlier to support your disproven prejudice. Sort of like your co-rodent thinking that science is invalid because there is some dispute about what killed the dinosaurs.