MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Friday, July 25, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 71.0° F  Mostly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

Cramer v. Stewart

How can cultural elitists like ourselves put TV in the Culture category? Well, where the hell else is it going to fit?

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:28 pm

fisticuffs wrote:
I'm not a fan of Mad Money.

He does very well at what he does. I enjoy his show.


I'm not a fan of the band Pine. They do very well at what they do and I enjoyed their show.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:30 pm

Walter wrote:
Renee Gabel wrote:Do you think posting under a moniker and not your real name makes you cool and undouchy?


It's worked wonders for me.


And here I thought it was all in the uniform....and the pink standard issue handcuffs.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Walter » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:37 pm

Renee Gabel wrote:
Walter wrote:
Renee Gabel wrote:Do you think posting under a moniker and not your real name makes you cool and undouchy?


It's worked wonders for me.


And here I thought it was all in the uniform....and the pink standard issue handcuffs.


Oh no. In real life, I'm the biggest douchy nerd ever, no matter what I'm wearing.
Walter
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1303
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:28 am
Location: Motorzburg

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:41 pm

O.J. wrote:Please explain to me how he's NOT a stock picker.

Do me a favor and read the very first line from his website.

http://www.cramers-mad-money.com/

Now, kindly STFU.


from the link wrote:Cramer's Mad Money site is here to provide you with updates through-out the day of Jim Cramer's Stock Picks.


Did you not understand the disclaimer at the bottom of the bottom of the page?

None of the information contained on this site or in any of his shows, (Mad Money, Stop Trading or RealMoney) constitutes a recommendation by Mr. Cramer, TheStreet.com, this site (Cramers-Mad-Money.com) or CNBC that any particular security, portfolio of securities, transaction, or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person. You must always make your own decisions when decide to invest in any particular asset weather it is a stock, security or otherwise that may be mentioned on this site. Neither this site nor anyone in affiliation of this site guarantees any specific outcome or profit, and you should be aware of the real risk of loss in following any investments discussed on this site (Cramers-Mad-Money.com). As with any stock the price will go up and down and it is possible for you to get back less than you invested. Please note this risk and that this site, its owner and affiliates recommend that you seek advice from your personal financial advisor. This site has no affiliation with CNBC, Mad Money, Stop Trading, RealMoney, thestreet.com, or Jim Cramer and is not liable for any of the reccomendations given on this site.


You found a bogus website and bought into it foolishly. Goodydoucheshoes for you. You are helping me make my point that idiots will be idiots and will always try to blame someone else for it. Cramer didn't make anyone buy a stock. Blaming him for being an idiot is douchebaggery.

Ok, I'm sorry, fair enough, instead please tell me kindly tell me who isn't a stock picker or STFU.

Want to hear mine?

SWHC, IPI and TD for starters. Long (hold for 6 months+}. I don't have any short picks, I've been working too much and can't really do any research. As far as picks to play bullish shorterm, I'm working on it. However....the stem cell stocks have already played out......anytime Obama opens his mouth and says those two words you can guarantee a pop.

Look at me, mom! I is a stock picker!
Last edited by Renee Gabel on Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Shipley » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:47 pm

It took me until the end of this to figure out Stuart is Jon Stewart. So I don't think that brings clarity to an already confusing arguement.

Is there some difference between Mad Money and Real Money? does mad money not affect the market? Because if some douche box was spending mad money and help fuel this loss, which has literally wiped my father out in the space of a few months, then I think we need to apologize to Cramer find whoever is accountable since Mad Money looks just Real Money.
Is Fast Money something different?

How do I know if the buck and a quarter in my pocket right now is not Mad Money? Is there a disclaimer?
Shipley
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2090
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: college park, md

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:53 pm

Renee Gabel wrote:
OK, fine. However, kindly tell me who isn't a stock picker or STFU.

It's when you say shit like this that it's plainly obvious to all that discussion isn't what you're after, you just like being obstinate.

The answer to your question is: the vast majority of the population. Not only do relatively few people actually play the market, even fewer have much clue about what they're doing. Virtually everyone I know with money in stocks does whatever their investment advisors tell them to. That may be stupid, but it still makes you dead wrong.
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8757
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 5:58 pm

Shipley wrote:It took me until the end of this to figure out Stuart is Jon Stewart. So I don't think that brings clarity to an already confusing arguement.

Is there some difference between Mad Money and Real Money? does mad money not affect the market? Because if some douche box was spending mad money and help fuel this loss, which has literally wiped my father out in the space of a few months, then I think we need to apologize to Cramer find whoever is accountable since Mad Money looks just Real Money.
Is Fast Money something different?

How do I know if the buck and a quarter in my pocket right now is not Mad Money? Is there a disclaimer?


Huh. I thought all you fans of TDS knew Stuart made a stage name change. I used to be a fan of his until he lost his snap and got stale.

Whatever.

I already said, your father's money, my money, Joe Plumbers money, etc etc etc....doesn't move markets. Smart money, the money behind huge investment agency with ginormous bank accounts is the money that moves the market. We are just the grease.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:04 pm

Prof. Wagstaff wrote:
Renee Gabel wrote:
OK, fine. However, kindly tell me who isn't a stock picker or STFU.

It's when you say shit like this that it's plainly obvious to all that discussion isn't what you're after, you just like being obstinate.


This is what annoys me about TDP forons. Why did you edit out O.J. quote that I was responding to?

I am the obstinate one? Give me a break. One of the most annoying things about forons is their snide out of context BS.

Just like Stu's cut and paste crap about Cramer. Put together a montage of shit taken out of context and act like it's fact. Happens all the time around here, and just about as entertaining too.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Shipley » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:31 pm

Renee Gabel wrote:
This is what annoys me about you

Give me the most BS.

Just crap. Put together a montage of shit. Entertaining too.


This is fun. I make it sound like you really like poop.
Shipley
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2090
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: college park, md

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:44 pm

And one of the things I found most annoying is when people claim their views are being taken "out of context" when what's really happening is they're being called on their bullshit.

In what possible context does it make sense to claim that everyone is a stock-picker?

Quoting someone out of context suggests that their words have been cherry-picked, thereby distorting the idea they were actually trying to convey. But I didn't do that at all. I quoted a complete... well... I'll call it a thought for the sake of argument, but we both know you didn't actually think before you typed it. You just reached up into your ass and yanked out another one of your "I will never back down for any reason" posts. No, I got your context exactly right: in an effort to distract from the fact that someone had just disproved your claim that Cramer was not a stock picker, you made the even more ridiculous claim that, well, yeah*... but so is everyone else. But they're not. So now you're wrong on two counts. Three, actually, if you include not knowing what it means to quote someone out of context.


*with a disclaimer, of course!
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8757
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 6:50 pm

Whether his show is entertainment or not, this is the type of guy he is. Also, people listen to him and take his advice. Is he not giving advice of the teevee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfWSRuNm6do

What an awesome dude.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4749
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:41 pm

Prof. Wagstaff wrote:And one of the things I found most annoying is when people claim their views are being taken "out of context" when what's really happening is they're being called on their bullshit.

In what possible context does it make sense to claim that everyone is a stock-picker?

Quoting someone out of context suggests that their words have been cherry-picked, thereby distorting the idea they were actually trying to convey. But I didn't do that at all. I quoted a complete... well... I'll call it a thought for the sake of argument, but we both know you didn't actually think before you typed it. You just reached up into your ass and yanked out another one of your "I will never back down for any reason" posts. No, I got your context exactly right: in an effort to distract from the fact that someone had just disproved your claim that Cramer was not a stock picker, you made the even more ridiculous claim that, well, yeah*... but so is everyone else. But they're not. So now you're wrong on two counts. Three, actually, if you include not knowing what it means to quote someone out of context.


*with a disclaimer, of course!


Do you have an actual opinion about the conversation or do you just fancy yourself some kind of arm chair psychologist who would rather waste time fucking with people?

Define Stock Picker. A bogus website that isn't an official website is not any proof of anything but typical douchebaggery. Good day to you dear Wags.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:53 pm

Prof. Wagstaff wrote:
Renee Gabel wrote:
OK, fine. However, kindly tell me who isn't a stock picker or STFU.

It's when you say shit like this that it's plainly obvious to all that discussion isn't what you're after, you just like being obstinate.

The answer to your question is: the vast majority of the population. Not only do relatively few people actually play the market, even fewer have much clue about what they're doing. Virtually everyone I know with money in stocks does whatever their investment advisors tell them to. That may be stupid, but it still makes you dead wrong.


Not true. You must have pulled that vast majority out of your ass. Over half the households in the US are invested in the stock market, according to the Federal Bank Reserve's Survey of Consumer Finance re:2006.

I know you are all "auld skool" and shit but man, with online trading, there is way more people than you think that are investing and maintaining their own portfolios.

Welcome to the new millenium old man.
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Archipants » Thu Mar 12, 2009 7:54 pm

Renee Gabel wrote:I'm positive his mother would disagree. By the way, what's your real name?

Do you think posting under a moniker and not your real name makes you cool and undouchy?

Yawn...
Archipants
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2008 8:04 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Cramer v. Stewart

Postby Renee Gabel » Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:01 pm

Stebben84 wrote:Whether his show is entertainment or not, this is the type of guy he is. Also, people listen to him and take his advice. Is he not giving advice of the teevee.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfWSRuNm6do

What an awesome dude.


He's discussing hedge fund management....what's your point? You think he invented this?

Bonus question: What is the most common occupation of US billionaires?

He is an awesome dude for explaining this in common language so the common foron can understand it. This is what I was saying before. My money doesn't move markets. Investment managers with global bank accounts do. Thanks for sharing that.

The lesson here is learn to play along or get out of the way. Or you could just ask yourself WWOD?
Renee Gabel
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 12:25 am
Location: Dane County

PreviousNext

Return to TV

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar