-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Diagnosis of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and psychotic decline previously called here by @wdolson and/or his S.O. I can't find post by George Conway confirming the analysis but here is another by Conway. Obviously informed by recent Trump tantrums on twitter if not inside information. Comments by Republican heavy, Bill Kristol are also notable.
George Conway on Twitter
George Conway on Twitter
My biggest problem with Obama getting the prize was that he hadn't done anything (as president) yet. I'm much happier with Thunberg. Malala Yusufsai (sp?) was another young female recipient who totally deserved it.
The connection of Narcissistic Personality Disorder with white supremacy's tendency to violence and Trump is noted by the New York Times.
Opinion | It Isn’t Complicated: Trump Encourages Violence
Opinion | The Anatomy of White Terror
Opinion | It Isn’t Complicated: Trump Encourages Violence
Opinion | The Anatomy of White Terror
People with personality disorders often have a deep down fear the rest of the world is going to figure them out many times they fear being committed. People driven by fear often gravitate towards the right end of the political spectrum. So it makes sense that white suppremecist organizations have more NPDs and probably Antisocial Personality Disorders than the general population.
I came across this poll today. It's a stark demonstration of how much Fox News warps perceptions and how far apart the political camps are in the US.
Stepping Inside the Fox Hole | Navigator
I've also started reading Utopia for Realists. I find it challenging to some of the notions I accepted as true, but he backs up everything with references to studies and papers based on research:
https://www.amazon.com/Utopia-Reali...+for+realists&qid=1553209584&s=gateway&sr=8-2
Stepping Inside the Fox Hole | Navigator
I've also started reading Utopia for Realists. I find it challenging to some of the notions I accepted as true, but he backs up everything with references to studies and papers based on research:
https://www.amazon.com/Utopia-Reali...+for+realists&qid=1553209584&s=gateway&sr=8-2
The penny has dropped. Mueller delivered his report to William Barr. Mueller Time at the Barr?
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I've said this before - this will be a giant nothing burger. But we'll never know for sure since unredacted report won't be released (anytime soon).
We'll see. I'm sure we won't see the full report anytime soon, but I've seen some lawyers today saying this is just the end of the beginning.
So, reading the tea leaves... Rosenstein, who Trump dislikes and who supported Mueller, stayed on longer than expected. Barr is an old-school Republican (i.e. anti-Russia). Rosenstein and Barr are reviewing the report and Barr has already said that the Special Counsel behaved impeccably (i.e. he's backing up Mueller). Democrats want the full report released, while Republicans in Congress (!!!!) are calling for lots of the report to be released.
It might be released.
It might be released.
Just yesterday I had the monthly lunch with my local brain trust. My buddies were very negative about prospects of the report expecting a coverup. I demurred. They also strongly expected Trump to win re-election handily. That's a possibility and my greatest concern is skullduggery by the two Rs: Russia and Republican election officials.
I've just sat through two hours of CNN responses by their usual suspects and most of Rachel Maddow's show before I gave up for here with a bit before retiring—I'm sleepy. The most positive about the full report came from Maddow as was expected, some issues confirmed elsewhere. She had a clip from Nadler of House Judiciary demanding the full report and Adam Schiff of House Intelligence has already sent a letter to Barr requesting all foreign intelligence information to his Committee "as is required by law." Most persuasive to me was her interview with a guy from Politico—forgot his name and what follows is not a direct quote. He is the top legal reporter for Politico. Most information will eventually be revealed. Why? He said, I just came back from a briefing at Justice and we were informed the report is substantial/comprehensive. Plus, "though Barr is not known as politically adroit, he can't ignore the recent 420 to 0 vote in the House for releasing the full report."
Cheers, and good night, my virtual brain trust.
I've just sat through two hours of CNN responses by their usual suspects and most of Rachel Maddow's show before I gave up for here with a bit before retiring—I'm sleepy. The most positive about the full report came from Maddow as was expected, some issues confirmed elsewhere. She had a clip from Nadler of House Judiciary demanding the full report and Adam Schiff of House Intelligence has already sent a letter to Barr requesting all foreign intelligence information to his Committee "as is required by law." Most persuasive to me was her interview with a guy from Politico—forgot his name and what follows is not a direct quote. He is the top legal reporter for Politico. Most information will eventually be revealed. Why? He said, I just came back from a briefing at Justice and we were informed the report is substantial/comprehensive. Plus, "though Barr is not known as politically adroit, he can't ignore the recent 420 to 0 vote in the House for releasing the full report."
Cheers, and good night, my virtual brain trust.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I looked at the Obama NPP as an aspirational bet by the committee. They were hopeful (reference intended) that an inspirational leader could change the arc of current US populist behavior. I do not believe this is possible but I too was hopeful. We placed our bets and got what we got. At least the nation saw someone with darker skin was competent and capable and, like so many that came before him, could grow in office when their ego realized they were in over their heads. Wow how the pendulum has swung.
Paracelsus
Active Member
Its going to be a busy day in France today for the Yellow Vests protesting for economic justice. Corporate Media has managed to put a pretty successful lid on this in the US with our similar policies of Austerity in place:
'War is declared': 'Yellow vests' plan protests in nine French cities and a blockade of ports
'War is declared': 'Yellow vests' plan protests in nine French cities and a blockade of ports
Let this be a reminder of what we're up against, and how much work there remains to be done to undo the damage that this administration has done:. Recording Reveals Oil Industry Execs Laughing at Trump Access
Note the sections that spelled out exactly what protections were removed.
Note the sections that spelled out exactly what protections were removed.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
The problem is - even if they release the report - it could be heavily redacted. So, we won't know for sure.
In a fair election, I don't think Trump stands a chance for re-election. The mid-terms showed that several states Trump won are swinging hard the other way. In 2016 there were people lamenting that Democrats had lost over 1000 state legislature seats in this decade, and they gained back a big chunk of them in 2018. Not all, but quite a few. This despite the Republicans rigging the game to favor Republicans in many places. They still held out in places like Virginia (in 2017) and Wisconsin where the game is so heavily rigged that the Republicans still won a majority of seats despite losing the generic ballot by a fairly decent margin.
Also in the federal elections gerrymandering limited Democratic gains in the House, even though they won a lot of seats.
There was evidence of Russian meddling in the midterms, but most of the proven Russian meddling, such as Facebook trolling, is much less effective when people know it's happening. As a result the trolling didn't move the needle much, if at all.
There is some evidence somebody altered election results in Florida, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan in 2016. Just like there is evidence vote results were altered in some states in 2000, 2002, and 2004.
This came about from statistical analysis of results compared to exit poll data. In the original studies on the early 2000s elections (I haven't seen the methodology of recent election result checking, but I would guess it was similar), exit poll data was compared to the official results. In states that were safe for one party or the other, like Utah and New York, the difference between exit poll data and actual results differed by 0.1% on average. But in some key battleground states the exit polls and actual results differed by exactly 1.0% and always in Republican favor.
It has been rumored that this was a Karl Rove operation back in the early 2000s, but nobody has ever been caught. People have proven that a number of voting machines approved around that time were easily hackable and the companies that made them were all run by Republican backers. A lot of those voting machines are still in use.
Doing things that suppress the vote for certain populations raise ire in the media, but are effective at swinging the vote towards Republicans. This isn't new, whites in the South used various tactics to suppress the black, Republican vote during the Jim Crow era. The strategies have become more sophisticated, but they are essentially the same thing.
On the other hand straight up vote manipulation is risky and only a certain amount can be done before somebody cries foul. If exit polls showed a 60-40 win for one candidate, but vote counting showed the opposite, people would justifiably want answers. About 1% is the most anyone can fudge without getting caught. Because of the risk, it is only trotted out in a close election. Doing so in an election that isn't close is taking risks for no gain. There is little evidence of it in the big Democratic wins of 2006, 2008, and 2018 because most elections weren't close enough to warrant making the attempt.
Some states, mostly run by Democrats, it's not easy to tamper with election results nor is suppressing the vote very common. If Democrats were looking at the demographic cliff the Republicans are, they might try tricks too, but fair elections favor Democrats in a big way right now, so they do everything they can to keep elections fair. When the Democrats regain control of the government, something should be done to ensure fair elections locked into laws nobody can get around in the future. This keeps everyone honest. If the Democrats end up controlling the government and the narrative for the next generation, there will be places they will go off the rails, and we need a system that keeps everyone honest.
But the weakness to all the skullduggery by Russians and Republicans is they can only nudge the needle to win close elections. If a large enough chunk of the population vote the other way, it can end up backfiring.
Gerrymandering is very vulnerable in wave elections. The gerrymandered districts are fixed so there are a few very, very safe minority party districts, and a bunch of majority party districts that can be won if the minority party gets around 55% or less of the votes. But are vulnerable in a wave. The wave in 2018 was just shy of the firewall in places like Wisconsin. If just 1-2% more voters went Democrat, the Republicans would have lost a huge number of seats.
In 2016 the Democrats had their least popular candidate ever at the top of the ticket, the Russians were interfering to a large degree, and large parts of the media were actively punishing Hillary for every minor gaff or past mistake and looking past much bigger gaffs and disqualifying things about Trump. In an environment where each candidate got completely equal media treatment, the truly undecided voters would have come to the same conclusion as those across the political spectrum made: Donald Trump is not remotely qualified to be president, and is, quite possibly, the worst combination of traits we've ever seen in a major party presidential candidate.
The "never Trumper" Republicans came to this conclusion on their own and were punished by their peers for it. Falling in line is a very popular quality among Republicans and they can't stand those who go their own way.
So the factors that enabled Trump to win in 2016 that have changed:
1) Russian social media campaigns - people know about them and are aware that they might be getting trolled. The only people they are going to convince are already voting Republican anyway. Exposure makes these sorts of things much less effective.
2) Voter suppression - people are fighting it more and more. There have been lots of law suits in recent years. And in wave elections, a lot of the people who are targeted for suppression see it as a badge of honor to vote anyway. This is still a problem, but it's getting weaker each election cycle.
3) Foreign money coming into Republican pockets - There is evidence that foreign money flowed into Republican coffers in 2016 and those investigations will lead to arrests. It's quite possible some very prominent Republicans could end up in prison. At minimum, the Republicans are going to be more cautious and both the FBI and the American media will be watching.
4) The news media - The way they are reporting on Republicans is completely different from 2016, and from how they went about it the last 20+ years. The rest of the media aren't afraid of conservative bullies anymore and have found they get better ratings reporting Republican problems rather than covering them up.
5) Vote tampering - It's possible, but unlikely if the election doesn't look like it's going to be close. The Democrats need to run up the score to a point where tampering will be taking risks for no gain.
6) Demographics - Since the 80s the white share of the electorate has dropped about 2% per presidential election. It was said in 2012 that Romney was the last Republican who had a chance of winning by encouraging the white vote. But the percentage dropped less between 2012 and 2016 in large part because Trump got out a lot of white voters who had quit voting. Republicans have also generally done better in midterms since the mid-1990s because white voters tend to be more reliable and turn out in larger numbers in midterms than non-white voters. One reason the Democrats won the midterms was because more non-whites turned out, but also suburban whites and white women voted Democrat in far larger numbers than in other recent elections. The suburban white vote is what flipped Orange County, CA from a bastion of GOP power in the state to solid blue.
7) The Fox News effect - Conservative media still has the eyes and ears of a fairly good sized chunk of the electorate and people still believe the distortions and lies. But Fox News' ratings are dropping. Their audience is both dying off and leaving. But conservative media remains a force to be reckoned with for 2020. It's probably the best asset the Republicans have left.
2020 is a completely different electoral landscape from 2016. Some mid-westerners are sticking with Trump even though he's destroying their economy, but quite a few have awakened to the fact Trump is bad for them. In 2016 Iowa went from 3 Republican and 1 Democrat to 3 Democrats and 1 Republican. Joni Ernst in the Senate is up in 2020 and in the current climate, she's going to have a tough re-election fight.
Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania have all swung back into the Democratic camps the last election. Florida held on to elect a Republican senator and governor in 2018, but both races were tight and at the same time Floridians passed an initiative to allow ex-felons to vote again. That allows 1.5 million people to get their voting rights back. Considering how the Republicans fought to prevent former felons from voting (and still are trying to sabotage the initiative), many of those re-enfranchised ex-felons are probably going to vote Democrat.
Arizona and Montana are new battleground states as their demographics have changed. Pundits have expected Texas to become a battleground state in the next decade and 2020 might be the year. The demographics of Texas are similar to California, but Republicans controlling Texas have managed to suppress the Democratic vote enough to hold onto power. But time is working against them. Texas becomes a little less white every day and eventually a tipping point will be reached.
Here is an electoral map for 2020:
2020 Presidential Election Interactive Map
The map starts with a 2020 consensus, but you can look at the different contributing pundits. Inside elections have the starting map at 269 Democrat. It takes 270 to win. Looking at the midterm results, I would put Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania into the "Lean-Democrat" column and Iowa at least a toss up. If I change those states, the Democrats start with 278 electoral votes.
The routes for a Democratic win in 2020 are many, but there are very few routes for Trump to win. His approval ratings in every single state that went for Hillary is so poor he has no chance of picking up any states she won from 2016 and the states he won by narrow margins don't look very promising for him.
I don't think anyone should let up because the Democrats are looking good. The bigger the GOP defeat in 2020 the better it will be for the entire country. A big victory sweeps in a party with political capital and it's going to take every bit of political capital the Democrats can generate to turn around the Trump disaster. 2020 does just need to be a Democratic win, it needs to be as big a blow out as possible.
My SO had the same take on Barr's memo that I did. At a cursory glance it looks like he's stonewalling Congress, but read the finer nuances and it's pretty clear he's backing Mueller and Barr, Mueller, and Rosenstein will be working together from here.
There will need to be areas of the report redacted to protect ongoing investigations as well as national security. But I expect the relevant committees in Congress will get the unredacted report for their analysis. As indictments are handed out, we will get to know other sections of the report.
Barr and Mueller have been close friends for decades. And Barr is an old school national security Republican. I think he's been playing Trump to get into a position where he can do the most damage to Trump. Nothing is certain, but he and Mueller are going to play it by the book, but also do everything in their considerable power to end the corruption.
Historically charismatic people have changed the political direction of the country. Each of the party systems were started by a charismatic president: Andrew Johnson, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. Other charismatic presidents have come along, but didn't dramatically change the narrative. John Kennedy had a lot of big ideas, but most didn't happen.
Obama could have been a voice of change if he had more seasoning. He wasted all his political capital on health care reform that ended up being a lot less than it could have been. Because he hadn't taken the time to form his own economic opinions, he filled the financial ranks with Republicans and others who believed in trickle down economics and laze faire capitalism so instead of the economic reforms that could have been done after the 2008 financial collapse, the system was put back together in much the same way it was.
When Obama came to power, I read someone who thought Obama was coming to power too early. He had it in him to revolutionize the political system, but he was too green in 2008 and because of his inexperience he listened to the wrong advisers and didn't make the sweeping changes he could make if he was allowed to come back now that he understands his naive mistakes.
We won't know much initially. I expect many in Congress will get it. Adam Schiff pointed out last night that Barr is obligated by law to hand over any parts of the report that involve national security to his committee. That would probably be most of the report.
I can live with not knowing what's in the report for now if I know that people empowered and motivated to do something about it do have access to it. That's the most important part. For me, right now, the only thing the report would do is satisfy my curiosity. I personally can do nothing with that information until November 2020. But there are many people in Congress and law enforcement who can make a lot of use of that information tomorrow.
This is a true yet at the end, a balanced tour de force. Does Nate Silver accept unsolicited manuscripts? I'd like to see his blessing of your statistics, not that I see any to challenge, but I'm nowhere near your competence in using them. The thought crossed my mind some time ago Barr might be a plant. Do you know if he has a connection to James A. Baker? He's smart enough to engineer something like what you suggest and would have the motivation.
You make an old man hopeful.
He's not wrong about that.
Barr is also *not* a Trump lackey (he's from an older group of Republicans).
It'll either be totally released or released with minor redactions, or possibly with redactions to protect ongoing prosecutions or sources.
There is no way in hell Trump will be legitimately re-elected, and I really doubt they can steal an election again. I worry more about a Republican blocking majority being retained in the Senate. Or Trump trying to stay in office by declaring martial law after he loses (doubt it would work, though).
FWIW, when looking at Florida, don't forget the exodus from Puerto Rico after Katrina, when Trump refused to rebuild Puerto Rico and it had the longest blackout in US history. The majority of those who left went to Florida, and there was a big campaign to register them to vote. And they will NOT be voting for Trump.
I expect another attempt to steal Florida. Even if it succeeds, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania have 0% chances of going for Trump, so he has a very very narrow path to try to eke out an Electoral College victory. It's not possible.
But as wdolson says, it's important to SWEEP him out, and sweep his corrupt minions out too. Only 12 Republican Senators broke ranks with Trump over his corrupt, admittedly fake emergency; the other 41 are complete lickspittles, and the more of them we can sweep out of Congress, the better.
Paracelsus
Active Member
Agree @neroden. It is criminal that we are held hostage by Citizens United and other 'tools' crafted by 'tools' that still call into question how campaign funding can be sourced and the legitimacy of votes counted in the US almost 250 years after we became a 'free' nation. And with the power of special interests monopolizing the media there are many other avenues to attempt to rig the outcomes. Corporate media fears Twitter in part because it represents the ability to share a truthful message of a brighter and uncontrolled future..........one not shaped by FUD. The Arab Spring is a great example, and TSLA investors know this first hand, with TSLA's Long Investors suffering a $1B hit to the stock price with the SEC's 'concerns' over Elon's Twitter account - the same account that launched the world's most successful utility upgrade in South Australia with the support of fellow Twitter user - Michael Cannon Brookes. And the same Twitter account that has been used consistently to advance Tesla Motors mission in the face of Corporate Media and ICE mfg's FUD.
The 2020 campaign trail is already getting manipulated in a similar fashion as Tesla/Elon have been.............with a nearly complete blackout of any success the candidates not favored by Corporate America might be enjoying. This is similar to the US media blackout of the Yellow Vest efforts in France...........and there is a similar fear of the Political Revolution already underway in the US. For instance, despite attendance estimates of over 6,500 people in a park in San Diego on Friday, estimates of approximately 20,000 yesterday in LA, and expectations of at least that many to gather in San Francisco today for Bernie rallies, the main stream corporate media has pulled almost every journalist off the trail..............yet the campaign rolls on and continues to build momentum through Twitter, Reddit, and other social media sources (despite the growing effort by trolls.........ironically very similar to what TMC has experienced while Tesla continues to grow through the S curve).
LA rally yesterday - with people unable to fit into the park lined up and down the streets
Yet posted on Reddit today after inquiries of lack of coverage:
"There hasn't been a single reporter (from a major media outlet) following the campaign in two weeks now, that's highly unusual for a presidential campaign.
There were only 2 local reporters (LA Times/Fox LA) at the rally yesterday, one local WaPo reporter at the San Diego Rally and no one in Nevada, that's not normal.
CNN pulled Ryan Nobles off the campaign trail directly after South Carolina and they did not replace him to this day."
Quite a crowd already gathered in SF for today's rally. Will be interesting to see how big the rally is...........and how it is spun. Here is the YouTube link to the live event:
The 2020 campaign trail is already getting manipulated in a similar fashion as Tesla/Elon have been.............with a nearly complete blackout of any success the candidates not favored by Corporate America might be enjoying. This is similar to the US media blackout of the Yellow Vest efforts in France...........and there is a similar fear of the Political Revolution already underway in the US. For instance, despite attendance estimates of over 6,500 people in a park in San Diego on Friday, estimates of approximately 20,000 yesterday in LA, and expectations of at least that many to gather in San Francisco today for Bernie rallies, the main stream corporate media has pulled almost every journalist off the trail..............yet the campaign rolls on and continues to build momentum through Twitter, Reddit, and other social media sources (despite the growing effort by trolls.........ironically very similar to what TMC has experienced while Tesla continues to grow through the S curve).
LA rally yesterday - with people unable to fit into the park lined up and down the streets
Yet posted on Reddit today after inquiries of lack of coverage:
"There hasn't been a single reporter (from a major media outlet) following the campaign in two weeks now, that's highly unusual for a presidential campaign.
There were only 2 local reporters (LA Times/Fox LA) at the rally yesterday, one local WaPo reporter at the San Diego Rally and no one in Nevada, that's not normal.
CNN pulled Ryan Nobles off the campaign trail directly after South Carolina and they did not replace him to this day."
Quite a crowd already gathered in SF for today's rally. Will be interesting to see how big the rally is...........and how it is spun. Here is the YouTube link to the live event:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Depends on who the Democrats nominate.
But if his approvals remain in low 40s, he is likely to lose.
RealClearPolitics - 2020 - Latest 2020 General Election Polls
In Wisconsin, Trump looks somewhat competitive - compared to Michigan.
But the biggest surprise might be Texas. Biden & Sanders are within 2 points of Trump. If Republicans lose Texas, it will be a long time before we'll have another R president.
- Status
Similar threads
