Your felicity in writing “rot wrought” renders risible all your protestations of impending senility.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
EVNow
Well-Known Member
But usually economy results in high approval, which results in re-election. But Trump is under water in almost all the swing states in terms of approval. Infact quite badly under water.Trump is really unpopular in the most important 2020 battleground states
- New Hampshire: 39 percent approval, 58 percent disapproval
- Wisconsin: 42 percent approval, 55 percent disapproval
- Michigan: 42 percent approval, 54 percent disapproval
- Iowa: 42 percent approval, 54 percent disapproval
- Arizona: 45 percent approval, 51 percent disapproval
- Pennsylvania 45 percent approval, 52 percent disapproval
- Ohio: 46 percent approval, 50 percent disapproval
- North Carolina: 46 percent approval, 50 percent disapproval
- Florida: 48 percent approval, 48 percent disapproval
- Indiana: 49 percent approval, 46 percent disapproval
Every study I've seen says Perot pulled from Bush & Clinton equally. I'd like to see where you are getting this from.
The Ross Perot Myth
Polls that had Shultz in the mix didn't show much difference for Bernie - he still led Trump by same margin. It is likely that Shultz will only run if Bernie is the nominee.
Look at swing state votes. Trump isn't faring better. One can argue even in '16 he won by a great stroke of luck.
- Extremely unpopular Dem nominee
- 6M people who voted for Obama didn't vote in '16
- Last minute bombshell by FBI
- Still won by < 60k votes in 3 swing states, after losing the popular vote
Where do you see that 1/3, 1/3 ? Trump has extreme negatives. I'm not sure you are looking at actual polling data.
43% strongly disapprove Trump and 28% strongly approve of him in the latest YouGov poll (I don't see averages anywhere).
Non-partisans i.e. independents definitely voted in mid-term. In Mid-term the usual problem is Democrats (esp. POC) don't vote in enough numbers.
He could definitely be - because Dems have a great history of gifting elections. Infact if Bernie is the nominee many corporate Dems may actually prefer Trump over Bernie.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
No, there is a possibility that he could be in office for a second term but it is far from strong.
Unfortunately, yet again, this has been retracted.
MSNBC's O'Donnell retracts Trump story
Does the MSM have any credibility left? Why does everyone keep falling for this trick?
All they are doing is helping Trump.
Point of clarification: the story has not been retracted, sensu stricto. Rather, O’Donnell stated he/MSNBC did not corroborate the story with further sources prior to breaking the story; rather, relied on a single source. And that confession by itself does in fact provide strength, not weakness, to him and to his organization. When was the last time you heard [dingledong “news” organizations] reel back on some trumped-up sensationalist piece of birdcage lining?
You’re defining yourself? Please tell me no.Strict Constitutionalism, nuf said.
Otherwise, of course, you must be one of those who spends every free moment protesting in front of every US Air Force base. Because, Strict Constitutionalist as you be, you certainly know that the Air Force is unconstitutional. It’s right there in black & white in Article 1, Section 8.
nuf said.
DragonWatch
Small FootPrint
Financially I was in “fear” of losing my career because BoA deposited my First Lieutenant (late seventies) pay check into someone else’s account unknown to me. In my day, if you could not manage your personal finances, you were considered unworthy to serve your soldiers and Country. While I do not remember the call from my wife telling me our checks were bouncing. That Friday afternoon, I briefed my superior and headed to the battalion commander’s office where I was “read My rights,” before filling in the facts as I knew them.
My wife, in tears, called her parents and begged for them to wire us $50 (Western Union) so we could still give our son a birthday party, and pick up some food as we unscramble the bank error. I have been know to carry a grudge, BoA will never get off my poo list. They never apologized or refunded the bounced check charges.
The military was in the transition of converting from making soldiers stand in lines to receive their pay monthly in cash, then checks, then to direct deposit. BoA error was human ~ computer entry. You know, “garbage in, garbage out.”
If you are serving the public, in my humble opinion, you must be above reproach ~ period, amen If our senior leaders are not held to equal or more stringent standards than soldiers, then ~ you get what we have.
If a person is corrupt; their decision making ability is compromised. Example, my First Sergeant “Willie” confessed to having smoked a some weed before becoming a first sergeant, one time. As the battery commander, for me it was no big deal, I annotated that I was aware, and moved on. My wife had smoked it long before we met (California Valley Girl). As the commander of a nuclear capable missile battery, I had to review all the personal files of my men/women as required by the Personal Reliability Program (PRP). If I had a negative view of black people; I could have used that pot smoking event as just cause to toss First Sergeant Willie essentially out of the service. That man was the best ever First Sergeant.
As officers, our careers were evaluated at least once a year. There was a laundry list of Morals and Ethics we were evaluated against; including our technical skills and leadership abilities.
When I went thru basic training back in May/June 1969, if I needed to take a dump, I sat cheek to cheek ~ no partitions, no semi-locked doors. No private moments there ~ even for a private
Bottom line, if you want to run for office you might want to have an honest talk with yourself before signing on the dotted line. Or, if you cannot stand the heat, stay out of the fire. Back in the late eighties I had an op-ed published in the L A Times suggesting we have an option for every position - “None of the Above.”
Hey, if you want to revisit the past, my grandfather ordered his son, my uncle, to murder a Native America ~ hence, the first shot fired in the King Philips War (1675).
My wife, in tears, called her parents and begged for them to wire us $50 (Western Union) so we could still give our son a birthday party, and pick up some food as we unscramble the bank error. I have been know to carry a grudge, BoA will never get off my poo list. They never apologized or refunded the bounced check charges.
The military was in the transition of converting from making soldiers stand in lines to receive their pay monthly in cash, then checks, then to direct deposit. BoA error was human ~ computer entry. You know, “garbage in, garbage out.”
If you are serving the public, in my humble opinion, you must be above reproach ~ period, amen
If our senior leaders are not held to equal or more stringent standards than soldiers, then ~ you get what we have.If a person is corrupt; their decision making ability is compromised. Example, my First Sergeant “Willie” confessed to having smoked a some weed before becoming a first sergeant, one time. As the battery commander, for me it was no big deal, I annotated that I was aware, and moved on. My wife had smoked it long before we met (California Valley Girl). As the commander of a nuclear capable missile battery, I had to review all the personal files of my men/women as required by the Personal Reliability Program (PRP). If I had a negative view of black people; I could have used that pot smoking event as just cause to toss First Sergeant Willie essentially out of the service. That man was the best ever First Sergeant.
As officers, our careers were evaluated at least once a year. There was a laundry list of Morals and Ethics we were evaluated against; including our technical skills and leadership abilities.
When I went thru basic training back in May/June 1969, if I needed to take a dump, I sat cheek to cheek ~ no partitions, no semi-locked doors. No private moments there ~ even for a private
Bottom line, if you want to run for office you might want to have an honest talk with yourself before signing on the dotted line. Or, if you cannot stand the heat, stay out of the fire. Back in the late eighties I had an op-ed published in the L A Times suggesting we have an option for every position - “None of the Above.”
Hey, if you want to revisit the past, my grandfather ordered his son, my uncle, to murder a Native America ~ hence, the first shot fired in the King Philips War (1675).
No respectable journalist would have gone with this story as it stood yesterday so no one would be discussing it today.
The only thing that is in the news is the "retraction."
Very bad optics.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Why would anyone think this somehow counters the blatant lies and irrational behaviour we can all see with our own eyes on a daily basis from Trump? One bad story does not negate reality.
It looks like the original was on another thread. I do agree with you to a large degree, but from all I've heard Democrats are very dedicated to not diluting the vote this time. "Vote blue no matter who" is the catch phrase. The more moderate Democrats would vote for Bernie if he's the nominee and hope Congress will keep him in check.
Some people are expecting 2020 to be like a normal election, but it won't be. Because any major party nominee could win, Trump has a chance if he's still on the ticket. I think if it begins to look clear that he will lose by next summer he will do something like take a start trip to Russia and refuse to leave.
There are some people who do vote purely economics and may vote for Trump if the economy holds together, but at this point it looks uncertain the economy is going to hold together and his economic coattails are far narrower than most presidents. We are also at a point in the cycles of American history where things can change quite unexpectedly.
In the party system theory of American politics, one party also sets the tone of political discussion. From 1932 to 1979 it was the Democrats and the language of the New Deal and the further reforms of the 60s were the political memes everyone had to operate in. Eisenhower and Nixon were Republican presidents, but they sound quite liberal by the political lens we've used since 1980 when the memes have all been Republican driven.
We're at the end of the Republican party system started by Ronald Reagan. Trump is the Caligula tearing apart the legacy started by the Julius Caesar like Reagan. There is a churn on the left with new ideas that haven't been publicly voiced by many politicians in decades. The emerging left is trying to figure out what the memes of the next cycle are going to be.
Frequently the first presidential election of a new political system is a blow out for the new president and the last president of the old system is usually a one termer who is considered a disaster. The only time this was broken was when the radical VP Theodore Roosevelt came to power when McKinley was assassinated. The only change election in which the new president didn't get at least 70% of the electoral college was 1860 when 4 candidates won electoral votes. When Teddy Roosevelt ran for re-election in 2004 he won with 70% of the EV.
The Republican Party does have a potent propaganda arm serving as a news network that does work in their favor, but pretty much all the other factors work against them.
Even if this doesn't become the sea change I think it might become, Rachel Bitecofer is a professor in Virginia who was accurate predicting 40 out of 42 House races last year and she says she has refined her model. Analyzing the factors going on in 2020 in each state, she predicts that any Democratic candidate will start with 278 EV. Barring some game changing situation, that's the worse case scenario for the Democrats and that's any Democratic candidate. Enough people in enough states want Trump gone, he doesn't stand in chance in those states right now.
A third party running to try and divide the Democratic vote would likely get almost nothing as the "vote blue no matter who" attitude runs deep among almost anyone who is willing to vote for a Democrat. On the other hand I wouldn't put it past a right wing politician who has decided their political career is probably over anyway to run as a spoiler. Bill Weld would get little Republican vote as an independent, but Mark Sanford or Joe Walsh running as independents could draw away a few percent and possibly throw some more states to the Democrat.
The Republican establishment hates Trump with a passion but are afraid to say it. A third party candidate they find acceptable is a passive aggressive way to hurt him.
The big nail biter in 2020 is the senate. The Democrats need 3-4 seats and even though the Republicans are defending 22 seats, there is not much low hanging fruit. However if the Republican party is badly wounded by November 2020 the Democrats have some chances to grab some seats in red states.
Pelosi is working that angle right now. She wants the Senate to have to be faced with whether an impeachment trial is going to happen or not and possibly a vote during primary season. That puts candidates in a bind to either side against Trump and face being primaried from the right, or side with Trump and face losing the general. That would put some senate seats in play that aren't right now.
This is new to me.
Opinion | The Remarkable Life of the First Woman on the Harvard Faculty
I wonder when we might seriously consider the advantages of a woman candidate for president?
Opinion | The Remarkable Life of the First Woman on the Harvard Faculty
I wonder when we might seriously consider the advantages of a woman candidate for president?
bhtooefr
Active Member
Speaking of an example of the kind of media bias that Tesla is up against, but firmly in the politics domain and only very very very tangentially related to Tesla:
David Doel on Twitter
Sanders has, of course, been attacking Amazon for its labor practices.
And, SpaceX competes against one of Bezos's other enterprises, which could easily contribute to such a bias against Tesla...
David Doel on Twitter
@[email protected] said:
Sanders has, of course, been attacking Amazon for its labor practices.
And, SpaceX competes against one of Bezos's other enterprises, which could easily contribute to such a bias against Tesla...
EVNow
Well-Known Member
MSNBC is fixated on Russia - since otherwise they have to accept Hillary was a bad candidate.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
A Top Financier of Trump and McConnell Is a Driving Force Behind Amazon Deforestation
A Top Financier of Trump and McConnell Is a Driving Force Behind Amazon Deforestation
Quelle surprise
A Top Financier of Trump and McConnell Is a Driving Force Behind Amazon Deforestation
Quelle surprise
As both of you are nearest to the top of on my admire list for thinking and writing, the boost on that score is most welcome. (Karen Rei is like Elon, both Martians.) Yesterday at lunch with my brain trust near half my sandwich and dessert ended up on my suspenders or food catcher belly or the seat of the guy next to me. He is a real nurturing mensch so quietly cleaned a near suspender and the seat and then worked in detail for me how I was going to drive and navigate home, just checking the mind. With a spell checker, a supplement called "Basic" by Elysium—which is supposed to stimulate metabolism at the cellular level—and Wikipedia, the intellectual will is strong but from the legs to hands I'm all wobbly. After apologizing to my buddies, I'm going to try soup and a straw at our next lunch.
Words are toys to be played with when all else is failing. HG Wells, here, is right. The Democratic Party needs to wound with humor. A thousand cuts can drain even the swampiest mind, and the best are self-inflicted.
I got into a bit of an argument yesterday with a feminist friend who is a Marianne Williamson supporter (she knows Williamson personally). She misunderstood my pragmatism for misogyny, but had to back down when my SO took the exact same position. I wouldn't have hesitated to vote for a woman for any office 30 years ago, if she was the right candidate. Obama's skin color also made no difference to me.
I can be OK with just about anyone running on the Democratic side. I believe anyone running for president should have some kind of public service record which is why I discount Andrew Yang, tom Steyer, and Marianne Williamson. All three have things to say that are good for the country to debate and maybe even adopt, but their lack of experience disqualifies them IMO. Tulsi Gabbard can be a bit nutty. But the rest are all acceptable to me.
Personally I think Harris has shown as the best candidate, but I mentioned to my friend that being a woman who is half Asian Indian and half black will not play well in some parts of the country right now. She thought I was dissing her for being a woman and non-white. I was being a pragmatist. Personally I think she could be a good president, but she would stir up the racists and misogynists. We don't live in an idea world and who will run up the score the most (win the most states) among the acceptable list is my top choice. At this time that looks like Biden.
You could try neuro-feedback. It can do wonders for a number of brain related issues.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Surprised you think Harris has shown to be the best when polls do not reflect that, not did her debate performance. Also surprised you still think Biden a good choice with all his displayed weakness, who is also slipping in the polls.
- Status
Similar threads
