Agree Agree:  194
Likes Likes:  128
Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 10253132333435
Results 511 to 523 of 523
  1. #511

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Honesty. Deadly for politicians.
    Missing winter...

  2. #512

    Re: The Run to the WH

    This is an example of what many people have been espousing for the Democratic candidates: Tell it exactly like it is without waffling. There is no need to try to soften the blow for the Trump base when asked a question like this. Those people are not even remotely likely to vote for a Democrat, so don't try to appease them by trying to walk a tightrope when talking about issues (especially gun control). This was a great answer.


  3. #513

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Chrissy Stroop
    This deleted tweet by
    needs to be spread far and wide. No one who thinks that “power of the mind” kept a hurricane away from Florida is fit to be president. And it seems she thinks Bahamians didn’t pray enough? Racist much?

    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  4. #514

    Re: The Run to the WH

    I see her as having not even the slightest chance, so this doesn't really matter too much in the grand scheme of things. GH

  5. #515

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Quote Originally Posted by GlennHarman View Post
    I see her as having not even the slightest chance, so this doesn't really matter too much in the grand scheme of things. GH
    She made it onto the stage of the first two debates though so someone, somewhere, thinks the world of her. And she got a fluff piece from Haberman at the NYT I think.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  6. #516

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Kyle Griffin
    Andrew Yang on CBS News: "My job is to help get Donald Trump out of office and I would do nothing that would increase the odds of him sticking around. And I think a third-party candidacy would do just that."
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  7. #517

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Josh Rudolph

    has been "reliably told" that Trump is intentionally withholding a White House visit and US military aid "in an attempt to extort" the Ukrainian government into "intervening in the 2020 US presidential election" by investigating Joe Biden.

    Susan Kay Kenney
    Replying to
    Similar tactic used by Kushner/MBS to blockade & force Qatar to *loan* Jared $1 billion for his 666 building.
    Olga Lautman

    Replying to
    So much more! Russia started floating Ukraine interfering in US elections in 2016 to deflect from their actions. If Ukraine complies then Russia will blame Ukraine, Europe will not back them. If Ukraine doesn't comply they risk losing funds necessary for protection.
    Casy Rybeck

    I was waiting for trump to get big headed and slip up. Rudy went to Ukraine as don the traitor trumps spokesman. He even said he was going to get dirt on Biden. I’m guessing Ukraine said F you so now the extortion to change their minds #Treason
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  8. #518

    Re: The Run to the WH


    Replying to

    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  9. #519

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Trump hopes his made-up approval rating will scare potential primary challengers

    By Philip Bump
    September 9, 2019 at 9:59 a.m. EDT

    A poll conducted last week by YouGov for the Economist finds something fairly unremarkable: President Trumpís job approval rating stands at 43 percent. Since he took office, thatís generally the higher end of where his approval has been, all of the movement having taken place in a narrow range.

    The reason isnít complex. Republicans love Trump and Democrats hate him, with independents on the Democratic side of the middle. In that YouGov poll, for example, Democrats give Trump an 11 percent approval, compared with 37 percent from independents and 87 percent from Republicans. Without partisans embracing or abandoning him, things donít move a lot, which is why we call that YouGov poll result unremarkable.

    There have been numerous other polls in recent weeks saying the same thing. Trumpís approval ranges from 38 percent to 44 percent; his approval among Republicans from 84 percent to 88 percent. Each of these polls looks essentially the same.

    (Philip Bump/The Washington Post)

    94% Approval Rating in the Republican Party, a record. Thank you!

    ó Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 9, 2019

    Perhaps you noticed the horizontal dashed line on the graph above. It marks 94 percent, the point at which Republican support sits, according to Trump. Youíll notice that thereís some distance between that line and the tops of the red columns, suggesting that Trumpís estimation of his approval from Republicans doesnít come from any of those polls.

    So where does it come from? The short answer is: nowhere.

    For months, Trump had been touting a 93 percent approval rating from Republicans. The first iteration of that figure that we found came from a straw poll conducted at the Conservative Political Action Conference, which is a bit like foxes claiming to be overwhelmingly popular after surveying people at a furry convention. Itís like asking about support for the Second Amendment at a gun show.

    In June, though, Trump tacked on a percentage point. He first claimed to have 94 percent support from Republicans during a news conference with then-British Prime Minister Theresa May. Our fact-checkers looked into it, determining that there was no public poll showing anything of the sort. If it was an internal campaign poll, it hasnít been made public (our fact-checkers asked). Since then, though, 94 percent has supplanted 93 percent in Trumpís rhetoric, with his touting this purported number over and over and over again.

    Weíve noted in the past that Trump likes to tout the same poll numbers repeatedly. There have been more than two dozen occasions on which Trump has touted an overall approval rating of 50 percent or higher, but those are usually at least tied to existing polls. (As a general rule, those polls are from Rasmussen Reports, a pollster that tracks approval among likely voters, not all Americans, and that has consistently given Trump higher approval numbers than nearly any poll.) Itís interesting that Trump continues to tweet things like ďWorking hard, thank you!Ē as he promotes a poll number that, even according to his presentation, is the same as it has been for months.

    Thatís not whatís happening here. Instead, Trump appears to simply be making the figure up. Perhaps there is internal polling showing Trump with substantially higher approval than public polls, a function of who theyíre asking and how theyíre asking it. But Trump doesnít even say that; he just throws out this number as though itís real.

    Trump recorded an approval rating over 92 percent among Republicans in an established poll precisely once during his first two years in office: a Suffolk University-USA Today poll from October 2018 in which he was at 94 percent. If heís referring to that poll, though, itís deceptive, given the challenges of relying on one poll ó much less one thatís nearly a year out of date. It would also be hypocritical, given that this is a president who excoriates pollsters for showing Hillary Clinton with a substantial lead in late October 2016, ignoring that those pollsters then showed a closer race as Election Day approached.

    But, again, thereís no reason to think that Trumpís poll number is actually rooted in anything real. In this particular case we say that because of the dearth of any evidence. In the abstract itís a fair assumption because of Trumpís general disinterest in accuracy.

    So why say it? Well, itís probably in part because of something else Trump tweeted on Monday morning: insults targeting former South Carolina congressman Mark Sanford. Sanford announced his intent to challenge Trump for the Republican Party primary over the weekend, and Trump welcomed him to the race by insulting his personal and political backgrounds.

    In that context, Trumpís claim makes sense. A Republican president with 94 percent approval among Republicans would be a formidable opponent for a challenger. The last time Trump touted this purported 94 percent approval rating was in late August, and he offered it specifically in the context of potential primary challengers.

    Granted, an incumbent with 87 percent approval is formidable, as well, but Trump does have something of a penchant for exaggeration. In this case, though, that exaggeration seems as though it would run counter to his intent: A challenger thinking about getting into the race might accept Trumpís 94 percent figure as accurate, only to then discover itís somewhat south of that.

    Wait until they learn that his approval rating isnít 50 percent, either.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  10. #520

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Trump’s war on truth just got a lot more cult-like

    Greg Sargent

    September 11, 2019 at 10:32 a.m. EDT

    ...Trump is raging about data again, this time angrily denouncing a new Post-ABC News poll that shows him trailing the leading Democratic candidates by sizable margins. Trump claims this poll is rigged and that if it weren’t for the “fake news,” he’d be trouncing all rivals by 20 points.

    Polling this early isn’t predictive, but it does shed light on Trump’s deep unpopularity — indeed, the Post-ABC News poll has his approval sliding to 38 percent. And Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to make his dismal public standing disappear, as part of a broader war on information waged by Trumpworld, most recently to prop up his falsehoods about Hurricane Dorian.

    Now we’re getting fresh examples of this war on facts — and they’re both remarkably revealing.

    The first: Republicans are now accusing the Republican National Committee of concealing internal data about Trump’s unpopularity from down-ballot Republican candidates.

    This revelation comes courtesy of a new ProPublica investigation into Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale. The piece mostly looks at Parscale’s use of his proximity to Trump to line his pockets.

    But ProPublica also reports new details on the Trump campaign’s takeover of the Republican Party architecture, including this revelation:

    Since Trump’s election in 2016, critical “voter scores” — sophisticated polling-based analytics that the RNC provides to party committees and candidates — have conspicuously omitted an essential detail for any down-ballot race: how voters in specific states and congressional districts feel about Trump. Republican insiders believe these analytics are being withheld to try and prevent GOP candidates from publicly distancing themselves from the president or leaking unfavorable results that embarrass Trump.
    “They don’t want you to know if it isn’t good,” says former RNC chairman Michael Steele, a vocal Trump critic. “There’s a lot of data they’re sitting on that they’re not sharing.” Steele adds that today, “the RNC is not an independent actor; the RNC is now a part of the Trump campaign. The question now isn’t, ‘What do you need?’ The question is, ‘Do you support Donald Trump?’”

    In other words, Republicans are criticizing the RNC for withholding data about Trump that might help other Republican candidates because they might distance themselves from Trump in unflattering ways. Former president Barack Obama was criticized for taking over his party, but ProPublica notes that experts see this as “unprecedented. ”

    Trump must be protected at all costs

    To understand what this means, I spoke to Dan Sena, who ran the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s 2018 recapture of the House. He said withholding such data would be unthinkable.

    “The idea that you wouldn’t provide a blanket score about how people feel about the president is ridiculous and really hamstrings how other campaigns will operate,” Sena told me, adding that this would deny candidates a crucial weapon in tough swing districts: “Anybody who is interested in moving swing voters has to have this kind of information. ”

    Sena said this info is crucial to how “modern” campaigns run targeted digital advertising in particular. “This information allows you to look for independents who like the candidate but have mixed feelings about the president,” he said. “These voters are going to be more persuadable. ”

    Sena opined that this omission of data was such glaring “malpractice” that it has to be “intentional,” adding: “They clearly don’t want anyone overperforming the president. ”

    To be fair, we need to know more about this arrangement to fully understand it. But one thing we can say right now is that this reading is absolutely plausible, given that it’s consistent with much of what we’ve already seen about how far this party will go to shield Trump.

    For example, as Politico reports, Republicans have canceled primaries in multiple states, in part due to “months of behind-the-scenes maneuvering” by Trump campaign operatives hoping to “smooth” Trump’s path to the nomination. This shields Trump from political competition — and criticism.

    Trump wields Mexican data

    Here’s the second new example of this war on information: Trump is now using data provided to him by the Mexican government to paint a misleading picture of what’s happening at the border — and is even using it to displace information provided by his own government.

    On Tuesday, Trump tweeted out a chart that purported to show a sharp decline in migrants remaining in the United States pending processing, because of the new arrangement in which Mexico cracks down on their passage and some migrants are sent back there. Trump touted “Incredible progress. ”

    But as The Post’s Nick Miroff learned, this chart was supplied to Trump by Mexican officials. Though there has been a decline in border crossings, in reality, U.S. government data shows that the picture is far less rosy, and migrant crossings are still very high.

    The real key here, though, is the active supplanting of U.S. government data with other data more to Trump’s liking, for naked propagandistic purposes:

    Just incredible: the Mexican govt basically got Trump to endorse its view of the migration deal (big success) over that of his own advisors (Mexico needs to do more) by presenting him with a flattering chart — which the president then posted to Twitter as if it were a US govt doc

    — Nick Miroff (@NickMiroff) September 11, 2019
    That is startling. But it’s only the latest in a long trend. I’ve already documented numerous examples in which government officials wheeled into action to make Trump’s lies and obsessions into truths, in some cases putting out “official” information explicitly shaped to do so.

    What’s more, they have regularly disregarded or suppressed info generated within the government when it undermined the stated rationales of preconceived policy decisions, such as slashing refugee flows and banning people from majority-Muslim nations.

    We keep discussing these things as the latest examples of Trump’s “post-truth presidency." But what also deserves mention here is the kind of deep, seething contempt all this shows for the voters, and really for democracy and governing — indeed, for the very notions of good-faith voter deliberation and official decision-making on which those things rely.

    Everything must always be pressed into service — even, it appears, to the detriment of the political needs of down-ballot candidates in Trump’s own party — for the single highest good of propping up the Cult of Trump.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  11. #521

    Re: The Run to the WH

    Salvador Hernandez

    President Trump asks his supporter Steve Cortes in the middle of the rally: "Who do you like more, the country or the hispanics? He says the country, I dont know. I may have to go with the hispanics to be honest with you. we've got a lot of hispanics."

    Sorry but this clip has to be seen to be believed. I apologize to those who like me become ill at the sound of his voice.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  12. #522

    Re: The Run to the WH

    The short, and long, of the Hunter Biden "scandal"

    Rick Tyler

    Hunter Biden worked for Burisma Holdings, Ukraine’s largest private energy company owned by Mykola Zlochevsky, an official in the government of disgraced former President Viktor Yanukovych who was ousted after a revolution. Yanukovych and Zlochevsky went into .

    . . exile. Zlochevsky was investigated as part of an effort to root out the wide-spread corruption of the Yanukovych administration. Remember it was Paul Manafort who worked to get Yanukovych elected. Manafort is serving a 7-year sentence stemming from his unreported income . .

    . . . from work in Ukraine. No charges were ever filed against Zlochevsky and his case was closed the year before Biden was pressuring Ukraine to fire Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin not because he was aggressively investigating corruption but because he wasn’t.

    Hunter was . .

    never the subject of any investigation. Trump and Giuliani were allegedly extorting the current president Volodymyr Zelensky, ironically elected on an anti-corruption platform, to open an investigation by freezing US military aid to Ukraine. The money has since been released . .

    . . along with an inexplicable $140 million more.
    Trump pressuring the Ukraine president because there was no premise to bring a case through the Justice Department using a regular process.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

  13. #523

    Re: The Run to the WH

    And now the longer version

    Kurt Eichenwald

    1. It is very rare that I criticize a reporter by name. However, the recklessness and poor reporting of
    - and his "we're going to keep pulling back the Biden story" garbage requires pointing out the abject poverty of his "reporting" and his attempts to take a few...

    2...facts strung together to suggest scandal where none exists - all compelled by his failure to know or report on the circumstances in Ukraine from 2015-2016. Maybe, Ken, start talking to foreign affairs folks rather than politicos.

    So, here we go....

    3...the entirety of the BS Biden "scandal" pertains to the firing of Viktor Shokin, Ukraine’s former prosecutor general, who was sacked by a vote of Parliament.

    Why was Shokin fired? Did it all have to do with Biden's telling Ukraine - at the instruction of Obama - that the...

    4...prosecutor general must go to get American money? Nope.

    Ukraine was a uniquely corrupt nation, and - under international pressure - had begun an attempt to clean itself up. However, Shokin was standing directly in the way of that getting done.... a result, government officials committed to reform - including Economic Minister Abramavicius and Deputy General Prosecutor Vitaliy Kasko - resigned in protest. Kasko was Shokin's second in command. In his resignation, Kasko said this on a nationally televised statement:

    6...when he says "foreign investment" he is NOT talking about the United States government. He is talking about foreign investors, who had specifically been stating that they would not put money into Ukraine until it attacked corruption.

    Just foreign investors? Nope....

    7...the blocking of corruption reforms by Shokin was leading to across the board condemnation and refusal of foreign entities to provide money to Ukraine. These included the European Union, the International Monetary Fund and the United States.....

    8...that excerpt was from a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the testimony of John E. Herbst, US Ambassador to Ukraine under GW. Bush. So Ken, was he also covering up for Biden? Was the EU? The IMF? Foreign investors? Parliament? Hell of a conspiracy...

    9...Oh, and other senators too. How about Senator Cardin from Maryland who said this at the hearing - BEFORE Parliament accepted the resignation of Shokin. Was he part of the "conspiracy" too?....

    10...time sequence is also important. So, presumably, in the "conspiracy" laid out by Ken et. al., Biden rushed in to protect his son, independently called for the resignation go Shokin, fearful, Ukraine folded and Biden saved his kid.

    Complete. Utter. BS.....

    11...Shokin did NOTHING in response to Biden's statement. And Biden's statement came AFTER those of the IMF and foreign investors. Once again, let's go to Herbst, the ambassador to Ukraine under GW Bush, who gives the correct timeline....

    12...the Shokin resignation followed the national scandal that exploded with the resignations of Abromavicius and Kasko. Their resignations were an announcement to the world that the anti-corruption actions required by the IMF, EU, US and foreign investors were being stymied....

    13....THAT is what led to the Shokin resignation. Not anything Biden said. Not anything EU or IMF said. Not anything the US said BEFORE Biden said anything. Not what foreign investors said. It was the fact that Ukraine government realized they would never be able to....

    14...survive now that the corruption of Shokin had been laid bare.

    To read a little bit about this in congressional hearings, go here:

    15...But let's dig in a little deeper. What made Shokin so corrupt? The main thing was keeping the corrupt prosecutors in place nationwide. in 2015, a prosecutorial restructuring was supposed to have begun. That was pushed off to 2016. Shokin rigged the selection committee with..

    16...four of his own supporters, against three from parliament. The result? Duh... The idea was to bring in fresh blood, people who were not part of the previous prosecutors division. But only 3% of hired were outsiders. The rest? Shokin's stooges....

    17...this is why the Atlantic Council (a global think tank composed of experts on foreign affairs) used this headline in a piece about corruption in Ukraine. Here is the full report:

    18...But let's not end there. How about the European Parliament? What did they say happen? Here are their. words:

    "The Rada voted to remove Prosecutor General, Viktor Shokin, in March 2016, after Western donors condemned his failure to prosecute open cases of corruption"...

    19...once again, those Western donors are the foreign investors. Then there is also the EU, the IMF and the United States. Here is the full report from the European Parliament...., maybe all of this - even though the timeline makes no sense - is some sort of double-reverse, three-dimensional mass conspiracy involving Europe, IMF, foreign investors et. al. who are all set to protect Biden's son.

    So, the question. How do we know there was an...

    21...investigation of the company on which Biden's son served as a director? Because SHOKIN - who first said the investigation was over, reversed himself after he was out of office and said there was one. Yes, the Republicans (and Ken) are relying on the man who is so corrupt....

    22...that he was forced out by the IMF, EU et al as their sole source that such an investigation was underway.

    So, you would think that, if that was a lie, someone would step forward and say "Shokin is lying." AND GUESS WHAT? Kasko - the anti-corruption deputy prosecutor whose..

    23...resignation helped push the sacking of Shokin, has come public and denied what Shokin said. His words:
    “There was no pressure from anyone from the U.S. to close cases against Zlochevsky. It was shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors.” (Zlochevsky is the company.)....

    24...notice: My reporting was based on WHAT HAPPENED IN UKRAINE, not on playing Sherlock Holmes using a series of misstated points for the purpose of concluding "questions raised."

    It is the utter conceit of US media and politicians that everything in the world is about us... is not. In this case, it was about a global campaign against the corruption in Ukraine - a corruption which, if it had not been addressed, would have certainly led them to open a criminal investigation of the company under Trump's pressure. But Ukraine has a reform...

    26...minded leader, and he is not going to place all of the country's international investment and support from EU and IMF at risk simply to satisfy Trump. He has seen corruption, and would recognize it for what it is.

    So, yah, Ken - start following the timeline of events....

    27...stop leaving out the global context in which everything was happening, stop resting your conspiracy theory on the word of a corrupt prosecutor while ignoring the one who resigned to combat corruption. And explain - if Biden's public pressure against Shokin was decisive....

    28...why nothing happened in response, why Shokin stayed in office until the resignations, why the EU and IMF and foreign investors are irrelevant, and all of this rests on the back of one guy who is a director of a company.

    Your argument is utter foolishness.
    There is more stupidity than hydrogen in the universe, and it has a longer shelf life.Ē

    ― Frank Zappa

Page 35 of 35 FirstFirst ... 10253132333435


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts