TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!
POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Monday, March 9, 2026 20:06
VIEWED: 244478
PAGE 15 of 17
Quote:Please add this to your signature, Signym: Why is Trump being friendly toward Russia? What is Trump getting out of this? Because the USA is getting nothing.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I just refuse to get on that recently-concocted anti-Russian bandwagon, because it sure smells a lot like the anti-Iraq bandwagon, and the anti-Vietnam bandwagon, and every anti-(fill in the blank) bandwagon that the USA elites wanted to go to war with: full of shit.
Well, I don't give a crap about "Russia" unless it impacts our interests, and neither should you.
Rex Tillerson, Trump’s future Sec State, already got paid by Russia. Remember Tillerson’s oil deals in Russia before you, Signym, say he has not been paid. Since Trump’s entire life is about money, why is Trump not getting paid, too? We can’t know because Trump, unlike Tillerson, keeps his business secret. Remember Trump hides his tax returns? Remember Trump hides his business dealings? Trump is definitely a guy who can be bought and sold. So how much did he get paid? That is what Swiss bank accounts are for, to hold the illegal wealth of rulers.
www.nytimes.com/1998/10/23/world/ferdinand-marcos-s-swiss-bank-legacy-
tighter-rules-for-despots-and-criminals.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well, you see SECOND, this is where your inability to even imagine "American interests" is a serious deficit, because I can imagine America getting a LOT of things out of reaching a detente with Russia. So you go toddle off and think about it some.
Please add this to your signature, Signym: Why is Trump being friendly toward Russia? What is Trump getting out of this? Because the USA is getting nothing. - SECOND
Oh by the way, I changed my signature to quote your anti-American statement.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Taking a page out of SECOND's playbook, I'm going to start posting other people's articles. This will save me a lot of typing-time, and demonstrate to SECOND and other proto-neocons on the board that I'm not the only patriotic American who holds these opinions.
Quote:
Neocon Panic and Agony
There are clear signs that the Neocons running the AngloZionist Empire and its “deep state” are in a state of near panic and their actions indicate they are truly terrified.
The home front
One the home front, the Neocons have resorted to every possible dirty trick on the book to try to prevent Donald Trump from ever getting into the White House: they have
organized riots and demonstrations (some paid by Soros money)
encouraged the supporters of Hillary to reject the outcome of the elections (“not my President”)
tried to threaten the Electors and make them either cast a vote for Hillary or not vote at all
tried to convince Congress to refuse the decision of the Electoral College and
they are now trying to get the elections annulled on the suspicion that the (apparently almighty) Russian hackers have compromised the election outcome (apparently even in states were paper ballots were used) and stolen it in favor of Trump.
That is truly an amazing development, especially considering how Hillary attacked Trump for not promising to recognize the outcome of the elections. She specifically said that Trump’s lack of guarantees to recognize the outcome would threaten the very basis of the stability of the US political system and now she, and her supporters, are doing everything in their power to do just that, to throw the entire electoral process into a major crisis with no clear path towards resolution. Some say that the Democrats are risking a civil war. Considering that several key Republican Congressmen have said they do support the notion of an investigation into the “Russian hackers” fairy tale, I submit that the Republicans are doing exactly the same thing, that this is not a Democrat vs Republican issue, but a “deep state vs The People of the USA” issue.
Most experts agree that none of these tactics are going to work. So this begs the question of whether the Neocons are stupid, whether they think that they can succeed or what their true objective is.
My guess is that first and foremost what is taking place now is what always happens when the Neocons run into major trouble: they double down, again. And again. And again. That is one of the key characteristics of their psychological make-up: they cannot accept defeat or, even less so, that they were wrong, so each time reality catches up to their ideological delusions, they automatically double-down. Still, they might rationalize this behavior by a combination of hope that maybe one of these tricks will work, with the strong urge to do as much damage to President-Elect Trump before he actually assumes his office. I would never underestimate the vicious vindictiveness of these people.
What is rather encouraging is Trump’s reaction to all this: after apparently long deliberations he decided to nominate Rex Tillerson as his Secretary of Defense. From a Neocon point of view, if General Michael Flynn was bad, then Tillerson was truly an apocalyptic abomination: the man actually had received the order of “Friend of Russia” from the hands of Vladimir Putin himself!
Did Trump not realize how provocative this nomination was and how it would be received by the Neocons? Of course he did! That was, on his part, a totally deliberate decision. If so, then this is a very, very good sign.
I might be mistaken, but I get the feeling that Trump is willing to accept the Neocon challenge and that he will fight back. For example, his reaction to the CIA accusations about Russian hackers was very telling: he reminded everybody that “these are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction”. I think that it is now a safe bet to say that as soon as Trump take control heads will roll at the CIA.
[SidebaNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
REPOSTED:
SECOND, calm down. I can hear your head exploding all the way over here.
Paul Krugman, stawmanning his way through an entire article.
I don't know what "Trump voters" want, but I know what I want: Three things.
1) Stop trying to foment war with Russia. Come up with some sort of modus vivendi that allows each of us to have our essential interests respected. Restore national sovereignty over our foreign policy. End our pointless concocted wars for Saudi Arabia or Israel or the elite EU bankers.
2) Start solving the illegal immigration problem. Restore national sovereignty over our borders.
3) Get out of TPP/ TTIP, and tear up NAFTA as much as possible. Restore national economic sovereignty.
Three things. It looks like TPP and TTIP are already dead. It looks like Trump is serious about not being on a escalating ramp-up to war with Russia. The rest is to be demonstrated.
Everything else, I'm willing to fight Trump at every level of government. Now, let me explain my rationale for voting the way I did: It will be far easier to fight Trump and the Republicans than it would be to fight some secret international "trade tribunal" on environmental and economic issues. If you think fighting Trump is going to be difficult - and it will be - imagine what it would be like if your local or state regulations were overturned by the TPP or TTIP because they might interfere with normal or expected transnational profits. Where would you turn then? (The answer is: Nowhere. You'd be as fucked as a whore in a whorehouse.)
ETA: So stop bitching, whining, gnashing your teeth, and trying to overturn the elected government. Start planning how to enhance Americans' prospects. ALL Americans, not just your precious hyphenated-identity subgroups. (That is, if you can get over your disdain for Yankees.)
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not that it will stop you, but you're not using "straw man" correctly: A straw man is based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. Now I will erect a true "strawman" by reading your mind and writing your response for you: Signym replied that she was using "strawman" correctly.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
REPOSTED:
SECOND, calm down. I can hear your head exploding all the way over here.
Paul Krugman, stawmanning his way through an entire article.
Will Trump’s Fiscal Policy Really Be Expansionary?
By Paul Krugman, December 18, 2016 1:49 pm
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/12/18/will-fiscal-policy-really-
be-expansionary/
It’s now generally accepted that Trumpism will finally involve the kind of fiscal stimulus progressive economists have been pleading for ever since the financial crisis in 2008. After all, Republicans are deeply worried about budget deficits when a Democrat is in the White House, but suddenly become fiscal doves when in control. And there really is no question that the deficit will go up.
But will this actually amount to fiscal stimulus? Right now it looks as if Republicans are going to ram through their whole agenda, including an end to Obamacare, privatizing Medicare and block-granting Medicaid, sharp cuts to food stamps, and so on. These are spending cuts, which will reduce the disposable income of lower- and middle-class Americans even as tax cuts raise the income of the wealthy. Given the sharp distributional changes, looking just at the budget deficit may be a poor guide to the macroeconomic impact.
Given the extent to which things are in flux, I can’t put numbers on what’s likely to happen. But I was able to find matching analyses by the good folks at CBPP of tax and spending cuts in Paul Ryan’s 2014 budget, which may be a useful model of things to come.
www.cbpp.org/research/the-ryan-budgets-tax-cuts-nearly-6-trillion-in-c
ost-and-no-plausible-way-to-pay-for-it
www.cbpp.org/research/chairman-ryan-gets-66-percent-of-his-budget-cuts
-from-programs-for-people-with-low-or?fa=view&id=3925
If you leave out the magic asterisks — closing of unspecified tax loopholes — that budget was a deficit-hiker: $5.7 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years, versus $5 trillion in spending cuts. The spending cuts involved cuts in discretionary spending plus huge cuts in programs that serve the poor and middle class; the tax cuts were, of course, very targeted on high incomes.
The pluses and minuses here would have quite different effects on demand. Cutting taxes on high incomes probably has a low multiplier: the wealthy are unlikely to be cash-constrained, and will save a large part of their windfall. Cutting discretionary spending has a large multiplier, because it directly cuts government purchases of goods and services; cutting programs for the poor probably has a pretty high multiplier too, because it reduces the income of many people who are living more or less hand to mouth.
Taking all this into account, that old Ryan plan would almost surely have been contractionary, not expansionary.
Will Trumponomics be any different? It would matter if there really were a large infrastructure push, but that’s becoming ever less plausible. There will be big tax cuts at the top, but as I said, the push to dismantle the safety net definitely seems to be on. Put it all together, and it’s extremely doubtful whether we’re talking about net fiscal stimulus.
Now, you might think that someone will explain this to Trump, and that he’ll demand a more Keynesian plan. But I have two words for you: Larry Kudlow.
Kudlow is the darling of the right-wingers, who praise him as demonstrating “statesman-like character and resolve, who can promote an agenda of growth and prosperity. The need of the hour is Larry Kudlow.” That huge load of ring-wing bullshit actually got uploaded today on Forbes.com. Where money can be made, there are no l
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Perhaps you are thinking of a Russian Poodle? That would surely benefit the USA.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Well, you see SECOND, this is where your inability to even imagine "American interests" is a serious deficit, because I can imagine America getting a LOT of things out of reaching a detente with Russia.
Donald Trump: The Russian Poodle
by Nicholas Kristof
www.nytimes.com/2016/12/17/opinion/sunday/donald-trump-the-russian-poo
dle.html?rref=opinion
In 1972, President Richard Nixon’s White House dispatched burglars to bug Democratic Party offices. That Watergate burglary and related “dirty tricks,” such as releasing mice at a Democratic press conference and paying a woman to strip naked and shout her love for a Democratic candidate, nauseated Americans — and impelled some of us kids at the time to pursue journalism.
Now in 2016 we have a political scandal that in some respects is even more staggering. Russian agents apparently broke into the Democrats’ digital offices and tried to change the election outcome. President Obama on Friday suggested that this was probably directed by Russia’s president, saying, “Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin.”
In Watergate, the break-in didn’t affect the outcome of the election. In 2016, we don’t know for sure. There were other factors, but it’s possible that Russia’s theft and release of the emails provided the margin for Donald Trump’s victory.
The C.I.A. says it has “high confidence” that Russia was trying to get Trump elected, and, according to The Washington Post, the directors of the F.B.I. and national intelligence agree with that conclusion.
Both Nixon and Trump responded badly to the revelations, Nixon by ordering a cover-up and Trump by denouncing the C.I.A. and, incredibly, defending Russia from the charges that it tried to subvert our election. I never thought I would see a dispute between America’s intelligence community and a murderous foreign dictator in which an American leader sided with the dictator.
Let’s be clear: This was an attack on America, less lethal than a missile but still profoundly damaging to our system. It’s not that Trump and Putin were colluding to steal an election. But if the C.I.A. is right, Russia apparently was trying to elect a president who would be not a puppet exactly but perhaps something of a lap dog — a Russian poodle.
In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair was widely (and unfairly) mocked as President George W. Bush’s poodle, following him loyally into the Iraq war. The fear is that this time Putin may have interfered to acquire an ally who likewise will roll over for him.
Frankly, it’s mystifying that Trump continues to defend Russia and Putin, even as he excoriates everyone else, from C.I.A. officials to a local union leader in Indiana.
Now we come to the most reckless step of all: This Russian poodle is acting in character by giving important government posts to friends of Moscow, in effect rewarding it for its attack on the United States.
Rex Tillerson, Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, is a smart and capable manager. Yet it’s notable that he is particularly close to Putin, who had decorated Tillerson with Russia’s “Order of Friendship.”
Whatever our personal politics, how can we possibly want to respond to Russia’s interference in our election by putting American foreign policy in the hands of a Putin friend?
Tillerson’s closeness to Putin is especially troubling because of Trump’s other Russia links. The incoming national security adviser, Michael Flynn, accepted Russian money to attend a dinner in Moscow and sat near Putin. A ledger shows $12.7 million in secret payments by a pro-Russia party in Ukraine to Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort. And the Trump family itself has business connections with Russia.
It’s true that there will be counterbalances, including Gen. James Mattis, the former Marine commander who has no illusions about Moscow and is expected to be confirmed as defense secretary. But over all it look
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That's you, SECOND.
My guess is that first and foremost what is taking place now is what always happens when the Neocons run into major trouble: they double down, again. And again. And again. That is one of the key characteristics of their psychological make-up: they cannot accept defeat or, even less so, that they were wrong, so each time reality catches up to their ideological delusions, they automatically double-down.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hell’s Angels was about left-behind people motivated only by “an ethic of total retaliation.” Sound familiar?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
That's you, SECOND.
Most people read Hell’s Angels (1966) for the lurid stories of sex and drugs. But that misses the point entirely. What’s truly shocking about reading the book today is how well Thompson foresaw the retaliatory, right-wing politics that now goes by the name of Trumpism. After following the motorcycle guys around for months, Thompson concluded that the most striking thing about them was not their hedonism but their “ethic of total retaliation” against a technologically advanced and economically changing America in which they felt they’d been counted out and left behind. Thompson saw the appeal of that retaliatory ethic. He claimed that a small part of every human being longs to burn it all down, especially when faced with great and impersonal powers that seem hostile to your very existence. In the United States, a place of ever greater and more impersonal powers, the ethic of total retaliation was likely to catch on.
What made that outcome almost certain, Thompson thought, was the obliviousness of Berkeley, California, types who, from the safety of their cocktail parties, imagined that they understood and represented the downtrodden. The Berkeley types, Thompson thought, were not going to realize how presumptuous they had been until the downtrodden broke into one of those cocktail parties and embarked on a campaign of rape, pillage, and slaughter. For Thompson, the Angels weren’t important because they heralded a new movement of cultural hedonism, but because they were the advance guard for a new kind of right-wing politics. As Thompson presciently wrote in the Nation piece he later expanded on in Hell’s Angels, that kind of politics is “nearly impossible to deal with” using reason or empathy or awareness-raising or any of the other favorite tools of the left.
But though Thompson’s depiction of an alienated, white, masculine working-class culture — one that is fundamentally misunderstood by intellectuals — is not the only one out there, it was the first. And in some ways, it is still the best psychological study of those Americans often dismissed as “white trash” or “deplorables.”
Thompson’s Angels were mostly working-class white men who felt, not incorrectly, that they had been relegated to the sewer of American society. Their unswerving loyalty to the nation — the Angels had started as a World War II veterans group — had not paid them any rewards or won them any enduring public respect. The manual-labor skills that they had learned and cultivated were in declining demand. Though most had made it through high school, they did not have the more advanced levels of training that might lead to economic or professional security. “Their lack of education,” Thompson wrote, “rendered them completely useless in a highly technical economy.” Looking at the American future, they saw no place for themselves in it.
In other words, the Angels felt like “strangers in their own land,” as Arlie Russell Hochschild puts it in her recent book on red-state America.
More of the story here:
www.thenation.com/article/this-political-theorist-predicted-the-rise-o
f-trumpism-his-name-was-hunter-s-thompson/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND
Just summarizing some of your posts with my response.
TRUMP WANTS BETTER RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA !!!
So? Or do you prefer to escalate tensions over things that don't materially affect the US in a 'game' of nuclear brinkmanship? Why?
REPUBLICANS NOW THINK BETTER OF PUTIN !!!!
And?
CHINA IS TWEAKED ABOUT TAIWAN !!!!
And? (fwiw the US drove China and Russia into each other's arms. This could be an opening to split them apart.)
No Americans care about Russia, but they do care that Trump is obsessed with Putin and Putin is sneaking stolen emails to Trump !!!!
That argument is as phony as a Nixon penny, and worth less. Apparently shillary thinks A LOT about Russia. So does obmanation. And so do you. And Thuggr, 'g', and krappo. The only people who really don't get all exercised about Russia are Signy and myself. As for Putin sneaking stolen emails to Trump - my god. You've disgraced yourself with that insanity.
THE NYT WROTE AN ARTICLE ABOUT MARCO'S SWISS BANK ACCOUNTS IN 1998 !!!
And?
PEOPLE SPECULATE ABOUT TRUMP'S POSSIBLE ECONOMIC PLAN AND THEN BLAST HIM FOR THINGS THEY IMAGINE !!!
They react to non-existent things as if they were real? That is the definition of insanity.
THE HELL'S ANGELS MIGHT BE BAD PEOPLE !!!
OMG. Who would have guessed?
In all of your posts, was there anything relevant? Useful? Interesting?
No.
And ...
... How DID your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As our #1 prize idiot would say: "Cites please!"
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Obama doubled our national debt and the only "jobs" that were "recovered" in the last 8 years were part time, minimum-wage jobs now held by people who used to be able to support a family with real jobs, or people who just completely left the workforce like me and are no longer a statistic they track....
Nobody but the truly Privilged White people will revere Obama as a great president. Not even ANY black people. He did NOTHING for Black People or Latin People. He actually deported more illegal Latinos that GWB did. One thing I actually agreed with him on although nowhere near the amount that should have happened. The only "Legacy" he has is Obamacare that is crushing middle income people, and Trump will strip it to bare bones if he doesn't just renig on what he said to appease idiot lefties like you and destroy it altogether.
I say this knowing full well that I will no longer have health insurance in my current position. I'm okay with that. It's not right that I have insurance while my Niece's parents pay 6k per year more with twice the deductible to cover my free insurance.
I said 10 years ago here that GWB was the worst president we EVER had.
Not even considering how little respect any foreign countries have for us now, but just for how much he spent with such little results for the middle class. Not to mention that Race Relations have been set back 50 years under 8 years of Obama. Blacks and Whites have not lived under this much tension since the 60's.
Obama was so much worse. He makes GWB look like JFK.
Because he is Black, nobody will talk about him at all in school 30 years from now. He will be among the 30+ "invisible" presidents we never discuss in public school.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What the FUCK dude, Proto-neocons, what!? are you writing fucking science fiction?
And stop being such a stupid little bitch. Be different for once and actually post with some intelligence.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Of course I don't want Russia to own us.
Too late, we already got it up the ass from our neighbors to the extreme right.
We are NOW Russia East!
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
GREAT FUCKING POST!!!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:When you use "our AMERICAN interests", who do think believes you are American? Your obsession, and 1kiki’s, with Russia makes everyone at Fireflyfans, except 1kiki and maybe 6ixStringJack, think you’re Russian. No Americans care about Russia, but they do care that Trump is obsessed with Putin and Putin is sneaking stolen emails to Trump. Is Putin blackmailing Trump? Although he never shuts up, Trump is so secretive about his business that we can only guess.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Please, think long and hard what our AMERICAN interests are before you start getting all hysterical about "Russia".
Trump can talk more about himself and say less than any other American politician. I do wish Trump’s accountant would talk about Trump’s tax returns or his foreign business dealings or his conflict of interest between what is best for the Trump family fortune and best for the USA, etc. because Trump is not talking.
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/156590/
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/156500/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Herr Tillerman's pick as SOS is just an enrichment scheme...guess who's NOT getting richer.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Honey, I've been here longer than YOU have.[\quote]
Really!? It's come to this - FIRSTIES!
Ha!
sgg
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mark-time...march...HIGH Goose Step -
ALL Hail President Putin, the new RPOTUS!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Well, you see SECOND, this is where your inability to even imagine "American interests" is a serious deficit, because I can imagine America getting a LOT of things out of reaching a detente with Russia. So you go toddle off and think about it some.
Please add this to your signature, Signym: Why is Trump being friendly toward Russia? What is Trump getting out of this? Because the USA is getting nothing. - SECOND
Oh by the way, I changed my signature to quote your anti-American statement.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SHINY, you're having a breakdown in public, did you know that?
BUCK UP, dood! It's time you stopped feeling horrified and sorry for yourself, and started planning on how to fight Trump on SPECIFIC proposals and policies.
Here, let me give you a couple of examples:
Right before Obamacare, the Big Blue State of CA was contemplating (much more cost-effective) single payer. The State Legislature even had a model bill written. But with the advent of (much inferior) Obamacare, the State Senate shelved their bill. If Obamacare becomes too unwieldy under Trump, I'm going to fight that this bill be revived.
In addition, CA is going to keep on keeping on with its greenhouse gas reduction plan.
Dood, get your head out of the bottle, or the bong, or your ass, or wherever it's been located for the past year. Come on and fight the good fight.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If you're also not aware, factory workers in Indiana did not have much concern for the well-being of blacks in Texas from 1877 to 2016. Indifference runs both from the North toward the South and South to North. Please add that to your signature, Signym.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump tweeted:
We should tell China that we don't want the drone they stole back.- let them keep it!
4:59 PM - 17 Dec 2016
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/810288321880555520
After seizing an American unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) operating in international waters in the South China Sea last week, China’s defense ministry has agreed to return the drone to the US—even if president-elect Donald Trump wants Beijing to keep it.
Beijing should not take Trump’s Twitter remarks seriously as no one really knows what he is thinking, said an op-ed (link in Chinese) published Monday (Dec. 19) on the front page of the top state newspaper People’s Daily’s overseas edition.
The author Hua Yiwen, identified as an international affairs expert, argued that the seized American drone was only “the tip of the iceberg” of the US’s military strategy on China. He wrote, the US’s increasing military presence in China’s claimed waters reflects its “doubts, and even hostility” to China.
The latest flare-up between the US and China adds to the rise in military tensions in the region in recent weeks. China may be flexing its military muscles in response to Trump’s recent remarks suggesting that the US could break with its decades-long policy on Taiwan and China, or to US Pacific Command chief Harry Harris’s comments last week that the US would confront China’s attempts to control the South China Sea.
http://qz.com/866303/that-underwater-drone-in-the-south-china-sea-that
-donald-trump-doesnt-want-back-china-says-it-might-have-valuable-information/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Three responses immediately spring to mind, n I don't know which is more apropos:
If you're also not aware, factory workers in Indiana did not have much concern for the well-being of blacks in Texas from 1877 to 2016. Indifference runs both from the North toward the South and South to North. Please add that to your signature, Signym.
1) Cites? Links?
2) Silly girl, the answer is "no".
3) If Americans don't care about other states, then you have just made the best argument EV-AR for the Electoral College, because each state will have to look out for itself.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The states don't help each other. Occasionally the Feds help states when their neighboring states won't. Signym, that date of 1877 was not picked at random. That was the year Reconstruction ended. In 1877, Hayes withdrew the last federal troops from the south, and the bayonet-backed Republican governments collapsed, thereby ending Reconstruction.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Three responses immediately spring to mind, n I don't know which is more apropos:
If you're also not aware, factory workers in Indiana did not have much concern for the well-being of blacks in Texas from 1877 to 2016. Indifference runs both from the North toward the South and South to North. Please add that to your signature, Signym.
1) Cites? Links?
2) Silly girl, the answer is "no".
3) If Americans don't care about other states, then you have just made the best argument EV-AR for the Electoral College, because each state will have to look out for itself.
Over the next three decades, the civil rights that blacks had been promised during Reconstruction crumbled under white rule in the south. The plight of southern Blacks was forgotten in the north as they were segregated and condemned to live in poverty with little hope.
And in the years since 1877, not once in all recorded history did Indiana factory workers send aid to Texas or anywhere else in the South for the suffering Black workers living in poverty with little hope. If Signym can find an example where Indiana factory workers did send monetary aid, or even free hope, let me know.
www.apstudynotes.org/us-history/topics/the-end-of-reconstruction/
Signym, you do know that Trump, in person, shook down Indiana Gov Pence for $7 million to save Indiana factory worker jobs at Carrier? Trump gave none of his own money and took all the credit for himself with none for Pence. Did you know that Indiana did not have enough money to save all those Carrier jobs? But Trump, with his $10 billion, could have. I will do the math for you: Trump's $10 billion is 1,428 times bigger than Indiana's $7 million. Trump had the money, but he only did what he does best: grab the spotlight for himself, run his mouth, and nothing more.
Where was Trump when these other Indiana factory workers needed his help, Signym? Nowhere. Trump left town.
www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Workers-at-endangered-Indiana-plant-fee
l-10787688.php
www.newyorker.com/cartoons/a20602
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
not once in all recorded history did Indiana factory workers send aid to Texas or anywhere else in the South for the suffering Black workers living in poverty with little hope. If Signym can find an example where Indiana factory workers did send monetary aid, or even free hope, let me know.
Why so restrictive, SECOND? Are you saying that no person from any northern, southern, western or eastern state crossed a state border to participate in the Civil Rights movement at any time? Are you saying that no person ever crossed a state border to help someone else? Are you claiming that no person ever donated to a mission or disaster in another state to help the people there? Because that would be foolish, if that's what you're claiming. (Good luck with convincing Americans to care about other Americans having factory jobs in another state.)
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
1kiki, you won't find a line item in any state's budget in any year since the USA was founded for helping another state. For example, there is nothing in Texas' budget to help the welfare of unemployed Indiana factory workers.
There is nothing in any budget in any state to help any people in another state. And there never has been help. 1kiki, think about that kind of stinginess, which has gone on for centuries. The States of the USA are NOT good neighbors. States do NOT help other states.
It is the Federal government that includes money in its budget to help states in trouble. The states refuse to help, perhaps out of principle. Or maybe the states have always been run by Scrooge.
In the bad old days, before the Great Depression, a rich state such as NY or CA would let a poor state (Mississippi) and its people suffer and die. No help was ever coming, except private charity at erratic intervals. And Americans thought that was right and proper in 1926. There is a political party in 2016 that still thinks it is proper for poor people to suffer and die.
Does 1kiki know about that political party? That party does very well in state and local elections because Americans agree with its philosophy of everything for me and nothing for you out-of-state strangers.
I can see why that political party does well. It is appealing to know that your tax money will never go to people in another state. Or to people you don't like, even if they live in your state.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:
not once in all recorded history did Indiana factory workers send aid to Texas or anywhere else in the South for the suffering Black workers living in poverty with little hope. If Signym can find an example where Indiana factory workers did send monetary aid, or even free hope, let me know.
Why so restrictive, SECOND? Are you saying that no person from any northern, southern, western or eastern state crossed a state border to participate in the Civil Rights movement at any time? Are you saying that no person ever crossed a state border to help someone else? Are you claiming that no person ever donated to a mission or disaster in another state to help the people there? Because that would be foolish, if that's what you're claiming. (Good luck with convincing Americans to care about other Americans having factory jobs in another state.)
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The End Of The TV Illusion And The Coming Of Plain Old, Ugly Reality
Europe’s populist parties are actually populist; they pursue policies that really do help workers, as long as those workers are the right color and ethnicity. As someone put it, they’re selling a herrenvolk welfare state. Law and Justice, Poland’s ruling populist party, has raised minimum wages and reduced the retirement age; France’s National Front advocates the same things.
Trump, however, is different. He said lots of things on the campaign trail, but his personnel choices indicate that in practice he’s going to be a standard hard-line economic-right Republican. His Congressional allies are revving up to dismantle Obamacare, privatize Medicare, and raise the retirement age. His pick for Labor Secretary is a fast-food tycoon who loathes minimum wage hikes. And his pick for top economic advisor is the king of trickle-down.
So in what sense is Trump a populist? Basically, he plays one on TV — he claims to stand for the common man, disparages elites, trashes political correctness; but it’s all for show. When it comes to substance, he’s pro-elite all the way.
He managed to get away with this in the election. But that was all big talk. What happens when reality begins to hit? Repealing Obamacare will inflict huge harm on precisely the people who were most enthusiastic Trump supporters — people who somehow believed that their benefits would be left intact. What happens when they realize their mistake?
Given history, what we can count on is a massive effort to spin the coming working-class devastation as somehow being the fault of liberals, and for all I know it might work.
And the indicated political strategy is clear: make Trump and company own all the hardship they’re about to inflict. No cooperation in devising an Obamacare replacement; no votes for Medicare privatization and increasing the retirement age. No bipartisan cover for the end of the TV illusion and the coming of plain old, ugly reality.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/reality-tv-populism
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND
"1kiki, you won't find a line item in any state's budget in any year since the USA was founded for helping another state."
This was your original claim: "Good luck with convincing Americans to care about other Americans having factory jobs in another state."
Do you see anything there are state budgets? No? Neither do I.
I'm sorry you're too dishonest to have a discussion with.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:“Dishonest” is probably not the word. “Tired” is probably the word you need as in the sentence “second is too tired to have a discussion with. Second won’t explain over and over with greater and greater clarity until the dumb 1kiki makes the connection.”
Originally posted by 1kiki:
SECOND
Do you see anything there are state budgets? No? Neither do I.
I'm sorry you're too dishonest to have a discussion with.
I’ve got one more example where American generosity ends at the state line. I think those state lines act as boundaries of Americans' willingness to help other Americans. Trump took advantage of that feature of America by making big promises that Congress will not allow him keep because a Congressman’s generosity also stops at his state line, whichever state he was elected from.
West Virginia versus Virginia. One is poor, the other rich. The two states were once The Same State. Does all that history of togetherness mean nothing? It means nothing. Virginia sends no aid to W Virginia. There is no generosity flowing across that state line. If government help is coming from outside the state, it will come from the Federal government. There will be no help from rich Virginia, other than sporadic charity from individual Virginians.
Once upon a time, the plantation owners in the eastern part of Virginia owned slaves, while the western portion of the state did not. So Virginia put an imaginary line on the map dividing it into east and west in 1861. That line became a wall that was worth killing to defend. Rich Virginia never looked back and it certainly never again helped poor West Virginia out of poverty.
Today the poverty line very clearly runs along the Virginia state line. Hot pink marks poor counties in America. Trump took advantage of the hot pink areas. He made promises that the Fed will fix what the neighboring states don’t want to fix:
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/raw-data-where-poor-are
There is an idea I am pitching to you to explain why Indiana factory workers aren’t getting all the help they need from Texas, why Republicans win a majority of governorships and legislatures, why Americans are always ready to listen to the ideas that Obamacare, Medicare and Social Security need to be “saved” by cutting back on expenditures to those programs. It even explains why the Presidency keeps switching back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.
What is my major idea, which 1kiki will shoot down as a lie? That the majority of Americans are neither caring nor generous to their neighbors in other states. That the majority of Americans will see disastrous problems in other states (even within their state) and will let those problems run their course to whatever awful destination. And the Republican party owes its success to letting that awful destiny happen without government stepping in, spending money, and stopping whatever doom is heading this way.
It is the Republican Party specialty to not see problems, not see solutions and not to help. Which is perfectly fine with most Americans who don’t see any problems but their own small and personal ones. Most Americans do not want their taxes spent to help someone other than themselves. That is the soil from which grows the local and state power of the Republican party.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Donald Trump Is Gaslighting America
www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-is-gaslighting-america
In this scorched-earth op-ed, Lauren Duca takes on Trump's systematic attempts to destabilize the truth and weaken the foundation of American freedom.
Gaslighting comes from a 1944 film called Gaslight, in which a husband attempts to drive his wife crazy. The husband (the trump in play) ends by being executed for murder and the wife, Ingrid Bergman, lives happily ever after.
Lauren Duca
Dec 10, 2016 11:40AM EST
The CIA officially determined that Russia intervened in our election, and President-elect Donald Trump dismissed the story as if it were a piece of fake news. "These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction," his transition team wrote in a statement. "The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again'."
It wasn't one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history, so presumably that's another red-herring lie to distract from Trump treating the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States like it is some rogue blogger to be cast to the trolls. A foreign government's interference in our election is a threat to our freedom, and the President-elect's attempt to undermine the American people's access to that information undermines the very foundation upon which this country was built. It's also nothing new.
Trump won the Presidency by gas light. His rise to power has awakened a force of bigotry by condoning and encouraging hatred, but also by normalizing deception. Civil rights are now on trial, though before we can fight to reassert the march toward equality, we must regain control of the truth. If that seems melodramatic, I would encourage you to dump a bucket of ice over your head while listening to “Duel of the Fates." Donald Trump is our President now; it’s time to wake up.
"Gas lighting" is a buzzy name for a terrifying strategy currently being used to weaken and blind the American electorate. We are collectively being treated like Bella Manningham in the 1938 Victorian thriller from which the term "gas light" takes its name. In the play, Jack terrorizes his wife Bella into questioning her reality by blaming her for mischievously misplacing household items which he systematically hides. Doubting whether her perspective can be trusted, Bella clings to a single shred of evidence: the dimming of the gas lights that accompanies the late night execution of Jack’s trickery. The wavering flame is the one thing that holds her conviction in place as she wriggles free of her captor’s control.
To gas light is to psychologically manipulate a person to the point where they question their own sanity, and that’s precisely what Trump is doing to this country. He gained traction in the election by swearing off the lies of politicians, while constantly contradicting himself, often without bothering to conceal the conflicts within his own sound bites. He lied to us over and over again, then took all accusations of his falsehoods and spun them into evidence of bias.
At the hands of Trump, facts have become interchangeable with opinions, blinding us into arguing amongst ourselves, as our very reality is called into question.
There is a long list of receipts when it comes to Trump's lies. With the help of PolitiFact, clear-cut examples of deception include Trump saying that he watched thousands of people cheering on 9/11 in Jersey City (police say there's no evidence of this), that the Mexican government forces immigrants into the U.S. (no evidence), that there are "30 or 34 million" immigrants in this country (there are 10 or 11 million), that he never supported the Iraq War (he told Howard Stern he did), that the unemployment rate is as high as "42 percent" (the highest reported rate is 16.4 percent), that the U.S. is the highest taxed country in th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND does a great job of 'moving the goalposts', which is a logical fallacy and dishonest argument.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
Tell me, SECOND, which argument are you making? The one where Americans don't care about other Americans? The one where Texans don't care about anyone else? The one where Americans don't care about factory workers specifically? The one about states' budgets? Or what?
Quote:
Americans want cheap goods more than they want to help American factory workers get a job
Quote:
If Americans gave a damn about other Americans, they wouldn’t act as they do. To be more particular, I’d say there is plenty of empirical proof that Americans do not give a damn about American factory workers because Americans don’t check for the country of origin of their purchases
Quote:
Good luck with convincing Americans to care about other Americans having factory jobs in another state.
Quote:
If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians ...
Quote:
You best look at the ACE Hardware labels for Chinese goods.
1kiki, I thought you and Trump were deeply concerned about factory jobs?
Quote:
Does it disturb 1kiki's view of Americans that Texans don't feel that Trump voters in West Virginians are family? And Texans won't willing pay more to create jobs for people they never met in states that are far away?
Quote:After I countered with examples of people crossing state lines to participate in the Civil Rights movement, of crossing state lines to volunteer, and of donating to help people in another state after a natural disaster, SECOND post-edited it to read
1kiki, you could just as easily ask why nobody did anything to protect Blacks after Southern Reconstruction collapsed in 1877. My answer would be that the vast majority of Americans after 1877 did NOT share the values of 2016's Democratic Party toward blacks.
Quote:
1kiki, you could just as easily ask why nobody did anything to protect Blacks after Southern Reconstruction collapsed in 1877 until 1964. My answer would be that the vast majority of Americans between 1877 and 1964 did NOT share the values of 2016's Democratic Party toward blacks.
Quote:
If you're also not aware, factory workers in Indiana did not have much concern for the well-being of blacks in Texas from 1877 to 2016. Indifference runs both from the North toward the South and South to North.
Quote:
The states don't help each other. Occasionally the Feds help states when their neighboring states won't.
Quote:
1kiki, you won't find a line item in any state's budget in any year since the USA was founded for helping another state. For example, there is nothing in Texas' budget to help the welfare of unemployed Indiana factory workers.
Quote:
I’ve got one more example where American generosity ends at the state line.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
AT THE MOMENT, WHO is DOING SOMETHING to mitigate what Trump might do?
http://www.salon.com/2016/12/15/elizabeth-warren-leads-democrats-push-
to-block-donald-trumps-conflicts-of-interests-by-invoking-emoluments-clause-of-constitution/
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:These are all true without argument. Let's move on to your "Or what?"
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Tell me, SECOND, which argument are you making? The one where Americans don't care about other Americans? The one where Texans don't care about anyone else? The one where Americans don't care about factory workers specifically? The one about states' budgets? Or what?
I've heard it said that Trump may represent some approximation of Nietzsche's ubermensch, and I think that's deeply mistaken. But the reasons why it's mistaken can help us think about what Trump actually is. First, it's wrong because Trump represents everything Nietzsche hated. The philistinism, the mediocrity, the worshipping of money for its own sake — this is exactly the opposite of what Nietzsche advocated. By ubermensch, Nietzsche meant someone who could live beyond good and evil, beyond conventional values, who refused to appeal to herd instincts.
There's a passage in Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra in which he talks about the ubermensch, and I think it's quite relevant. Zarathustra, the protagonist, comes down from his mountain retreat and tells the people in the town square that he's going to teach them about the ubermensch, about what mankind should become, and the people are having none of it. They don't want to hear that they’ve stopped believing in God; that life is chaos; that nothing lasts; that they’re living in illusion.
Zarathustra realizes the people are too decadent to hear this and so he decides instead to teach them about the "Last Man." And the “Last Man” is the kind of person who doesn't want to think, who fears progress, who is risk-averse and desirous of comfort, who just wants everything to stay the same. Of course, the people erupt in joy when they hear this because this is what they really want.
This is what Trump is to me. This is what he represents. He's a kind of "Last Man" demagogue, telling the people that he's going make things great again, which is to say simple and how they once were — and they love him for it.
For Nietzsche, the celebration of a man like Trump was the inevitable result of a democratic culture built on the virtues of ignorance and self-fulfillment.
Nietzsche spent a lot of time thinking about decadence and resentment, and how it manifests in society. For Nietzsche, culture has to do with overcoming yourself, and anything that is static and non-moving is the death of culture. All this nostalgia and looking back you see from Trump supporters is poisonous to culture for Nietzsche because it stunts any possibility of progress.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Tell me, SECOND, which argument are you making? The one where Americans don't care about other Americans?" Is this true? These are all true without argument. I hope you realize your beliefs - or should I say propaganda - is irrelevant compared to the facts of the real world.
Quote:As another example, many people crossed state lines and race lines to participate in the Civil Rights movement.
Americans donated generously after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
9% of online users – or 13 million people – donated online for Katrina and Rita relief; The number of online donors is up 53% overall since January 2005
http://www.pewinternet.org/2005/11/24/13-million-americans-made-donati
ons-online-after-hurricanes-katrina-and-rita/
I could also mention the many union organizers who crossed state lines to help others unionize for better pay and working conditions.
So this statement - Americans don't care about other Americans -is, by the evidence of historical facts, proven wrong.
That makes YOUR assertion - that all statements are true - equally wrong.
In any case, since you freely claim things that are obviously untrue, and that are also easily demonstrated to be untrue, I'm not going to bother continuing. Btw, I hope you realize that out of all your posts, I scroll past your regurgitation of other people's opinions, and when it comes to your personal posts, I only go up to the first lie. Which means I probably scroll past 95% of them at a minimum.
It's too bad you're too dishonest for adult, rational discussion. I'm just curious why, in this particular discussion, a presumably sane person such as yourself would hew to a line of thought so patently divergent from reality and so easily shown to be untrue.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Other people pushing back against Trump
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/19/politics/tammy-duckworth-axe-files/i
ndex.html?iid=ob_lockedrail_topeditorial
Duckworth cautions Trump: 'We're not a military junta'
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
While Trump has yet to be sworn in and become president, can we just stipulate that there are many things that could be negatives and move on from there? Because, honestly, I can't imagine what good endlessly wallowing in anti-Trump obsession is going to do. The question is, what to do next.
I've been thinking about what good the traditional mediators - like the Sierra Club - might do, if any, at the political level. The problem as I see it is that they got comfortable playing the political game. We give them money, they meet and schmooze with politicians, nothing significant changes, and life goes on. If that process wasn't broken before, now it truly will be.
From my perspective, the best results have come from the Sierra Club, Clean Air Coalition, and others filing lawsuits against the federal EPA or individual states to get specific action.
The one tactic that the NRA has used very successfully is the targeted phone-call campaign. That could be an effort worthy of support as well.
And, in general, it might be worth while to support Sanders, Warren, and Duckworth as the major contenders (to date) against the Trump agenda.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I actually don't know where to begin, so I'll dive right in.
Quote:
Obama doubled our national debt and the only "jobs" that were "recovered" in the last 8 years were part time[\quote]
Hmmm, let's see...the country handed over to him in 2008 in near financial collapse
+Since President Barack Obama first took office:
+Homicides have dropped 13 percent, but gun sales have surged.
+The economy has added more than 9 million jobs, and the jobless rate has dropped to below the historical median.
+The number of long-term unemployed Americans has dropped by 614,000 under Obama, but it is still 761,000 higher than at the start of the Great Recession.
+Corporate profits are up 166 percent; real weekly wages are up 3.4 percent.
+There are 15 million fewer people who lack health insurance.
+Wind and solar power have nearly tripled, and now account for more than 5 percent of U.S. electricity.
+The federal debt has more than doubled — rising 116 percent — and big annual deficits have continued.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/01/obamas-numbers-january-2016-update/
by By Brooks Jackson
Posted on January 12, 2016
Apparently, facts comes around like Santa Claus. The name of the game for some "folk" is LIE YOUR ASS OFF; thems is the rules according to sick-O leadership. Hail Trump!
SGGNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"While Trump has yet to be sworn in and become president, can we just stipulate that there are many things that could be negatives and move on from there? Because, honestly, I can't imagine what good endlessly wallowing in anti-Trump obsession is going to do. The question is, what to do next."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, sorry...he doesn't get off that easy! No, fuck that. For 8 fucking years Obama has been scalded with unrelenting heat from the boobs in the peanut gallery. Especially from his Dick-head-ness. Fuck no, it's Trump's turn now. Fuck him if he can't stand the heat, the little fucking cry-baby. Trump hasn't been installed yet (the Kremlin spank) and he's already began his backpedaling campaign. Reneging on his campaign promises. Of course, that's what politicians do, and of course, he's doing exactly what he was claiming to be against and expel the corrupt. Ooops!
Why can't we do both. Put him into a political vise grip with the Dems who dare to dream big! Like Shumer, Sanders, Warren, Duckworth and Cummings, and publicly humiliate Drumpf with constant bombardment by calling him out on the different promises he made.
I'm not of the mind, like the Obamas, of going High when they go Low. I'm for beating him to a bloody pulp with a 2x4, like the mangy dog that he is, then going on to right the ship with true patriots. So, I'm for giving him a boot in the ass, a "git out the way bitch" and let the real professionals do the job. This idiot is playing monopoly with house money. This fucking guy is taking the helm of the Titanic, but thinks that he's steering with a PlayStation control (fucking moron). I say Fuck Him, ridicule his ass as harshly as possible, but make sure that the right people have the real control over the country (not these Neo-Fucking Nazis).
MacArthur and FDR are turning over in their graves.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
For 8 fucking years Obama has been scalded with unrelenting heat from the boobs in the peanut gallery. Especially from his Dick-head-ness.
I'm not saying I disagree - or agree. I just have no idea what you mean. afaik the worst thing the repubs did wasn't name-calling, it was being the party of 'no'. So who is Dick-head-ness?
Quote:You seem to have WAAYyy more energy than I do. I'll stick with one. You'll have to forge on ahead with both.
Why can't we do both.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'm from the old school. You hit me, I don't go High, as the president has graciously shown. I hit you back twice as hard. That's how I've survived (funny thing about that, it's how Frump operates. Imagine that!) It's a New York thing!
Dick-Head-Ness...basically, the Grand Poobah, His Drumpfness, you know, the Great White Dope. For the next 4 years, I will be doing this no matter what.
Like I said - FUCK HIM!
Don't expect you to agree, or not. By the way, it's not about name-calling. It's about lack of respect for the office, and the man. A man who studied and worked to get to the Top Spot in the entire world. Nothing was handed to him by daddy. He was not afforded the luxuries the Donald was provided and yet became POTUS, despite the obstacles that face a man of color in this day and age. Let's set that aside.
Do you honestly, and I mean honestly, believe that THIS man is qualified?
The party of "No." To actually do nothing to advance the country that they supposedly serve. Name-calling is nothing compared to the concerted effort to embarrass and delegitimize the POTUS. Imagine...if the Dems would have done that to Reagan or Poppa Bush?
I am not speaking strictly in regards to race, only the most important and influential office in the world. Repubs embarrassed the country and themselves....and now we go a step further by allowing the fucking Russians
to run our country and hand-pick our next president.
That speaks volumes.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:
For 8 fucking years Obama has been scalded with unrelenting heat from the boobs in the peanut gallery. Especially from his Dick-head-ness.
I'm not saying I disagree - or agree. I just have no idea what you mean. afaik the worst thing the repubs did wasn't name-calling, it was being the party of 'no'. So who is Dick-head-ness?Quote:You seem to have WAAYyy more energy than I do. I'll stick with one.
Why can't we do both.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
MacArthur and FDR are turning over in their graves.
Just turning over? They are spinning!
I hav Lincoln'z skeleton mounted to a generator. Free electrisity sins 1998! I coud probably add the founding fatherz and bekum a local power company!
I appreciate your riled uppedness. If the averaj Dem voter wuz 1/4 az enerjized az you, we woudnt be in this mess.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
1kiki, I am dishonest you say? Your example was not honest. You brought up 13 million contributing to Katrina and Rita victims. Would 13 million also vote in state and local elections? Yes, they would. That only leaves 310 million other Americans who did not contribute aid, even as little as 25 cents, to victims for whatever selfish or political reasons. Maybe that 310 million don't believe in charity toward others? Maybe they are simply indifferent toward people in faraway states? I'm just saying.
But perhaps some of the 310 million voted. Out of that 310 million who did NOTHING to help victims, the Republican party could very easily form a permanently ruling majority in many states to kill government aid for larger and more enduring problems than Katrina and Rita.
Hurricanes are now out of season until June 1st, but poverty is year round. It will take more than 13 million Americans to permanently solve poverty, especially if the other 310 million Americans object or simply don't help for whatever reasons.
Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah, Scrooge 1kiki!
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Tell me, SECOND, which argument are you making? The one where Americans don't care about other Americans?" Is this true? These are all true without argument. I hope you realize your beliefs - or should I say propaganda - is irrelevant compared to the facts of the real world.Quote:As another example, many people crossed state lines and race lines to participate in the Civil Rights movement.
Americans donated generously after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
9% of online users – or 13 million people – donated online for Katrina and Rita relief; The number of online donors is up 53% overall since January 2005
http://www.pewinternet.org/2005/11/24/13-million-americans-made-donati
ons-online-after-hurricanes-katrina-and-rita/
I could also mention the many union organizers who crossed state lines to help others unionize for better pay and working conditions.
So this statement - Americans don't care about other Americans -is, by the evidence of historical facts, proven wrong.
That makes YOUR assertion - that all statements are true - equally wrong.
In any case, since you freely claim things that are obviously untrue, and that are also easily demonstrated to be untrue, I'm not going to bother continuing. Btw, I hope you realize that out of all your posts, I scroll past your regurgitation of other people's opinions, and when it comes to your personal posts, I only go up to the first lie. Which means I probably scroll past 95% of them at a minimum.
It's too bad you're too dishonest for adult, rational discussion. I'm just curious why, in this particular discussion, a presumably sane person such as yourself would hew to a line of thought so patently divergent from reality and so easily shown to be untrue.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I can see why 1kiki does not want "endlessly wallowing in anti-Trump obsession" thanks to 1kiki's selling the idea that Trump is no worse than Hillary.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
While Trump has yet to be sworn in and become president, can we just stipulate that there are many things that could be negatives and move on from there? Because, honestly, I can't imagine what good endlessly wallowing in anti-Trump obsession is going to do. The question is, what to do next.
...
And, in general, it might be worth while to support Sanders, Warren, and Duckworth as the major contenders (to date) against the Trump agenda.
Sanders and Warren and Duckworth won't be able to hold back the Republican tide. It will be the King Canute legend: No matter what Sanders and Company do, the tide will eventually go back out again without Sanders' help and the Republicans in Congress will lose some of their absolute control. In the meantime we are all getting wet thanks to people who were too disgusted to vote for either Trump or Hillary. Or who used their vote to send a message to Hillary. That would be 1kiki, would it not?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Canute_and_the_waves
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump is whining about Hillary getting 3,000,000 more votes than he did:
Quote:
Campaigning to win the Electoral College is much more difficult & sophisticated than the popular vote. Hillary focused on the wrong states! I would have done even better in the election, if that is possible, if the winner was based on popular vote - but would campaign differently
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/811562990285848576
Trump is apparently still chafing at critics' claims that he lacks a popular mandate. This is possibly because Trump has never acknowledged that FBI Director James Comey’s infamous letter on the 28th actually won the election. And the letter did it all by itself, without any help from Trump or his campaign.
I think Trump should honor Comey’s original letter by framing and hanging it in a prominent location in the Oval Office for all his guests to read.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3198222/Letter.pdf
A lot of people really did switch to Donald Trump at the last minute:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-really-did-switch-to-trump-
at-the-last-minute/
Quote:
While no one moved from Trump to Clinton, 0.9 percent of our respondents moved from Clinton to Trump....Trump also outpaced Clinton among people who were previously undecided or third-party backers, with 3.1 percent of respondents moving from those categories to Trump while just 2.3 percent did the same for Clinton. Clinton also saw 3.1 percent of her October supporters defecting to third-party candidates or becoming undecided. Trump lost just 1.7 percent.
Let's add this up:
Trump gained 0.9 + 3.1 - 1.7 = +2.3 percent
Clinton gained -0.9 + 2.3 - 3.1 = -1.7 percent
The October poll ended on the 24th. FBI Director James Comey released his infamous letter on the 28th. The November poll then showed Hillary Clinton with a net loss of 4 percent compared to Trump.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:That list would be
Originally posted by G:
I realize that communications professor Melissa Zimdars is full of great intentions, but she's just posted a list of what not to do for future misinformation/fake news sites. "If you want to be taken seriously, don't do these:"
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53
V_81ZyitM/preview
Let's create some fake news to enrage Republicans: "I hear a rumor that Bernie scratched the initials DJT on bullets for his assault rifle." Critical thinkers would already know that did not happen, but Republican would not care. The GOP rage would know no limits, if they hear this fake news.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-gun-policy/
Republicans don't care about fake or true. They can't stop believing fake facts, even if a Professor recommends they stop. Even Democrats don't care enough to do anything beyond complain very softly and in a calm tone of voice about fake facts. The classic article explains in "Timid Liberals Blew the Election by Flinching at Hillary Clinton's Email Server"
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/timid-liberals-flinching-hillar
y-clintons-email-server
From start to finish, on every TV channel, there was misleading, call it fake, news about Hillary's email. After summarizing what was true and what was misleading, the article ends here:
Quote:
Liberals should have defended her with gusto from the start. There was never anything here and no evidence that Clinton did anything seriously wrong. And yet we didn't. Many liberals just steered clear of the whole thing. Others—including me sometimes—felt like every defense had to contain a series of caveats acknowledging that, yes, the private server was a bad idea, harumph harumph. And some others didn't even go that far. The result was that in the public eye, both liberals and conservatives were more or less agreeing that there was a lot of smoke here. So smoke there was. And now Donald Trump is a month away from being president.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Why? What American interests does this cross? I have asked over and what our AMERICAN interests are and yanno what?? NONE OF YOU KNOWS. But If you could figure our what our actual interests are, you'd be a lot less likely be be spun around by our elites and their fake news. Please, think long and hard what our AMERICAN interests are before you start getting all hysterical about "Russia".
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
You actually think that Drumpf has America's interests in mind when cow-towing to Putin & Russia? Yes, please do think long and hard about American, Russian, Putin and Drumpf interests. One thing is certain, kissing Putin's ass is in no way beneficial to the U.S. Drumpf's only interests are, like Putin's, lining his pockets with cash and liberated properties.
Do you really believe that Putin wants America to succeed? Drumpf is living in La La Land and Putin knows it. He's toying with him.
SGG
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here, here!
Just keeping this thread at the top. See, at least I admit it!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:That list would be
Originally posted by G:
I realize that communications professor Melissa Zimdars is full of great intentions, but she's just posted a list of what not to do for future misinformation/fake news sites. "If you want to be taken seriously, don't do these:"
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53
V_81ZyitM/preview
Let's create some fake news to enrage Republicans: "I hear a rumor that Bernie scratched the initials DJT on bullets for his assault rifle." Critical thinkers would already know that did not happen, but Republican would not care. The GOP rage would know no limits, if they hear this fake news.
http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-gun-policy/
Republicans don't care about fake or true. They can't stop believing fake facts, even if a Professor recommends they stop. Even Democrats don't care enough to do anything beyond complain very softly and in a calm tone of voice about fake facts. The classic article explains in "Timid Liberals Blew the Election by Flinching at Hillary Clinton's Email Server"
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/timid-liberals-flinching-hillar
y-clintons-email-server
From start to finish, on every TV channel, there was misleading, call it fake, news about Hillary's email. After summarizing what was true and what was misleading, the article ends here:Quote:
Liberals should have defended her with gusto from the start. There was never anything here and no evidence that Clinton did anything seriously wrong. And yet we didn't. Many liberals just steered clear of the whole thing. Others—including me sometimes—felt like every defense had to contain a series of caveats acknowledging that, yes, the private server was a bad idea, harumph harumph. And some others didn't even go that far. The result was that in the public eye, both liberals and conservatives were more or less agreeing that there was a lot of smoke here. So smoke there was. And now Donald Trump is a month away from being president.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Why yes, I do. And yes, you are.
Originally posted by second:
1kiki, I am dishonest you say?
Quote:I was just responding to YOUR claim. YOU said AMERICANS don't CARE about other AMERICANS. I showed they do. Now you want to move the goalposts to. State budgets. Voting. Crossings state lines. Texans. You're constantly shifting the goal posts. Who DIDN'T contribute. Like here:
Originally posted by second:
Your example was not honest.
Quote:THAT'S dishonest. (BTW, when you make a general statement - 'AMERICANS don't CARE about other AMERICANS' - even a small exception makes it false. But a 10% exception - for people donating specifically online - is a major exception.)
Originally posted by second: Would 13 million also vote in state and local elections? Yes, they would. That only leaves 310 million other Americans who did not contribute aid, even as little as 25 cents, to victims for whatever selfish or political reasons.
YOUR CLAIM IS FALSE.
Ethically, practically, and logically false.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The dissection begins. OBVIOUSLY, CLINTON DID SOMETHING WRONG. OBVIOUSLY, TRUMP DID SOMETHING RIGHT.
To deny that is to deny reality.
Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-12-23/top-white-house-economist-adm
its-94-all-new-jobs-under-obama-were-part-time
Top Ex-White House Economist Admits 94% Of All New Jobs Under Obama Were Part-Time
Just over six years ago, in December of 2010, we wrote "Charting America's Transformation To A Part-Time Worker Society", in which we predicted - and showed - that in light of the underlying changes resulting from the second great depression, whose full impacts remain masked by trillions in monetary stimulus … America is shifting from a traditional work force, one where the majority of new employment is retained on a full-time basis, to a "gig" economy, where workers are severely disenfranchised, and enjoy far less employment leverage, job stability and perks than their pre-crash peers. It also explains why despite the 4.5% unemployment rate, which the Fed has erroneously assumed is indicative of job market at "capacity", wage growth not only refuses to materialize, but as we showed yesterday, the growth in real disposable personal income was the lowest since 2014.
When we first penned our article, it was dubbed "fringe" tinfoil hattery, or in the latest vernacular, "fake news."
Fast forward 6 years, when a report by Harvard and Princeton economists Lawrence Katz and Alan Krueger, confirms exactly what we warned. In their study, the duo show that from 2005 to 2015, the proportion of Americans workers engaged in what they refer to as “alternative work” soared during the Obama era, from 10.7% in 2005 to 15.8% in 2015. Alternative, or "gig" work is defined as "temporary help agency workers, on-call workers, contract company workers, independent contractors or freelancers", and is generally unsteady, without a fixed paycheck and with virtually no benefits.
The two economists also found that each of the common types of alternative work increased from 2005 to 2015—with the largest changes in the number of independent contractors and workers provided by contract firms, such as janitors that work full-time at a particular office, but are paid by a janitorial services firm.
Krueger, who until 2013 was also the top White House economist serving as chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers under Obama, was "surprised" by the finding.
Quoted by quartz, he said “We find that 94% of net job growth in the past decade was in the alternative work category,” said Krueger. “And over 60% was due to the [the rise] of independent contractors, freelancers and contract company workers.” In other words, nearly all of the 10 million jobs created between 2005 and 2015 were not traditional nine-to-five employment.
While the finding is good news for some, such as graphic designers and lawyers who hate going to an office, for whom new technology and Obamacare has made it more appealing to become an independent contractor. But for those seeking a steady administrative assistant office job, the market is grim. It also explains why despite an apparent recovery in the labor market, wage growth has been non-existant, due to the lack of career advancement and salary increase options for this vast cohort which was hired over the past decade.
The decline of conventional full-time work has impacted every demographic. Whether this change is good or bad depends on what kinds of jobs people want. “Workers seeking full-time, steady work have lost,” said Krueger. He then added, perhaps sarcastically, that “while many of those who value flexibility and have a spouse with a stead
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The dissection begins. OBVIOUSLY, CLINTON DID SOMETHING WRONG. OBVIOUSLY, TRUMP DID SOMETHING RIGHT.
To deny that is to deny reality.
The dissection from the other side:
As co-chair (with Ed Rollins) of the Great America PAC, OC political strategist Eric Beach had a key role in Donald Trump's stunning electoral win. And the PAC will continue to promote Trump's causes even after he takes office. Beach gives an insider's account of a wild election.
http://www.pbssocal.org/programs/inside-oc/pac-man-part-1/
http://www.pbssocal.org/programs/inside-oc/pac-man-part-2/
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The dissection begins. OBVIOUSLY, CLINTON DID SOMETHING WRONG. OBVIOUSLY, TRUMP DID SOMETHING RIGHT.
To deny that is to deny reality.
How the Obama Coalition Crumbled, Leaving an Opening for Trump
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/upshot/how-the-obama-coalition-crumb
led-leaving-an-opening-for-trump.html
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:To deny 1kiki's assumptions is to deny reality? Now 1kiki has "The Truth"? [/sarcasm off]
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The dissection begins. OBVIOUSLY, CLINTON DID SOMETHING WRONG. OBVIOUSLY, TRUMP DID SOMETHING RIGHT.
To deny that is to deny reality.
A letter to historians of the future — the 2016 election really was dominated by a controversy over emails
by Matthew Yglesias
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/25/14037576/trump-won-because-
of-emails
To Whom It May Concern:
Sitting at my desk in the winter of 2016-2017, I have no way of knowing what the future holds for the United States under the administration of Donald Trump. I hope it will all turn out for the best. But I fear that it will not. The election of a man temperamentally unfit to the presidency and lacking in the basic qualifications to perform the job, backed up by congressional allies who seem determined to ignore his flagrant corruption, is an alarming situation. The odds that he will systematically corrupt American institutions and install an authoritarian kleptocracy or blunder into some kind of catastrophic war seem simply too high to entirely discount.
And if something big and awful does happen, I know from my own reading of history that the scholars of the future will be sorely tempted to look for causes that are big in proportion to the consequences.
Historians will write of a growing trend toward partisan polarization and a brewing sense of political crisis dating back to Bill Clinton’s impeachment in 1998. They’ll note the projected end of America’s white majority, the geopolitical revolution induced by Russia’s reinvention of itself as an international beacon of cultural conservatism, and the corrosive effect of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. The “failures of neoliberalism” will come in for scrutiny.
All true and all important. But my message to the future is this. No matter how stupid it sounds, and no matter how much political and journalistic elites on all sides of America’s toxic politics began trying to ignore it as soon as the votes were counted, the dominant issue of the 2016 campaign was email server management.
The email story dominated the campaign
If that sounds far too boring and unimportant to have conceivably dominated the 2016 presidential campaign, then it is difficult to disagree with you. And yet the facts are what they are. Indeed, by September of 2015 — over a year before the voting — Washington Post political writer Chris Cillizza had already written at least 50 items about the email controversy.
Email fever reached its peak on two separate major occasions. One was when Comey closed the investigation. Instead of simply saying “we looked into it and there was no crime,” Comey sought to immunize himself from Clinton critics by breaking with standard procedure to offer extended negative commentary on Clinton’s behavior. He said she was “extremely careless.”
Comey then brought the email story back to the center of the campaign in late October by writing a letter to Congress indicating that the email case had been reopened due to new discoveries on Anthony Weiner’s laptop. It turned out that the new discoveries were an awfully flimsy basis for a subpoena, and the subpoena turned up nothing.
This all still sounds unimportant, but it was not at the time:
The New York Times dedicated 100 percent of its above-the-fold space to coverage of Comey’s letter to Congress.
Throughout the campaign season, network newscasts dedicated more time to Clinton’s email server stories than to stories about all policy issues combined.
Donald Trump’s campaign rallies featured regular “lock her up” chants, centering the email server as the opposition’s main criticism of Clinton.
Across five television networks and six major newspapers, 11 percent of campaign coverage was stories about Clinton’s email server.
Critically, one useful function of email-b
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
letter to historians of the future — the 2016 election really was dominated by a controversy over emails-SECONDHAND
Oh, is this spin-the-wheel-of-excuses? Again?
Racism
Misogyny
Deplorables
Hacked vote counts
Comey
Fake news
BUT PUTIN!!!
The problem with the emails isn't that they were leaked (not hacked, leaked) but that they showed the real DNC to the public: DNC mired in corruption.
Yanno, it's not like the DNC wasn't told. Hubby and I must have gotten at least five of those written "opinion polls" from the DNC (where I had to write in my top three concerns because they weren't part of their "push poll", and guess which ones they were?) and every time they called, which was at least six times, hubby or I gave them at least a 10-minute earful. The problem was, they weren't listening and they didn't intend to listen.
Jimminy crimminy, SECONDHAND. The DNC needs a new mission, aside from representing banks, neocons, and big pharma.
Oooh! oooh! I have an idea! How about representing working-class Americans???
So stop the grieving process, that time is over. Get on your phone, and start reforming the DNC.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I love that you quote me in your signature, Signym, but per your usual, you are full of it. Do you have a PhD in Propaganda and Misdirection?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Signym is a lying sack of shit."- SECOND
A lot of people really did switch to Donald Trump at the last minute based on Comey’s letter about email. Actually there were two letters: Oct 28th and just before the election. The first said that Comey, once again, was trying to put Hillary behind bars for a felony. Please standby for the Justice Dept’s indictment.
The second letter said that Comey could not prove that Hillary should be imprisoned, but it implied that voters should wait for further developments after the election, when Comey would once again reopen the email server question.
Both letters made all the difference in the world:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-really-did-switch-to-trump-
at-the-last-minute/
Quote:
While no one moved from Trump to Clinton, 0.9 percent of our respondents moved from Clinton to Trump....Trump also outpaced Clinton among people who were previously undecided or third-party backers, with 3.1 percent of respondents moving from those categories to Trump while just 2.3 percent did the same for Clinton. Clinton also saw 3.1 percent of her October supporters defecting to third-party candidates or becoming undecided. Trump lost just 1.7 percent.
Let's add this up:
Trump gained 0.9 + 3.1 - 1.7 = +2.3 percent
Clinton gained -0.9 + 2.3 - 3.1 = -1.7 percent
The October poll ended on the 24th. FBI Director James Comey released his infamous letter on the 28th. The November poll then showed Hillary Clinton with a net loss of 4 percent compared to Trump.
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3198222/Letter.pdf
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Quote:
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't awareSignym is a lying sack of shitaware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
I love that you quote me in your signature, Signym, but peryourusual,you are full of it. Do you have a PhD in Propaganda and MisdirectionI have to lie to make my point = SECOND
That's pretty ballsy, SECOND, lying egregiously where everyone can see it and then calling me a liar. I know that 1KIKI has pointed out your many, MANY "misquotes". I'm not going to make an exhaustive list, but I know that it happens with you, a lot.
Quote:
A lot of people really did switch to Donald Trump at the last minute based on Comey’s letter about email. Actually there were two letters: Oct 28th
This was the letter that told Congress that more emails had been found on Anthony Wiener's laptop
Quote:Which said that the emails weren't anything new.
and just before the election.
Quote:The first said that the investigation was re-opened because more evidence had been found. I see the source of your confusion: you not only misrepresent what people post here, you also misrepresent history, to yourself.
The first said that Comey, once again, was trying to put Hillary behind bars for a felony. Please standby for the Justice Dept’s indictment.= SECOND
Quote:Man, YOU are full of it! Here is the full text of that letter; it's very short and there are no "implications" in it at all.
The second letter said that Comey could not prove that Hillary should be imprisoned, but it implied that voters should wait for further developments after the election, when Comey would once again reopen the email server question. - SECOND
Quote:
Dear Messrs. Chairmen:
I write to supplement my October 28, 2016 letter that notified you the FBI would be taking additional investigative steps with respect to former Secretary of State Clinton's use of a personal email server. Since my letter, the FBI investigative team has been working around the clock to process and review a large volume of emails from a device obtained in connection with an unrelated criminal investigation. During that process, we reviewed all of the communications that were to or from Hillary Clinton while she was Secretary of State.
Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July with respect to Secretary Clinton.
I am very grateful to the professionals at the FBI for doing an extraordinary amount of high-quality work in a short period of time.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/06/read
-full-text-comeys-letter-new-clinton-emails/93398304/
Quote:
Both letters made all the difference in the world:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-really-did-switch-to-trump-
at-the-last-minute/
Why are you even referencing polls that everyone should know by now were egregiously wrong? Once you start using bad data, your conclusions are bound to be wrong. It's the GIGO (garbage in = garbage out) problem.
-----
What I get out of your screed THIS time, is that it was all Comey's fault. Not the leaked DNC emails, but Hillary's State Department emails, which is another thing entirely. And not posted by Wikileaks, but found by the FBI. So in other words, the fault is NOT RUSSIA.
Right? can we agree on that? Or are you going to circle around to that point again, and keep shifting the blame until you finally stop spinning that wheel of blame, and finally settle on something?
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
&
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
¤°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸,ø¤°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸,ø¤°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸,ø¤°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤°º¤ø,¸
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
The dissection begins. OBVIOUSLY, CLINTON DID SOMETHING WRONG. OBVIOUSLY, TRUMP DID SOMETHING RIGHT.
To deny that is to deny reality.
Quote:WHO is president, again? How did that happen? Clinton did something wrong. Trump did something right. If the balance had been different, the outcome would have been different.
Originally posted by SECOND:
To deny 1kiki's assumptions is to deny reality?
Quote:No, not "The Truth" cupcake. Just a grip on reality.
Originally posted by SECOND:
Now 1kiki has "The Truth"? [/sarcasm off]
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:SECOND, even YOUR OWN SOURCE doesn't say that. SHEESH! does your lying NEVER stop?
Originally posted by second:
Both letters made all the difference in the world:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-really-did-switch-to-trump-
at-the-last-minute/
Quote:
As to what moved these Americans in the final weeks of the campaign, the panel has little to say. ...
Still, we shouldn’t discount the possibility that voters might have gravitated to Trump anyhow. Research has long suggested that over the course of a campaign, partisans come home to their party’s candidate. Between mid-October and our post-election wave, Trump picked up almost 4 percentage points from people who had backed Romney four years before, suggesting that Republican identifiers were doing just that.
But in an election of surprises, Trump’s victory might have come from small electoral shifts in the campaign’s final weeks that were surprisingly unsurprising.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just as an observation, I've noticed over the decades that republican-ism fosters grass-roots action and populist movements, while democrat-ism co-ops grass roots movements and fosters dependency on government caretaking and action.
That's how so many school boards ended up in republican hands, why county governments are so often republican, and how - in 2010 - republicans were able to win so many state legislatures, governorships, and Congress. They were ready and poised at the lower levels.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym and 1kiki could be the same person. Both have the same style and concerns.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
That's pretty ballsy, SECOND, lying egregiously where everyone can see it and then calling me a liar. I know that 1KIKI has pointed out your many, MANY "misquotes". I'm not going to make an exhaustive list, but I know that it happens with you, a lot.
Signym, what is really ballsy, you lying sack of shit, is Trump settling Trump University for $25 million. And Signym, your long exegesis for Comey’s two letters about Hillary’s emails is as worthless as a Trump promise. I’ll attach the second letter below.
Trump insisted during a campaign debate that even though he could have settled the cases on any number of occasions, he refused to do so “out of principle.” On Dec 19th, the Judge accepted Trump’s settlement. That is Trump standing up for his principles.
A reporter who attended Trump U wrote: The event turned out to be nothing more than a two-hour sales pitch for a three-day workshop costing nearly $1,500. The “priceless information” on making millions from real estate promised in an ad could be boiled down to this: Buy low, sell high.
After I wrote about my seminar experience, Trump called to say he was going to sue me for the “inaccurate and libelous” things I’d written. He also contacted my editor to say that I’m a “nasty guy” and that the Los Angeles Times should fire me.
He never sued. I’m still employed.
www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-trump-university-settle
ment-20161223-story.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Are you aware, 1kiki, that your reading comprehension is as worthless as you are? You best go back and read that again and do the math, again. The two letters from Comey moved the election in Trump's favor by 4%. The fault I find is Obama not kicking Comey once Comey told the Dept of Justice he would be sending a letter to Congress. Obama let it happen rather than back the Dept of Justice, which recommended that the letter should not be sent because it interferes with the election.
Obama is saving for his Memoirs exactly why he did nothing. A Republican in the same position would have stopped Comey, even if it caused a crisis with Congress and threats of impeachment.
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:SECOND, even YOUR OWN SOURCE doesn't say that. SHEESH! does your lying NEVER stop?
Originally posted by second:
Both letters made all the difference in the world:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voters-really-did-switch-to-trump-
at-the-last-minute/Quote:
As to what moved these Americans in the final weeks of the campaign, the panel has little to say. ...
Still, we shouldn’t discount the possibility that voters might have gravitated to Trump anyhow. Research has long suggested that over the course of a campaign, partisans come home to their party’s candidate. Between mid-October and our post-election wave, Trump picked up almost 4 percentage points from people who had backed Romney four years before, suggesting that Republican identifiers were doing just that.
But in an election of surprises, Trump’s victory might have come from small electoral shifts in the campaign’s final weeks that were surprisingly unsurprising.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Where did I "lie"? Can you point it out to me? (I'll bet you can't.)
Signym, what is really ballsy, you lying sack of shit...
Quote:And there you are: moving the goalposts. Again!
... is Trump settling Trump University for $25 million.= SECONDRATE
Yep, spinning that wheel of who to blame next!
Throwing more shit against the wall to see what sticks! Quote:I think what really chaps your ass is that you adamantly accused Comey of being The Cause of Hillary's loss. Just following your logic, that means >>> NOT RUSSIA. (Unless you're accusing Comey of being a Russian agent?)
And Signym, your long exegesis for Comey’s two letters about Hillary’s emails is as worthless as a Trump promise.
Quote:Too late, I already posted the full text.
I’ll attach the second letter below. -SECOND
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hillary's 1st Loss: Electoral Spanking
Hillary's 2nd Loss: Jill Stein Recount in states that allowed it showed that there were actually more Trump votes than originally counted. States that didn't allow it were funds entirely non-refundable to idiot Democrats that gave more to the Green Party than the Green Party has ever raised in the history of the Green Party.
Hillary's 3rd Loss: Electoral Votes?
Whoops... 1 Single Faithless Elector voted against Trump. 5 Faithless Electors voted against Hillary even though she didn't have a chance of winning.
Even though he "Cray".....
And P.S. I'm sick of hearing about how mysoginists think women aren't funny.
Although her character is abused by the largely male cast, "Sweet Dee" is one of the funniest comedieans on the show, let alone being a woman.
Women are smart and funny. It just happens that the funny ones are people you personally know or almost non-knowns and not the ones the Media tells you are funny on SNL.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:From YOUR SOURCE:
Originally posted by second:
Are you aware, 1kiki, that your reading comprehension is as worthless as you are? You best go back and read that again and do the math, again. The two letters from Comey moved the election in Trump's favor by 4%.
As to what moved these Americans in the final weeks of the campaign, the panel has little to say. But I'm SURE you can find a quote from YOUR SOURCE that says 538 knows it was those 2 letters FOR SURE! Quote and cite required. I won't be waiting.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Are you aware, 1kiki, that your reading comprehension is as worthless as you are? You best go back and read that again and do the math, again. The two letters from Comey moved the election in Trump's favor by 4%.
WOW! The POWER of the FAKE NEWS.
Megan Kelly getting 20 Million Dollars next year just for taking her old bones in front of the TV with a little bit of makeup shaking those barely B cups in front of idiots who still watch the Fake News on either side....
3 weeks before that, Hillary was up in far more than barely double digits. That's when Nate Silver gave Trump less than a 3% chance of winning the election.
Quit sitting in your shit pot.
Blacks didn't vote at all.
People who never voted before or haven't voted in 20 years registered adn voted for Trump.
And worst of all, Educated White Women voted for Trump.
Go eat Balls
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Nate Silver is the founder and editor in chief of FiveThirtyEight. His chart of Trump:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
3 weeks before that, Hillary was up in far more than barely double digits. That's when Nate Silver gave Trump less than a 3% chance of winning the election.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now
Trump vs Rogue One, movie reviewed at Variety
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/rogue-one-donald-trump-felicity-jones-
1201947992/
The movie’s one true note of revelation is its explosive topicality, which feels both accidental and inevitable. The relevance wasn’t planned — and if it had been, “Rogue One” would probably be just another didactic liberal message movie. (A rumor fueled by Donald Trump supporters, that the film was rewritten to include anti-Trump sentiments, has turned out to be totally false.) Yet part of the power of “Rogue One” is that as you watch it, the fight against the Empire expresses something in the air, something beyond itself.
I acknowledge: As part of the 53 percent of the electorate who didn’t vote for Donald Trump, it’s easy enough for me to say that the Empire, with its top-down authoritarian menace, equals what the gathering Trump administration is starting to look like. But my real point isn’t about facile fascism. It’s about how the ragtag, hanging-by-a-thread spirit of the Rebel Alliance connects, to an astonishing degree, with the dazed and confused mood that anti-Trump voters now find themselves in. The true subject of “Rogue One” is what it takes to get up and fight, just when you’re starting to be convinced that all hope is lost. Right now, more Democratic voters than you can count feel that way. We feel like our government has been taken over by a figure who got voted in because his supporters wanted, with some legitimacy, to see him “drain the swamp” — and instead, here’s a man who is already rattling the American nuclear saber (and talking about making it bigger and longer), as if it were his own personal Death Star.
For a lot of people, it’s impossible to watch “Rogue One” without thinking of that parallel. The Death Star, the weapon that incarnates the spirit of the Empire, has a power of annihilation that in “Rogue One” — far more than in “Star Wars” — plays off the imagery of nuclear detonation. The movie isn’t about trade policy or racism (though the multi-ethnic cast, led by the Mexican-born Diego Luna’s utilitarian cool as Cassian Andor, makes its own statement). The explicit metaphorical upshot of “Rogue One” is that people who dream of wiping things out with nuclear weapons have to be stopped. They need to be defeated. And Trump is already flirting with becoming that person. You can just imagine his Twitter review of “Rogue One”: “The new Stars Wars movie is junk. A dying franchise. Will someone bring back Harrison Ford — I am tired of these rebel wimps. Boring!”
You’d be hard-pressed to pinpoint where Donald Trump’s fantasies leave off and his policies begin. The galactically ginormous success of “Star Wars” gave rise, over time, to the preeminence of fantasy culture. And while I don’t want to serve up an overly tidy cause-and-effect equation, it seems naïve to imagine that the new, fake-news America has no connection to our all-fantasy-all-the-time movie culture. On a mass scale, we no longer want (or expect) reality at the movies. That makes it easier to stop wanting — or expecting — reality in other places. Put another way: How many of the people who voted for Donald Trump really care if he’s a fantasy-based or even fraudulent politician? He’s an exciting character. That’s what matters. Maybe that’s why “Rogue One” packs a political punch. The movie speaks to its audience in the language of fantasy, and that has a special power when the leadership it’s commenting on threatens to leave reality-based thinking in the dustbin of history.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives,
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND, why do you keep referencing Nate Silver? The guy was right, once. But wrong so often afterwards. His mistake was that he believed the fake polls ... yeah, those polls where Democrats were "oversampled", which led to fake results. Which led to your fake analysis.
If you want to do a real analysis, go look at the Investors Business Daily poll, which (unlike Nate Silver's data) took results every day, and was much more accurate.
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:More accurate? Signym, your preferred pollster is still saying that “Trump Holds 2-Point Lead Over Clinton As Election Day Arrives”. 45% to 43%. But in the real world, Hillary has the 2-point lead. Hillary: 48.1% to Trump: 46.0%
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND, If you want to do a real analysis, go look at the Investors Business Daily poll, which (unlike Nate Silver's data) took results every day, and was much more accurate.
http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll
www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president
Signym, Trump cheated. The actual winner of the election is Comey and his two letters to Congress about Hillary being a felony who needs jail time. Comey claimed he was merely notifying Congress that he was energetically seeking the evidence to lockup Hillary and nobody about to vote, according to Comey, will assume Hillary is guilty until a jury convicts her.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/21/14025198/trump-undecided-fi
nal-weeks-survey
Signym’s pollster:
www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
New Home Buyers Are Paying a $600 Trump Tax Per Year on Mortgages
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/home-buyers-are-paying-600-trum
p-tax-new-mortgages
Matt Yglesias tweeted yesterday about mortgage interest rates going up after the election, and that got me curious about just how quickly they spiked upward after we all learned that Donald Trump would be our next president. The chart above shows the answer: pretty darn quickly.
On November 8, the average 30-year fixed mortgage was available at a rate of 3.53 percent. Within two days it had gone up 21 basis points, and within a week it had gone up 43 basis points. Adjustable mortgages spiked upward too, though not as dramatically, and both rates continued to drift upward until December 14. Then they spiked upward again thanks to the Fed's decision to increase interest rates.
So what does this mean for your ordinary working-class joe who voted for Trump? Well, for a 30-year fixed mortgage on a $200,000 loan, the monthly payment has increased from about $900 to $950. That's an extra $600 per year.
Generally speaking, this spike was due to the fact that everyone panicked after Trump won, causing treasury bond yields to jump 35 basis points in a week. More specifically, however, is it due to China selling US treasuries in greater quantities than usual? Maybe! But whatever the cause, if you waited until after the election to buy a house, you're paying a pretty stiff Trump penalty.
http://myf.red/g/ccse 
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What are you talking about "Trump Tax"
Obama is still our Aweful 45th President after 8 years of equal and greater terribleness...
Seriously Second... WTF?
Hillary lost 3 times so the new tactic is to blame as much as you can before Obama hands over the horrible reins?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND, why do you keep referencing Nate Silver? The guy was right, once. But wrong so often afterwards. His mistake was that he believed the fake polls ... yeah, those polls where Democrats were "oversampled", which led to fake results. Which led to your fake analysis.
Nate Silver is DONE....
I could jack off and randomly hit a bullseye at any pool hall in the area.
Just remember that as bad as Nate Silver was at predicting the President, he was much worse when Trump won the Primary.
I respect the always nearly accurate "Gallup Polls" who said "fuk this. My name is Paul and this is between y'all".
I agree that noboyd should listen to FAKE NEWS
CNN
MSNBC
even FOX NEWS
The "Legacy Media"
Walk the Dinosaur. (Thank you, Mork. Nanu-Nanu)
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sorry if this haz been posted alredy:
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
SECOND, If you want to do a real analysis, go look at the Investors Business Daily poll, which (unlike Nate Silver's data) took results every day, and was much more accurate.- http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll = SIGNY
More accurate?= SECOND
Yes, more accurate
Quote:And YOUR preferred predictor? What was HIS prediction? Based on what polls?
Signym, your preferred pollster is still saying that “Trump Holds 2-Point Lead Over Clinton As Election Day Arrives”. 45% to 43%. But in the real world, Hillary has the 2-point lead. Hillary: 48.1% to Trump: 46.0%
www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president =SEOCND
FiveThirtyEight
Hillary Clinton chance of winning: 71.4%
Donald Trump chance of winning: 28.6%
Hillary Clinton electoral votes 302.2
Donald Trump electoral votes 235.0
Hillary Clinton popular vote 48.5%
Donald Trump popular vote 44.9%
Objectively, the IBD poll was more accurate.
Quote:HOW??? And what does this have to do with Comey? Aren't you just spinning the wheel of excuses again?
Signym, Trump cheated.
Quote:WHOA, that's some serious delusion there.
The actual winner of the election is Comey and his two letters to Congress about Hillary being a felony who needs jail time.
Where in god's name is there anything even remotely like that in Comey's letters???
SECOND, I'm going to a breather from talking to you about Trump. Your extreme concern has pushed you into some dark intense space. Spew away, if you feel you must, but try to open up your scope of thought. Stewing on what happened and trying to rewrite history simply isn't going to work.
Carry on.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym, objectively you are full of shit. Your pollster gave Trump a 2-point lead, but Hillary ended with the 2-point lead. Nat Silver gave the odds that Trump would win the electoral vote. It is clear that Signym doesn't understand probability. Stay away from the poker table, race track and other games of chance, unless you are playing against those who know even less than you do.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
FiveThirtyEight
Hillary Clinton chance of winning: 71.4%
Donald Trump chance of winning: 28.6%
Hillary Clinton electoral votes 302.2
Donald Trump electoral votes 235.0
Hillary Clinton popular vote 48.5%
Donald Trump popular vote 44.9%
Objectively, the IBD poll was more accurate.Quote:HOW??? And what does this have to do with Comey? Aren't you just spinning the wheel of excuses again?
Signym, Trump cheated.Quote:WHOA, that's some serious delusion there.
The actual winner of the election is Comey and his two letters to Congress about Hillary being a felony who needs jail time.
Where in god's name is there anything even remotely like that in Comey's letters???
SECOND, I'm going to a breather from talking to you about Trump. Your extreme concern has pushed you into some dark intense space. Spew away, if you feel you must, but try to open up your scope of thought. Stewing on what happened and trying to rewrite history simply isn't going to work.
Carry on.
And Trump cheating? Giuliani asked Comey to write the two letters that would sink Hillary. Then Giuliani ran his mouth on TV. Then Giuliani realized that if he had said it any plainer on TV, he would be indicted. Then Giuliani changed his story to something less incriminating. Giuliani was part of Trump’s campaign and spoke at Trump’s convention.
You can read, and listen to, Giuliani:
Rudy Giuliani Confirms FBI Insiders Leaked Information To The Trump Campaign
“Did I hear about it? You’re darn right I heard about it.”
www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rudy-giuliani-fbi-clinton-emails_us_581c9
e3fe4b0e80b02c93d6b
Giuliani changes story on FBI
www.cnn.com/2016/11/04/politics/rudy-giuliani-hillary-clinton-email-fb
i/
If I were Obama, I'd have Comey and Giuliani waterboarded until they give the full story. But it won't happen since Obama isn't me. This is the very last chance to know for certain exactly what Comey and Giuliani did and why. Obama will flitter away the time and opportunity, leaving historians guessing and hypothesizing forever.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Factually wrong.
Nat Silver gave the odds that Trump would win the electoral vote.= SECOND
One last time:
Quote:
FiveThirtyEight
2016 Election Forecast
President
Updated Nov. 8, 2016
Hillary Clinton chance of winning: 71.4%
Donald Trump chance of winning: 28.6%
Hillary Clinton electoral votes 302.2
Donald Trump electoral votes 235.0
Hillary Clinton popular vote 48.5%
Donald Trump popular vote 44.9%
IBD/TIPP gave Trump a 2-point lead in the pools, Nate Silver gave Hillary a 3.7 lead. Nate Silver predicted that Hillary had a 71% chance of winning. Nate Silver gave Hillary a roughly 70-point electoral college lead (with a number of votes still undecided). Please look at the relevant statistics again.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Signym, it wasn't even three hours ago you promised "SECOND, I'm going to a breather from talking to you about Trump." But here you are, again, talking. You've got as little self-control as Trump.
Trumpster Fire
www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/12/26/1611926/-Cartoon-2016-in-review
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Factually wrong.
Nat Silver gave the odds that Trump would win the electoral vote.= SECOND
One last time:Quote:
FiveThirtyEight
2016 Election Forecast
President
Updated Nov. 8, 2016
Hillary Clinton chance of winning: 71.4%
Donald Trump chance of winning: 28.6%
Hillary Clinton electoral votes 302.2
Donald Trump electoral votes 235.0
Hillary Clinton popular vote 48.5%
Donald Trump popular vote 44.9%
IBD/TIPP gave Trump a 2-point lead in the pools, Nate Silver gave Hillary a 3.7 lead. Nate Silver predicted that Hillary had a 71% chance of winning. Nate Silver gave Hillary a roughly 70-point electoral college lead (with a number of votes still undecided). Please look at the relevant statistics again.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump 'cheated' by using Comey?
Originally posted by second:
Signym, Trump cheated. The actual winner of the election is Comey and his two letters to Congress about Hillary ...
Quote:the word you need is 'felon' (though in this case it's several layers of lie since Comey never said or implied that, and a felon is "a person who has been convicted of a felony".)
... being a felony ...
Quote:Since that isn't close to what he wrote, it indicates your mental problem - misreading/ misquoting/ lying - is generalized
... who needs jail time. Comey claimed he was merely notifying Congress that he was energetically seeking the evidence to lockup Hillary, and nobody about to vote, according to Comey, will assume Hillary is guilty until a jury convicts her.
Quote:And that's NOT WHAT YOUR OWN SOURCE SAYS, SECOND.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/21/14025198/trump-undecided-fi
nal-weeks-survey
Quote:And according to YOUR SOURCE, the only people who definitively claim it was Comey's letters - are the the Clinton team.
THERE ARE MANY FACTORS THAT COULD HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THIS CHANGE SO LATE IN THE GAME
Quote:
Clinton’s campaign argues that the Comey letter swung the election
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
1kiki, you are the lefty and Signym is the righty, am I right? I would add “Troll” but you two would argue that you are fact based. Yeah. Sure. Whatever you want to pretend about yourselves.
Do you two realize you are freaking nuts? You two have that in common.
1kiki, What happened to the true blue Bernie supporter you once were? The one who was convinced Trump had no chance of winning? Always demanding justifications for why you should vote for Hillary rather than the Green Party. You were completely unable to understand that the odds showed that Trump's chances of winning were the same as the odds for playing Russian Roulette with two bullets in the six-shooter. That is a 33.3% chance.
At some points in the race, the odds were the same as three bullets in the six-shooter! That is a 50% chance. 1kiki, you never understood any of that. And now you don’t understand that Comey’s letters about Hillary being the email felon also changed the odds in favor of Trump.
1kiki, Don't every play Roulette, or any other game of chance, because you will blow your brains out.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://ginmar.livejournal.com/2554327.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Good compendium. I am embarrassed to be the same speciez az the Trump voterz.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Moved by the spirit of Christmas, Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump tweeted yesterday:
I gave millions of dollars to DJT Foundation, raised or recieved millions more, ALL of which is given to charity, and media won't report!
6:53 PM - 26 Dec 2016 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/813578484572450816
I wonder why media won’t report Trump’s generosity? If only there were some kind of official documents that served as a trusted record of his finances? There is! Luckily when Trump becomes the boss of the IRS he can end that pesky audit and, just maybe, prove his gift-giving. But he also said he would release tax returns when he won, so that’s another broken promise.
Trump promised millions to charity. We found less than $10,000 over 7 years.
https://t.co/aeKfPQmd1J
In May, under pressure from the news media, Donald Trump made good on a pledge he made four months earlier: He gave $1 million to a nonprofit group helping veterans’ families.
Before that, however, when was the last time that Trump had given any of his own money to a charity?
If Trump stands by his promises, such donations should be occurring all the time. In the 15 years prior to the veterans donation, Trump promised to donate earnings from a wide variety of his moneymaking enterprises: “The Apprentice.” Trump Vodka. Trump University. A book. Another book. If he had honored all those pledges, Trump’s gifts to charity would have topped $8.5 million.
But in the 15 years prior to the veterans’ gift, public records show that Trump donated about $2.8 million through a foundation set up to give his money away — less than a third of the pledged amount — and nothing since 2009. Records show Trump has given nothing to his foundation since 2008.
Trump and his staff are adamant that he has given away millions privately, off the foundation’s books. Trump won’t release his tax returns, which would confirm such gifts, and his staff won’t supply details. “There’s no way for you to know or understand,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks told BuzzFeed recently.
Hicks did not respond to repeated questions about Trump’s charity from The Washington Post. Trump earlier this month revoked The Post’s press credentials to cover his events.
In recent weeks, The Post tried to answer the question by digging up records going back to the late 1980s and canvassing a wide swath of nonprofits with some connection to Trump.
That research showed that Trump has a long-standing habit of promising to give to charity. But Trump’s follow-through on those promises was middling — even at the beginning, in his early days as a national celebrity.
In the 1980s, Trump pledged to give away royalties from his first book to fight AIDS and multiple sclerosis. But he gave less to those causes than he did to his older daughter’s ballet school.
In recent years, Trump’s follow-through on his promises has been seemingly nonexistent.
The Post contacted 188 charities searching for evidence of personal gifts from Trump in the period between 2008 and this May. The Post sought out charities that had some link to Trump, either because he had given them his foundation’s money, appeared at their charity galas or praised them publicly.
The search turned up just one donation in that period — a 2009 gift of between $5,000 and $9,999 to the Police Athletic League of New York City.
The story continues at https://t.co/aeKfPQmd1J
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hokum meet Delusional.....
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Just as an observation, I've noticed over the decades that republican-ism fosters grass-roots action and populist movements, while democrat-ism co-ops grass roots movements and fosters dependency on government caretaking and action.
That's how so many school boards ended up in republican hands, why county governments are so often republican, and how - in 2010 - republicans were able to win so many state legislatures, governorships, and Congress. They were ready and poised at the lower levels.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Obama helped save this country, and the world from financial ruin after being handed over the keys to the fuckdom. World economy in near collapse, remember that!?
Double digit unemployment by the end of 2009 (10.0%). Ring a bell!?
Hello! anybody home, the lights are on!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What are you talking about "Trump Tax"
Obama is still our Aweful 45th President after 8 years of equal and greater terribleness...
Seriously Second... WTF?
Hillary lost 3 times so the new tactic is to blame as much as you can before Obama hands over the horrible reins?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It is hard to predict which Donald Trump will enter the White House on January 20. Will it be the Donald Trump who promised to decimate ISIS in 100 days, or the Donald Trump who promised to avoid an Iraq-like quagmire? Will it be a Donald Trump who is eager to strong-arm China at the negotiating table, or the Donald Trump who promised to discard the Trans-Pacific trade deal designed to increase American leverage over the region? Will it be the Donald Trump who campaigned on building up a decrepit U.S. military, or the Donald Trump who said he would slash military spending to balance the budget?
www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-military-spending-flip-flop-22670
5
Only Trump knows. But what does he know?
In this new segment 'Norm or Law?' Stephen Colbert clears up the difference between norms a president should follow and laws a president must follow.
Clinton emails. Trump admitting sexual assault. Clinton emails. Trump charity fraud. Clinton emails. Trump calls for nuclear proliferation. Clinton emails. Trump calls for national stop and frisk. Clinton emails. Trump violates trade embargo with Cuba. Clinton emails. Trump sued over Trump U fraud. Clinton emails. Trump bribes Florida DA. Clinton emails. Trump doesn't pay taxes for 20 years. Clinton emails. Trump employs campaign manager involved in illegal corruption with Russia. Clinton emails. Trump calls for ban of an entire religion from entering US. Clinton emails. Trump lied about support for Iraq War over and over in debate. Clinton emails. Trump in court for rape of a minor. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of Russia's Crimea occupation. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of situation in Syria. Clinton emails. Trump penalized for racist housing discrimination. Clinton emails. Trump files for bankruptcy 6 times. Clinton emails. Trump goes 0-3 in debates by showing scant knowledge of world politics. Clinton emails. Trump slams people for being POWs. Clinton emails. Trump calls Mexicans rapists. Clinton emails. Trump questions judge's integrity because of parent's heritage. Clinton emails. Trump deletes emails involved in casino scandal. Clinton emails. Trump commits insurance fraud after Florida hurricane. Clinton emails. Trump has dozens of assault victims and witnesses come forward with allegations of abuse. Clinton emails. Trump attacks former Ms America for being overweight. Clinton emails. Trump tweets about sex tapes at 3am. Clinton emails. Trump calls for US citizens to be sent to Gitmo. Clinton emails. Trump calls for more extreme forms of torture to be used. Clinton emails. Trump asks why cant we use our nukes if we have them. Clinton emails. Trump calls for offensive bombing attack on sovereign nations because someone gave the middle finger. Clinton emails. Trump calls to kill women and children of suspected terrorists. Clinton emails. Trump says women should be punished for having abortions. Clinton emails. Trump makes fun of disabled people. Clinton emails. Trump calls for end of freedom of the press. Clinton emails. Trump calls global warming a Chinese hoax. Clinton emails. Trump praises Putin and Kim Jong Un's strong leadership. Clinton emails. Trump openly admits to not paying his employees during debate. Clinton emails. Trump calls Obama an illegitimate non-citizen hundreds of times over 7 years. Clinton emails. Trump uses campaign donations to enrich his own businesses. Clinton emails. Trump says Ted Cruz involved in JFK assassination unironically citing National Enquirer. Clinton emails. Trump says laziness is an inherent trait in black people. Clinton emails.
http://ginmar.livejournal.com/2554327.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump congratulates himself for something Obama did:
The U.S. Consumer Confidence Index for December surged nearly four points to 113.7, THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN MORE THAN 15 YEARS! Thanks Donald!
7:10 PM - 27 Dec 2016 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/813945096269860866
This is the data Trump takes credit for:
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/thanks-donald
Gee whiz, Donald. Thanks indeed! But maybe you should get back to us after you preside over an eight-year rise from 25 to 109. I'm sure that teensy little one-month blip at the end of the chart was all your doing, but even kindergartners usually fill a whole page with their finger painting before begging for praise from the teacher.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump is Chicken
What do you get when you cross the year of the rooster with the year of Trump?
A "yuge" statue.
www.cnn.com/2016/12/28/asia/donald-trump-rooster/index.html
A giant chicken sculpture, sporting the President-elect's signature hairdo and hand gestures, has been erected outside a shopping mall in Taiyuan, in China's northern Shanxi Province.
The sculpture was commissioned by the company that owns the mall and will be its mascot, Cao Mingliang, the deputy director of planning department from N1 ArtWalk Mall, told CNN.
Wei Qing, whose Shenghe Yangtai Business is selling replica chickens, told CNN he thought sculpture was hilarious.
"I think the chicken is very cute and funny, the hairstyle and eyebrows look very much like Donald Trump. I'm sure it will attract a lot of customers," he said.
At least four stores are selling the Trump chicken, with prices starting from $57 to a whopping $1,739 for a statue that's 32 feet tall.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, second, since you failed to respond regarding what YOUR OWN SOURCE said about the cause of the Trump shift - which was that it didn't assign a cause - I take it you've abandoned your claim that YOUR OWN SOURCE said it was the Comey letters.
Quote:Hmmm. Was I a true blue Bernie supporter? I recall saying Bernie would have a better chance of winning. So, can you find me that quote where I said I was a true-blue Bernie supporter? QUOTE AND LINK REQUIRED But I DO remember saying I was voting AGAINST HILLARY, which I did.
Originally posted by second:
1kiki, What happened to the true blue Bernie supporter you once were?
Quote:Yep, me and Nate Silver, your hero. You should really be bagging on him for being so very, very wrong when the odds were down at 7%.
The one who was convinced Trump had no chance of winning?
Quote:I wanted to know why I should vote FOR Hillary. What was so good about her? And I was willing to vote for her if I could have had reassurances she wouldn't get us into a nuclear war with Russia. If you could have cogently addressed that, I would have listened. But you blew me off. Well, Hillary's loss. Literally. BTW, I never said I was going to vote for the Green Party for sure either. So if you want to claim otherwise QUOTE AND LINK REQUIRED. The only thing I said was that I was going to vote AGAINST HILLARY. Which, to reiterate, I did.
Always demanding justifications for why you should vote for Hillary rather than the Green Party.
Quote:No, I understood. I even remember asking you how far the odds would have to be stacked before you felt safe.
You were completely unable to understand that the odds showed that Trump's chances of winning were the same as the odds for playing Russian Roulette with two bullets in the six-shooter. That is a 33.3% chance.
In any case, Hillary lost YAY!!! Things went the way I wanted.
Now the next task is to fight against Trump.
Care to join? Or are you going to pout and whine, like a baby?
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Just as an observation, I've noticed over the decades that republican-ism fosters grass-roots action and populist movements, while democrat-ism co-ops grass roots movements and fosters dependency on government caretaking and action.
That's how so many school boards ended up in republican hands, why county governments are so often republican, and how - in 2010 - republicans were able to win so many state legislatures, governorships, and Congress. They were ready and poised at the lower levels.
So, to continue on with this historical observation - back in the days of Reagan the Campus Crusade for Christ really took off, as one of the grass-roots political/ religious movements that became prominent. Televangelism entered its heyday.
The Hyde amendment was passed.
The NRA shifted from a gun-owners hunting club to a political movement.
While creationists have lost case after case in the Supreme Court starting 1979, conservatives have responded by taking over school boards. http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/09/25/school-board-curricul
um-conservative-history-column/16159795/
"In response to the rise of the Christian right, the 1980 Republican Party platform assumed a number of its positions, including dropping support for the Equal Rights Amendment and adding support for a restoration of school prayer."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right
And conservative think tanks were formed to shape the debate.
While the population as a whole went in one direction nationally, the republicans co-opted movements and dug in locally, and behind the scenes.
The 60's, 70's, and to some extent the 80's saw a very activist 'liberal' movement. The 60's saw the civil rights movement and union organizing and the anti-war movement. The 70's saw the women's movement and the rise of environmentalism. The early 80's saw an attempt to be more inclusive of people with disabilities. But around the 1980's all that took a back seat to a 'show me the money' mentality, to Reaganomics, castigation of 'welfare queens' who were going to get in the way of that mythic shining city somewhere - and so on. That seems to be the end of grass-roots liberal activism. At some point liberals ceded action to the democratic party and became dependent on it.
Meanwhile, conservatives carried on.
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A Pew Research opinion poll conducted between Nov. 30 and Dec. 5, after the election had cast the usual victor’s glow on Donald Trump, indicated that only 37% of Americans thought Trump was well-qualified for the presidency, just 31% deemed him moral, and a mere 26% viewed him as a good role model. On the other hand, 62% thought he had poor judgment and 65% considered him reckless. And this man won?
www.people-press.org/2016/12/08/low-approval-of-trumps-transition-but-
outlook-for-his-presidency-improves/
Perhaps, despite his appalling personal attributes, Trump’s positions on key issues resonated with the electorate? In fact, concentrating on the economic issues that many pundits claim put him in the White House, he’s on the wrong side of almost every one. It’s a sobering inventory, based upon Trump’s own statements after the election and his cabinet picks. Those cabinet choices Trump has made tell the real story, the one that is the opposite of his campaign promises. See that sobering inventory at "Donald Trump is on the wrong side of almost every issue voters care about".
www.marketwatch.com/story/donald-trump-is-on-the-wrong-side-of-almost-
every-issue-voters-care-about-2016-12-28
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:1kiki, now I understand your thinking, maybe. Hillary was the Greater Evil, Trump was the Lesser Evil, and Bernie was Good Enough. Now that Greater Evil has been defeated, 1kiki is moving on to defeating Lesser Evil. In the meantime, while that defeat of Evil is from 4 to 8 years away, which is longer than WWII (the most destructive war ever fought) a political party that has a very colorful, yet Totally Evil {heard of Nixon?} history except for tax-cuts exclusively for people like me, will be in charge of all branches of the Federal Government.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
In any case, Hillary lost YAY!!! Things went the way I wanted.
Now the next task is to fight against Trump.
Care to join? Or are you going to pout and whine, like a baby?
‘The Wealthy Would Never Steal’ — A Credo for Trump’s Party
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/the-wealthy-would-never-s
teal-a-credo-for-trumps-party.html
Larry Kudlow praised Trump for choosing a cabinet of billionaires because rich men are incorruptible — after all, they don’t need even more money. This is ludicrous on its face; consider, for example, Russia’s oligarchs.
There is a special irony of seeing this argument from any right-wing advocate of supply-side economics.
Remember, their whole worldview is based around the claim that cutting taxes on rich people will work economic miracles because of incentives: let a plutocrat keep more of an extra dollar in income, and he’ll create jobs in order to get that extra income. But if lower marginal tax rates are an incentive to produce more, the prospect of personal gain is also an incentive to engage in corrupt practices. You can’t claim greed as a wealthy man’s motivator while claiming that wealth insulates a man from greed and temptation.
Kudlow claims, “Wealthy folks have no need to steal or engage in corruption.”
In point of fact, it is easy to find wealthy folks who steal and engage in corruption. Look at, oh, imprisoned coal baron Don Blankenship, who indirectly murdered 29 of his employees by blatantly flouting safety regulations and who tried to purchase his state’s legal and political system to protect himself. (Blankenship endorsed Trump.) Or look at Vladimir Putin, a leader whose methods Trump has repeatedly praised and who has leveraged his power into billions of dollars of personal wealth. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/12/23/why-exposing-putins-wealth-wo
uld-be-obamas-best-revenge/
www.cfr.org/russian-federation/why-exposing-putins-wealth-would-obamas
-best-revenge/p38614
The reality is clearly that even the insanely wealthy generally want more. You can ask why they want it; the hedonistic pleasures of luxury can be had for only a tiny fraction of what the average Trump nominee is worth. There are only so many $1,000 bottles of champagne you can drink a day without dying from cirrhosis. But for such people, money is not about consumption, but about their ego, power, and winning the game. Unlike a craving for alcohol, that kind of greedy craving has no fatal limit.
But what’s more interesting and revealing, I think, is the way right-wing advocates of supply-side economics have always claimed that tax money is an incentive for billionaires, but are suddenly saying that money from conflicts of interest is NOT an incentive to cheat.
And this is telling us something significant: namely, that supply-side economic theory is and always was a sham. It was never about the incentives to keep the rich motivated to work harder and smarter at creating jobs for the other 99%; it was just another excuse to make the rich richer.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND, is it safe to talk to you now?
Quote:This was my thinking as well. I tried to explain my POV many times: I was only hoping for three things from the Trump admin that Hillary would NEVER accomplish, three things that could NEVER be accomplished at the state or local level: stop provoking Russia, kill free trade, and stop accommodating illegal immigration. The rest I was ready to fight Trump on.
1kiki, now I understand your thinking, maybe. Hillary was the Greater Evil, Trump was the Lesser Evil, and Bernie was Good Enough. Now that Greater Evil has been defeated, 1kiki is moving on to defeating Lesser Evil. In the meantime, while that defeat of Evil is from 4 to 8 years away, which is longer than WWII (the most destructive war ever fought) a political party that has a very colorful, yet Totally Evil {heard of Nixon?} history except for tax-cuts exclusively for people like me, will be in charge of all branches of the Federal Government.- SECOND
Now, I have a natural advantage: I live in the Big Blue State of CA. CA will continue with its carbon-reduction plan. If Obamacare is reduced to block-grants for each state, then CA might dust off that (superior, more cost-effective) single-payer model legislation that they shelved when Obamacare was passed. CA will continue to fund education and infrastructure: state and LA County residents just passed a number of huge bond and tax-retention measures this past November to fund various projects. Our state legislature is supermajority Democratic: they could pass a statewide increase in taxes, if they so chose. And fortunately, our state government is spending (mostly) rationally and setting aside a "rainy day" fund, because economies can always turn sour!
So I have a good chance of fighting Trump at the state level, and even at my city-level. I don't intend to bang my head against the Federal government wall very much, although I will ... as usual... contact my Congresspeople when necessary.
Quote:That is why they need to be fought. It's not going to be easy. But at least the fight is in the USA, and not some secret trade tribunal that we don't have access to.
Wealthy Would Never Steal’ — A Credo for Trump’s Party
Under "free trade", if the USA were to impose regulations which reduced usual or expected profits, the issue would be decided by private trade tribunal. And all of your environmental, health/ consumer, or worker wage/ safety regulations would be just so much toilet paper, and you would have absolutely no venue in which to present your case. That is my main concern. Capisce?
I may be wrong in my vote, or I may be right, but no matter who won the election, I didn't expect MY interests to be respected. I assumed I would be fighting, either way.
-----------
"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
"If you aren't aware, Texans don't have much concern for the well-being of Yankees or Californians, even Yankee factory workers in Indiana "- SECOND
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Your first concern is too easy for Trump. He can go deaf, dumb, and blind to Russia. Trump has perfected that act.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
SECOND, is it safe to talk to you now?
This was my thinking as well. I tried to explain my POV many times: I was only hoping for three things from the Trump admin that Hillary would NEVER accomplish, three things that could NEVER be accomplished at the state or local level: stop provoking Russia, kill free trade, and stop accommodating illegal immigration.
The second concern, free trade, is too complicated for me to make a guess on what Trump will do. Trade wars, anger by Americans over higher prices caused by higher tariffs, Republican Congressmen feeling uncooperative about fulfilling Trump's promise. Too uncertain how serious Trump is about overcoming those difficulties. He may not do a damn thing. Or he may.
But the third concern, illegal immigration, has a solution that is already up and running, but it is running at a tenth of the speed it should run if Trump intends to keep his promise. Will Trump do more than Obama did (or Hillary would)? Only if the Republican controlled Congress will spend more money on federal courts because immigration is already hogging half of the federal court system’s time and money. If there will be more immigration prosecutions under Trump, there will need to be more federal courts to hear the cases. A little article says: Immigration Now 52 Percent of All Federal Criminal Prosecutions
Immigration remains the major focus of federal criminal enforcement efforts. The latest available data show that criminal prosecutions for illegal entry, illegal re-entry, and similar immigration violations made up 52 percent of all federal prosecutions in FY 2016. During the 12 months ending September 30, immigration prosecutions totaled 69,636.
http://trac.syr.edu/tracreports/crim/446/
Did you notice that Obama did more than Bush about deporting illegal aliens? We will see if Trump does more than Obama. That will require more than Trump running his mouth. These immigration cases get tracked (Deportation Proceedings in Immigration Courts) so you can see what is happening in 2017. Or NOT happening under President Trump.
http://trac.syr.edu/phptools/immigration/charges/deport_filing_charge.
php
Click Time Series: Number to get a chart of cases.
Then there are employer sanctions for hiring illegal immigrants. What has Trump done about that? Nothing. He has actually hired illegals and not had his fat Trump ass thrown in jail. What is California doing? Nothing. One state has done something that does not amount to a hill of beans http://archive.azcentral.com/business/news/articles/20131102arizona-em
ployer-sanctions-law-seldom-used.html :
On January 1, 2008, an employer sanctions law took affect in Arizona. Business owners face the nation's first state law that requires employers to verify the work documents of their new employees. The law says any business that knowingly hires a worker who is in the country illegally will have its business license suspended. For a second offense, the business' license could be revoked. That is different from the federal penalties of fines and possible criminal prosecution that have been infrequently imposed for similar offenses.
www.fairus.org/issue/employer-sanctions
If Trump had more federal courts run by his Dept of Justice, more violations of his new federal employer sanctions law could be prosecuted and more illegal immigrants would find their employer going to a federal jail and their job going away.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Now the next task is to fight against Trump.
Care to join? Or are you going to pout and whine, like a baby?
How did your beloved 'democratic' party fuck up so badly?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Does that mean a Vietnam War protest style fight? That didn't work so well, did it?
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Now the next task is to fight against Trump.
Care to join? Or are you going to pout and whine, like a baby?
All that passionate draft-card and flag burning did not move Nixon out of office, did it? But it did rile the hardhats, the long distance truckers, the Merle Haggard country music fans, and the Archie Bunkers, you know, the super patriots who wanted all the hippies to leave the country or love Nixon.
If any of those ancient Archie Bunkers are alive, they voted for Trump. Most of Archie's grandchildren voted for Trump. The best that Trump protestors can hope for is the same as what saved the Nixon protestors from complete futility: Trump's own version of Watergate.
Even if Trump goes, there is still VP Mike Pence, who is as bad as Trump -- he just doesn't have Trump's attention-deficit brain/hyperactive mouth to make him as obnoxious as Trump. And, obviously, the Republican party will hold its grip on a majority of states and Congress because Archie Bunker is and always has been the majority in America.
If Archie Bunker had understood, which is not Archie's strongest characteristic, that Nixon wrecked a Vietnam ceasefire before the 1968 election, some Archie Bunkers, but not many, would have voted against Nixon or abstained from voting. Read the details here www.commondreams.org/views/2014/08/12/george-will-confirms-nixons-viet
nam-treason#
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump announced that Sprint was bringing 5,000 jobs back to America. "I just spoke with the head person," Trump told Bloomberg. "He said because of me they're doing 5,000 jobs in this country."
Good work, Trump! But I have since learned that Trump was lying. First of all, Sprint announced these jobs back in April. Here's the Kansas City Star: "Sprint Corp. is launching a nationwide service to hand-deliver new phones to customers in their homes. The Direct 2 You service, which first rolled out in a Kansas City pilot, will lead to the hiring of about 5,000 mostly full-time employees as it spreads nationwide."
Second, the Japanese owner of Sprint, Softbank, announced in October that it was creating a huge tech investment fund.
Third, in December, Softbank's CEO announced the fund again after a meeting with Trump, and said that one part of the whole package was the creation of 50,000 new jobs. Today, Sprint reluctantly conceded that its 5,000 jobs were part of the previously announced 50,000 jobs.
And finally, these jobs were announced yet again yesterday.
That makes four times these jobs have been announced. Donald Trump was responsible for none of them.
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/donald-trump-holds-micro-press-
conference-comes-idiot
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:More useful than focusing on illness for understanding what is wrong with Trump and his appointees and his Party would be the article: The phenomenon of “unethical amnesia” explains why we behave a lot more badly than we remember
Originally posted by JO753:
Is Trump Mentally Ill?
"Psychological research on morality shows that we hold an overly optimistic view of our capacity to adhere to ethical standards. We believe that we are intrinsically more moral than others, that we will behave more ethically than others in the future, and that transgressions committed by others are morally worse than our own."
"So, how do these beliefs of our moral selves play out in our day-to-day actions? As researchers who frequently study how people who care about morality often behave dishonestly, we decided to find out."
More at http://qz.com/705793/the-phenomenon-of-unethical-amnesia-explains-why-
we-behave-a-lot-more-badly-than-we-remember/
I'd say that Trump has unethical amnesia, but his past is not forgotten:
Trump admitting sexual assault. Clinton emails. Trump charity fraud. Clinton emails. Trump calls for nuclear proliferation. Clinton emails. Trump calls for national stop and frisk. Clinton emails. Trump violates trade embargo with Cuba. Clinton emails. Trump sued over Trump U fraud. Clinton emails. Trump bribes Florida DA. Clinton emails. Trump doesn't pay taxes for 20 years. Clinton emails. Trump employs campaign manager involved in illegal corruption with Russia. Clinton emails. Trump calls for ban of an entire religion from entering US. Clinton emails. Trump lied about support for Iraq War over and over in debate. Clinton emails. Trump in court for rape of a minor. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of Russia's Crimea occupation. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of situation in Syria. Clinton emails. Trump penalized for racist housing discrimination. Clinton emails. Trump files for bankruptcy 6 times. Clinton emails. Trump goes 0-3 in debates by showing scant knowledge of world politics. Clinton emails. Trump slams people for being POWs. Clinton emails. Trump calls Mexicans rapists. Clinton emails. Trump questions judge's integrity because of parent's heritage. Clinton emails. Trump deletes emails involved in casino scandal. Clinton emails. Trump commits insurance fraud after Florida hurricane. Clinton emails. Trump has dozens of assault victims and witnesses come forward with allegations of abuse. Clinton emails. Trump attacks former Ms America for being overweight. Clinton emails. Trump tweets about sex tapes at 3am. Clinton emails. Trump calls for US citizens to be sent to Gitmo. Clinton emails. Trump calls for more extreme forms of torture to be used. Clinton emails. Trump asks why can't we use our nukes if we have them. Clinton emails. Trump calls for offensive bombing attack on sovereign nations because someone gave the middle finger. Clinton emails. Trump calls to kill women and children of suspected terrorists. Clinton emails. Trump says women should be punished for having abortions. Clinton emails. Trump makes fun of disabled people. Clinton emails. Trump calls for end of freedom of the press. Clinton emails. Trump calls global warming a Chinese hoax. Clinton emails. Trump praises Putin and Kim Jong Un's strong leadership. Clinton emails. Trump openly admits to not paying his employees during debate. Clinton emails. Trump calls Obama an illegitimate non-citizen hundreds of times over 7 years. Clinton emails. Trump uses campaign donations to enrich his own businesses. Clinton emails. Trump says Ted Cruz involved in JFK assassination unironically citing National Enquirer. Clinton emails. Trump says laziness is an inherent trait in black people.
http://ginmar
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Donald Trump is right. The US doesn’t make TV sets anymore, and it’s mind-boggling that an industry that once supported as many as 100 American manufacturers churning out millions of devices each year went from startup to standard-bearer to extinction in 50 years’ time.
But the US president-elect is wrong when he casts the sector’s demise as a failure of globalization. US television manufacturing wasn’t killed by bad trade deals or competition from cheap labor abroad. It was done in by its own inward focus on the domestic market and its own failure to see the global opportunities at hand—and it won’t be resurrected by protectionist trade policies that encourage businesses to repeat these mistakes.
The American manufacturers’ short-lived glory days
RCA introduced Americans to television at the 1939 World’s Fair in New York. Though World War II would postpone its broad adoption, it wasn’t long before the TV set had taken over the American living room.
By the late 1950s, the US was home to an enormous new industry, and its manufacturers were understandably lured by the domestic market. As one executive at now-defunct Zenith put it, just a small increase in market share in Los Angeles might represent as much revenue as an entire country outside the US. So the focus stayed close to home.
But others saw the opportunities abroad. It was Japanese firms that started taking US technology overseas through licenses from RCA. Pretty soon, they were exporting what they learned back to the US in the shape of TV parts—and later whole TVs.
They were committed competitors. They tested meticulously to avoid quality problems. They were eager adopters of automation—while their American competitors, intent on saving jobs, were reluctant to replace workers with machines, according to Martin Kenney, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who has studied the sector. Japanese products started to get both better and cheaper than what the US produced.
In order to compete, American TV part makers started shutting down their facilities in the US and moving them abroad, setting off a decades-long period of steady job losses.
A bungled response
The US government at the time responded to the losses as Trump is proposing to do some 50 years later, with trade barriers. But the efforts ended up strengthening US competitors. In 1977, the US started restricting imports of Japanese TVs and components. That encouraged Japanese companies to move some production to the US, as intended, but it also gave a boost to Taiwanese and Korean producers by moving their biggest competitor, Japan, out of the way. When the US blocked imports from those countries as well, production moved to Southeast Asia.
In another example of protectionist policies backfiring, the US imposed high duties on television tubes, the kind of sophisticated, high-value component it wanted to keep within the country. At the same time, it set lower tariffs for assembled products than on individual components for the benefit of US manufacturers that were assembling TVs abroad. The result: US companies imported tubes from Asia to their Mexico plants, loaded them into TVs, and exported the nearly ready units to the US. Meanwhile, the American tube makers saw orders collapse.
In the end, the government’s trade-policy tinkering was overwhelmed by the economic rationale of Mexico’s lower wages and proximity to the US. American and foreign companies along the whole TV supply chain eventually migrated to Mexico. The US sector—which employed 130,000 at its peak, in 1966—employed less than 50,000 US workers by 2001. That number would keep dropping as flat-screen displays replaced tube television. Today the industry employs fewer than 20,000 Americans.
Flat panels
The color-tube TV industry was the US’s to lose, but the US never really owned the flat-screen TV industry. . . The story continues at:
http://qz.com/863121/the-origin-of-your-tv-set-is-a-simple-lesson-in-t
he-dangers-of-ignoring-globalization/
Trump’s ad
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Does a Never Trumper Need to Be Forgiven?
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443364/never-trump-administation
-cabinet-2016-election-character
I did get the election wrong. Although there were occasions when I wrote that Trump had a shot, certainly at the end I was convinced that he’d lose.
And yet, defensive though it may sound, I think the claim that I got “everything wrong” in 2016 reveals more about my detractors than about me. The only sense in which one could plausibly claim I got everything wrong is if Donald Trump is your everything. Indeed, the bulk of those shouting that I got “everything wrong” seem to be the “Trump can do no wrong” crowd as well.
There is a weird, not quite fully baked idea out there that if you —or me — were wrong about Trump’s electoral chances, that means you must be wrong about the man in full. There is no such transitive property in politics or punditry. I don’t know what George Will said of Richard Nixon’s electoral prospects in 1972, but even if he had predicted a McGovern landslide, that wouldn’t mean he was wrong about the outrageousness of Watergate.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Can You Guess What Was the Most-Read Politics Story of 2016?
Here are the most-read stories of 2016 in the New York Times, noted without comment.
(Except for the big red oval, that is.)
www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/19/business/media/top-stories.html
Google Searches for Hillary's Emails Peaked After Comey's Letter
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/google-searches-hillarys-emails
-peaked-after-comeys-letter
As long as we're on the subject of James Comey and Hillary's emails, here's a chart showing Google searches on the subject:
This is the second time in five elections that an arm of the US government, rather than the voters, has appointed a US president. The first time was the Supreme Court in 2000 and the second time was FBI in 2016.
Not odd at all that five Republicans on the Supreme Court selected a Republican President. Neither is it odd that the Republican FBI director selected a Republican, although it does give the impression of being, shall we say, crooked.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
In a word................Yes!!!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Bill Maher is NOT calling Trump mentally ill in the following eight minutes on Trump. I’m sorry for Maher's blue language, but otherwise his comments are spot on. He says we should start by combining the Dakotas — why on earth should they have 4 senators when his home state of California, with 25 times as many people, has just 2? (Gavin Newsom is mentioned for President 2020. He is Lieutenant Governor of California.)
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
James Fallows listens to talk radio so you don't have to:
Spent 8 hrs today in car, listening to AM talk radio.
All the rhetorical energy was defending (a) Russia (b) Assange, as below
James Fallows Retweeted Ann Coulter
Quote:https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/816773038276542464
Assange: It wasn't the Russians or Putin! You know the Dem party has hit rock bottom when the KGB is telling the truth & the DNC is lying.
This is scary. Not because Ann Coulter and similar folks are defending Putin and Assange—plenty of people do that—but because these are precisely the folks who were the most outraged by Putin and Assange as recently as last year. Now they've turned on a dime, and for one reason: because Donald Trump told them to.
Twenty years ago, a Washington Post reporter wrote that followers of television evangelists were "largely poor, uneducated and easy to command." The blowback was huge and immediate and the Post apologized the next day. To this day, conservatives will quote these words as evidence that the mainstream press has it in for conservatives.
But what else explains what's happening now? Donald Trump has essentially commanded his followers to defend Putin and Assange, and with barely a whimper they've complied. And when the press starts to point out what's going on, we get this:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Quote:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/816999062562107392
The dishonest media likes saying that I am in Agreement with Julian Assange - wrong. I simply state what he states, it is for the people....
Trump says, "It is for the people." Everything is "for the people."
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:www.nytimes.com/2017/01/03/opinion/2016-in-charts-and-can-trump-delive
Originally posted by second:
Trump says, "It is for the people." Everything is "for the people."
r-in-2017.html
The incoming president has said repeatedly that he would provide the middle class with a “massive tax cut”; his selection for Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin, has maintained that the wealthy would receive “no absolute tax cut.” Mr. Trump’s plan, as published on his campaign website, says otherwise. It includes a $6 trillion tax reduction over the next decade, vastly tilted toward business and the wealthy. An estimated 83 percent of the benefits would go to the top 20 percent of Americans and 51 percent to the top 1 percent by 2025. A middle-class taxpayer would receive an average tax benefit of $1,090; a typical member of the top 1 percent would get $317,100.
These huge tax giveaways — along with Mr. Trump’s promises to increase infrastructure spending and not touch Social Security and Medicare — would blow up the deficit and add $4 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years over and above current projections. That’s made particularly ironic by Mr. Trump’s claim in a Washington Post interview that he would eliminate our current $19 trillion of debt over eight years through better trade deals and economic growth. The sharp increase in interest rates since the election — mortgage costs are up by about a half a percentage point — can be directly attributed to investors’ fears of rising deficits and debt and the likelihood that the Federal Reserve will respond by raising interest rates more quickly.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
There is the executive summary of the document from which Trump almost instantly came to very different conclusions from what he was told, but we already knew that Trump is not good at details. He is a big-picture kind of guy:
The intelligence community seems pretty sure that (a) Putin directed the influence campaign, (b) he did it to discredit Hillary Clinton, (c) Russian military intelligence carried out the hacking and relayed information to WikiLeaks, (d) they also hacked Republican sites but didn't make any of it public, and (e) this all worked really well, so Russia will probably do it again.
www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/01/read-us-intelligence-report-russi
an-hacking-2016-campaign
Trump, of course, remains ignorant. Minutes after meeting with the intelligence chiefs and hearing the full, complete and totally top-secret classified version of all this, he released an obviously prewritten statement saying that lots of countries try to hack us; it had absolutely no effect on the election—zilch, Zero, NADA, NOTHING!; and from now on we shouldn't talk about any of this publicly because we don't want to give anything away to our enemies.
Seriously. That's what he said. So that it seems that Trump gave it some thought, could he wait at least thirty minutes before issuing his statement? Absolutely not. He had already decided what the facts were before he heard the facts, so there was no reason to listen nor to wait.
www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/donald-trump-statement-hack-int
elligence-briefing.html
Following the meeting, Trump released this statement:
“I had a constructive meeting and conversation with the leaders of the Intelligence Community this afternoon. I have tremendous respect for the work and service done by the men and women of this community to our great nation.
“While Russia, China, other countries, outside groups and people are consistently trying to break through the cyber infrastructure of our governmental institutions, businesses and organizations including the Democrat National Committee, there was absolutely no effect on the outcome of the election including the fact that there was no tampering whatsoever with voting machines. There were attempts to hack the Republican National Committee, but the RNC had strong hacking defenses and the hackers were unsuccessful.
“Whether it is our government, organizations, associations or businesses we need to aggressively combat and stop cyberattacks. I will appoint a team to give me a plan within 90 days of taking office. The methods, tools and tactics we use to keep America safe should not be a public discussion that will benefit those who seek to do us harm. Two weeks from today I will take the oath of office and America’s safety and security will be my number one priority.”
Comparing Trump’s statement with the following report shows that Trump had no comprehension of what he had been told, which is never a sign of a good business executive:
Quote:
This report is a declassified version of a highly classified assessment; its conclusions are identical to those in the highly classified assessment but this version does not include the full supporting information on key elements of the influence campaign.
Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections
ICA 2017-01D 6 January 2017
Key Judgments
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow's longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations.
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a cNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME