ChrisWeigant.com

Trump Doubles Down On Losing Strategy

[ Posted Tuesday, March 26th, 2019 – 16:43 UTC ]

Even though most of the political media refused to acknowledge it until after the fact, one big political issue emerged during the 2018 midterms that turned out to be a real winner for Democrats: protecting people's healthcare. This was really nothing more than a self-inflicted wound by the Republicans, since the voter backlash had been growing ever since the GOP tried to repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with absolutely nothing. Democrats merely pointed this out in their campaigns, and the voters backed them overwhelmingly on the issue. And now it seems that Donald Trump is doubling down on this losing strategy in preparation for the 2020 campaign. Democrats, meanwhile, are moving forward on healthcare in a positive and constructive way, which paints the starkest of differences between the two parties' political attitudes, right at the start of the campaign season.

The Trump Justice Department just announced that it was siding with the Republican states who are challenging the Affordable Care Act in court. Their new position is that Obamacare is unconstitutional through and through, and that the entire law should be struck down in its entirety. While the issue of protecting people with pre-existing conditions was the biggest political fight during the midterms, if the Trump administration now has its way in the courts, the public will stand to lose a lot more than just the pre-existing conditions protections that Obamacare instituted. They'll lose all the protections Obamacare created, in one fell swoop.

This, obviously, is a gigantic political gift to the Democratic Party from Trump. He is so sure that killing Obamacare is a winner for him personally that he's going to force his own party to fight the same exact political battle that they just badly lost in the last election. It'd be hard to even imagine a worse political strategy for Trump to take, at this point.

Republicans have had almost ten years to come up with an alternative to Obamacare. They have utterly failed to do so, time and time again. Their mantra was "repeal and replace," but they never could come up with any replacement at all, or at least any replacement that wouldn't throw tens of millions of people off their health insurance. For ten solid years they've proven that they simply have no idea what a proper conservative alternative to Obamacare should look like. And yet if the courts rule the way the Justice Department is now urging, Obamacare will disappear and leave absolutely nothing in its place. We'll all go back to the bad old days of people going bankrupt due to a health emergency. And that's what the Republican Party is apparently going to run on in 2020.

At exactly the same time, Nancy Pelosi is introducing a bill in the House which would strengthen Obamacare and expand access to affordable healthcare beyond what Obamacare has already achieved. If the Justice Department hadn't made its move, Pelosi might have run the risk of being called too timid by the more progressive members of her caucus. She has not begun work on a single-payer bill, much to the chagrin of many progressives. She is not even proposing to introduce a public option ("Medicare for all who want it"), she is instead keeping the current bill tightly focused on shoring up Obamacare and countering all the moves Trump has made to undermine the system. Without the threat of Obamacare being ruled out of existence by the courts, this would likely be seen as too incremental and not bold enough. But now, Pelosi can rightfully claim that she's concentrating on legislation that might actually have a chance of passing rather than setting an agenda for the future with bills that are guaranteed to go nowhere in the Republican Senate. In other words: do what we can to shore up Obamacare immediately, and then there will be plenty of time later for bigger measures to improve the future of America's healthcare system.

Again, absent the Justice Department's new stance, even such an incremental bill would probably have gone nowhere in the Senate. But now Republicans are going to be forced to take sides -- either support Trump's effort to kill off Obamacare entirely with no replacement plan in sight, or work with Democrats on some commonsense fixes that will improve the law for millions. And hanging over this decision is how badly the issue played out for them in 2018.

In the midterms, Republican candidates tried a version of the "Big Lie." They swore up and down that they wanted to protect people with pre-existing conditions, but they never had anything to back these false claims up. They simply could not explain how they were supposedly going to protect vulnerable patients, because there was no actual plan to do so. The voters noticed, and voted accordingly.

This time around, Republicans are going to have to attempt to explain why they are for not just destroying protections for pre-existing conditions, but also why they want to get rid of all the other Obamacare benefits as well -- Medicaid expansion, children being able to stay on their parents' insurance to the age of 25, the ban on lifetime caps from insurance companies, cost-free physicals, expanded prescription drug coverage, and all the rest of it. In other words, Democratic political ads won't be limited to just pointing out how Republicans are going to stick it to those with pre-existing conditions, but how Republicans want to stick it to just about everybody. That will be the direct result of jumping on board Trump's position, for Republicans. And the smarter ones already know how that worked out for them in the last election cycle.

Donald Trump flat-out lied about how wonderful healthcare would become under his leadership. He lied about how everyone would be covered, he lied that everyone's coverage would be far better than Obamacare, and he lied that he knew exactly how to achieve all of this. Now it seems he is going to double down on this position for his 2020 campaign. The only problem is that as time goes by, more and more people have figured out the fact that Republicans have no idea whatsoever about what they would create to "replace" Obamacare. And they won't even have any fictional "replace" bill to point to this time, because if the courts rule the way Trump is urging them to, then Obamacare will disappear immediately with absolutely nothing to replace it. If this happens judicially rather than legislatively, then the courts have no obligation to create any sort of replacement. It will be up to the Republicans in Congress to have something in place by that time, and (once again) they have not managed to come up with any sort of magic replacement plan despite having ten whole years to come up with one.

In 2018, even though the national media completely missed it, Democrats rode to victory on a whole host of ads warning voters that Republicans were trying to take away protections from people with pre-existing conditions. This time around, Democrats will once again be able to warn that Republicans are on board with destroying health protections for tens of millions of other Americans -- as well as removing the pre-existing conditions protections. Republican candidates will have a painful choice to make -- either back up Donald Trump's attack on Obamacare, or split with Trump and side with the Democrats. Trump is painting them into this tight corner by doubling down on the very strategy that lost dozens of seats for Republicans the last time around. And, as always, they simply have no answer to the question of how they'd replace Obamacare. Which is why Trump's doubling down on a losing issue is nothing short of a huge political gift to Democrats, right before campaign season gets underway.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

45 Comments on “Trump Doubles Down On Losing Strategy”

  1. [1] 
    Kick wrote:

    Trump Doubles Down On Losing Strategy

    I know, right!? So before I even start reading this, I would just like to comment that Trump is the ignorant gift that just keeps on giving.

    Poor Donald: He is still upset with John McCain for turning over the dossier to the FBI and turning over his right thumb.

    The FBI already had the dossier, and it was Lindsey Graham's idea to give it to them (spoiler alert... they already had it for months), but I digress.

    John McCain voted "no" on "Repeal and Replace" because there was no "Replace" after all these years because Republicans will never, never, and never magically wave a magic wand and become the Party of health care in the exact same way that Mexico is never, never, and never going to pay for a damn "Wall."

    If I do not see the word "liar" and/or "lied" and/or "pathological" inside these paragraphs, CW is fired. ;)

    Reading now.

  2. [2] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Donald Trump flat-out lied about how wonderful healthcare would become under his leadership. He lied about how everyone would be covered, he lied that everyone's coverage would be far better than Obamacare, and he lied that he knew exactly how to achieve all of this.

    "Nobody knew that healthcare could be so complicated."

    Narrator: Virtually everybody knew.
    _____________________

    Who hasn't seen enough yet to figure out that Donald Trump is nothing more than a pathologically lying con artist who is the world's biggest victim who will fabricate, prevaricate, and lie, lie, lie to anybody with a pulse who is foolish enough to buy into the perpetual and repetitive spew of self-serving utterly nonsensical bullshit?

    Great article, CW. :)

  3. [3] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "For ten solid years they've proven they simply have no idea what a conservative alternative to Obamacare should look like."

    Duh.

    A conservative alternative to Obamacare would look almost exactly like Obamacare.

    Obamacare was a conservative idea that added a few goodies like pre-existing conditions and a public option- though the public option didn't make it into law.

    This was of course the Democratic strategy/job. Pretend to fight for the public option and then try to sell a half a slice as if it were half a loaf.

    Similar to now with the "gift" from Republicans to the Democrats of the lawsuit challenging Obamacare.

    But the gift wasn't the gift you seem to be implying of an unintentional benefit for Democrats in 2020.

    The gift is that the Big Money Democrats like Pelosi now have cover to defend and and make small improvements to Obamacare and not take the bold step that many people want for a public option. (Didn't someone recently write aboot people wanting BOLD?)

    Even though you did not do it on purpose, you should be more careful aboot exposing the strategy of the big money Democrats like Pelosi that are scamming the public as a false alternative to the Republicans.

    Either that or start actually exposing the bullshit on purpose.

  4. [4] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Don Harris,

    A conservative alternative to Obamacare would look almost exactly like Obamacare.

    You beat me to it! The framework of the ACA was the result of years of planning by the best Conservative minds. It was supposed to be the crowning jewel in the GOP’s legislative crown; and it would have been just that had McCain not lost the 2008 election.

    Republicans had considered letting Bush release their new healthcare plan in late 2007, but Bush’s approval numbers were so low that they figured it would be better to let the incoming Republican president get the credit for it. This is why the GOP hates the ACA so much — they were so close to passing legislation that they could actually be proud of!!!

  5. [5] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    4

    I know, right!? And then when it was Mitt Romney's turn at bat, he had to argue the ridiculous nonsensical notion that he was actually against the ACA after being one of the first governors in the United States of America to implement statewide healthcare, together with the Senior Senator who achieved in Massachusetts what was literally the culmination of his life's work and what he dreamed to achieve for the entire country... Ted Kennedy, may he rest in peace, who made the ultimate decision to endorse Barack Obama just before Super Tuesday because Kennedy was able to secure a commitment from Obama to make universal health care the top priority of his administration.

    Senator Edward Kennedy didn't live to see his life's work signed into law by Barack Obama because he passed away on August 25, 2009, from a brain tumor... glioblastoma... the same type that would take one of his closest personal friends, Senator John McCain who saved the ACA with the swift downturn of his right thumb before he passed away exactly nine years later to the day of Kennedy on August 25, 2018.

    "John McCain will cast a long shadow," Joe Biden said. "His impact on America hasn't ended. Not even close." It was that same cancer that also took Joe Biden’s son, Beau, in 2015.

    If you pay careful attention, you will notice the uncanny way that history sometimes rhymes. If I noticed patterns in things, I would wager that Joe Biden will be entering the 2020 race for the presidency with a story to tell and a fight against Trump uniquely his own. As CW rightly points out, Trump has chosen poorly. :)

  6. [6] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Trump's a moron, but this one is both a) terrifying, and b) amazingly stupid.

  7. [7] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Someone pointed out, if I recall, during the original ACA debate, that the Republicans' health care plan appears to be: Don't get sick. If you get sick, die quickly.

    (One advantage of adopting a Medicare opt-in is that structures are already in place, unlike ACA when it was introduced, and the qualifying groups could be expanded over a period of years to avoid overloading the system.)

  8. [8] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    The fundamental problem with delivering healthcare to Americans boils down to two specific aspects of the question: 1), There is no rational reason for the involvement of insurance companies in public health, and 2), public health cannot be left entirely to for-profit enterprises.

    The dual concepts of 'insurance' and of 'pre-existing conditions' are mutually exclusive. You cannot expect health insurers to cover pre-existing conditions for the same reason that you cannot expect fire insurers to cover the cost of rebuilding a house that has already burned.

    The reasoning behind No. 1 involves an understanding of the very concept of insurance, which is beyond the grasp of many people, especially sick people, and simply needs to be accepted as a 'given' by those who want to discuss public healthcare.

    The reasoning behind No. 2 is that healthcare is essential to life, and due to the realities of how it can be delivered is therefore too basic to be subjected to the laws of economics the way most life essentials normally are.

    The ultimate solution is for healthcare to be delivered (meaning rationed) as a public service at a level that does not lead to bankruptcy of the public sector (the goverenment).

    There you have the principles that absolutely have to govern the system - now you just have to argue about the details (you know, that place where the "devil always resides").

  9. [9] 
    TheStig wrote:

    It's not a losing strategy if you can "manage" the voting franchise. I suspect that is (still) the Grand Strategy of the Republican Party. Democrats need to focus on this. In the end, it all boils down to the number of asses in the seats, and how long they have been there.

  10. [10] 
    John M wrote:

    Another thing that tends to be forgotten about Obamacare and pre-existing conditions, which gets little coverage or talked about.

    Obamacare also prevents insurance companies from charging people with pre-existing conditions a higher rate for coverage.

    It prevents companies from charging people 10, 20, 50 times more for insurance if they have been sick, as opposed to those who have always been healthy.

    NONE, of the Republican proposals about protecting pre-existing conditions, ever took this little know item into account!!! All the Republican proposals would have let insurance companies charge un-affordable prices, which would have made the pre-existing condition guarantee worthless.

  11. [11] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    John M

    Read my [8] above.

  12. [12] 
    John M wrote:

    [11] C. R. Stucki

    "John M

    Read my [8] above."

    I already actually did thanks. :-)

    For once, I could not agree with you more.

    Excellent post.

  13. [13] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "In the end, it all boils down to the asses in the seats, and how long they have been there."

    Spot on.

    They've been there too long and they are there because they manage (manipulate) voters into keeping them there by keeping the argument within safe parameters for the big money interests.

    While we may see those in the seats as asses, the big money interests see them as ASSETS.

    Until citizens stop putting and keeping assets for the big money interests in the seats and replace them with small donor candidates the parameters of the debate will remain as the current situation of rearranging the deck chairs instead of avoiding the iceberg on this and many other issues of desperate importance.

  14. [14] 
    Paula wrote:

    Republicans get up every day determined to prove how unfit they are to govern.

    McConnell says he's blocking the Mueller report because it will help Dems.

    This stupid move is an attempt to distract from GOP suppression of the Mueller report.

    And much of media seems to be absent - the non-stop outrage that went on during the despicable Starr investigations - the breathless announcements of new GOP allegations (always false) against Bill Clinton - Starr releasing his report the in book form as literally quickly as he physically could...now, some outrage and some people lecturing others about over-emphasizing the investigation, lots of galloping towards the new outrage - and republicans sitting behind closed doors laughing and laughing and laughing.

    Barr simply suppresses the report and appears, so far, to get away with it. Repubs ANNOUNCE Blotus is cleared and nazis swarm the internet to crow about it. All without any of us seeing the report.

    Mueller, so far anyway, fades away. He is a republican after all. Party before country always. Liars before truth. Crimes allowed by the rich and powerful. Nazis quoting Hitler in the House. Dem's reponse - muted. Always beaten by the bad guys because the bad guys don't give a damn about anything but their own hides. The bad guys lie, cheat, steal - in public, blatantly. What is the response to that?

    It's quite possible GOP will steal 2020 - why wouldn't they? They've quashed everything about how Russia helped Blotus in 2016. They stopped all efforts at the top to do anything about cyberwarfare.

    Repubs are the batterers who eventually murder their partner because escalation is inevitable unless forcibly stopped.

    They are committing obstruction in plain site, to cover for an unfit POTUS who sold out the country to Russia in plain site.

    And then they run around and taunt us - see what we can do?

    Many times I have read the variation of this thought: if you were in Nazi Germany during the rise of Hitler, knowing what we know now, what would you have done?

    Exactly what you're doing now.

  15. [15] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Paula [14]

    Re: "If you were in nazi . . . what would you have done?" "Exactly what you're dong now."

    Wrong! The only realistic answer is 'Got the hell out!', right?

    How does that help here and now? I don't notice you leaving!

  16. [16] 
    neilm wrote:

    Frankly I hope that the U.S. adopts one of the healthcare models that have been working will in Europe or Japan. There are several models, some of which would fit our circumstances better than others, and some that we can adopt more easily than others.

    There are two issues, one a problem, the other a side-effect.

    The first is the problem of losers - if we adopt a system that has no insurance companies, then a lot of people who handle the insurance paperwork, both in the providers as well as the payers will lose their jobs, and insurance companies will lose a large source of revenue. I expect both of these entities to fight against change to the death - because, from a business perspective it literally is.

    The second issue is a side-effect. Currently a large portion, maybe even a majority, of medical research is conducted by companies and research organizations in the U.S. because they know that have a market that will be heavily overcharged for their new products. These same product, when released in Canada, the U.K., France, etc. cannot command the same margins. Thus U.S. patients basically foot the cost for a large percentage of the World's medical research. This will very likely diminish under any nationwide purchasing scheme essential to controlling medical costs, and thus research will slow. There may be some reaction by other countries to pick up the costs they have been shirking for the last 40-50 years, however I doubt that - most of the national health systems are straining already with the increase in older people, and more ability to act than in the past.

    The big driver for the country should be the potential savings - we pay 19% of our GDP for poorer outcomes than most OECD countries get for 10-12% of GDP.

    To the point of the article, until we start to hear proposals from Republicans on the model they want to replace the ACA with, I assume most of the public are going to be concerned that it will simply become an insurance company dystopia. If they do propose a model, then they will be attacked mercilessly by the losers. It indicates how stupid Trump is that he has re-opened this can of worms.

  17. [17] 
    Kick wrote:

    CRS
    8

    What did you have for breakfast, son? Whatever it was, you are now required to have it every day; no, make that 3 times a day and for snacking.

    I agree almost entirely with Stucki, and now I'm going to take my temperature and make sure I'm not ill and CW didn't give me the flu or something. :)

    There you have the principles that absolutely have to govern the system - now you just have to argue about the details (you know, that place where the "devil always resides").

    And to think I was under the misguided impression he resided in the State of Taters. ;)

  18. [18] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    neilm

    Well said - feel free to act even (modestly, of course), a little "smug"!

  19. [19] 
    neilm wrote:

    Well said - feel free to act even (modestly, of course), a little "smug"!

    Praise from you deserves more than just a little smugness ;)

    And I thought your comment [8] was spot on.

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mueller, so far anyway, fades away. He is a republican after all. Party before country always. Liars before truth. Crimes allowed by the rich and powerful.

    I knew it wouldn't take long for ya'all to start blaming Mueller...

    Hero to zero in no time flat...

    Another prediction I made that was spot on...

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, all of ya'all's demands for the full Mueller report to be released is all bullshit..

    Because even if the full report is released, ya'all will just come back with " He is a republican after all. Party before country always. Liars before truth."

    In other words, NOTHING will satisfy ya'all..

    NO FACTS, NO REALITY...

    All you want is your delusions...

    Nice ta have ya'all finally concede the truth...

  22. [22] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Kick

    You need to read my [8] over again - You missed my misspell typo on 'government'.

  23. [23] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Paula [14]: I feel your pain.

    Right now, Barr just put out the letter, and is in ascendance. Trolls are having a little field day, and now Trump is attacking Health Care.

    Seems a bit overwhelming. Truth is, they don't know what's about to hit them.

    Millions are MOBILIZING on health care. Take my word on that. The Congressional leaderheads are MOBILIZING to get to the bottom of the Barr Report, and to get Mueller on the stand, and to pursue their own investigations.

    We can chew gum & walk at the same time.
    Stay strong.

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Seems a bit overwhelming. Truth is, they don't know what's about to hit them.

    What's funny is that you and people like you have been saying that since Nov 2016...

    You **DO** realize that, sooner rather than later, ya'all are going to have to actually DELIVER something..

    So it was with the Russia Collusion..

    "Just be patient!!!"

    "Mueller is gonna deliver a knockout blow!!!!"

    "Trump will be frog marched from the Oval Office!!!"

    "Just wait!! You'll see!!!"

    "It's gonna be glorious!!!!"

    And so on and so on and so on...

    I hate to say it because I am fond of you...

    But you and every one else here (NEN) have absolutely NO CREDIBILITY...

    It's gonna be March 2025 and ya'all will STILL be saying...

    "Just be patient!!!"

    "Mueller is gonna deliver a knockout blow!!!!"

    "Trump will be frog marched from the Oval Office!!!"

    "Just wait!! You'll see!!!"

    "It's gonna be glorious!!!!"

    It's time to face the awful (for ya'all) truth..

    Ya'all lost... Trump won... In EVERY sense of the word...

  25. [25] 
    neilm wrote:

    Yes - but nobody round here said any of that Michale, except for the voices in your head.

    We've been though this. You keep making the stupid claims, then when you are asked to point to real comments with real links, you run away.

    Two days later, you try the same nonsense again.

    It is sad. If this is all you have, get a hobby.

  26. [26] 
    Kick wrote:

    CRS
    22

    You need to read my [8] over again - You missed my misspell typo on 'government'.

    No, I didn't miss a single one of your typos, dearest, nor did I miss your ridiculous use of apostrophes in place of quotes, for example, 'government' , and the period should go inside the quotes, etc.

    And what do you think it means that I remained silent about it? I feel certain that you're not ignorant enough to subscribe to notions that are utterly nonsensical and mentally deficient (I won't say retarded... oops, just did) regarding silence.

    What could I have meant by my silence?

    * I am giving you some "space" uninterrupted.
    * I am encouraging your creativity.
    * I don't care.
    * I do care but not enough to say anything "right now."
    * I'll let you go "this one time."
    * I can't always fix the terminally stupid.

    I tease... but you obviously appeared to be asking for it. It's time for your Raisin Bran. ;)

  27. [27] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula 14
    Balthasar 23

    Balthasar is correct, Paula. I would simply add:

    1. Read the parsed words in the letter without reading anything more into it than what is actually there. With a few exceptions, the words in the letter are Barr's.

    2. Mueller does not equivocate; whatever he did would have been done deliberately.

    3. This morning, there was a hearing on a motion to unseal more details about the "mystery Mueller case." Chief Judge Beryl Howell said that public interest is dependent on the status of the grand jury investigation. She also asked AUSA (Assistant U.S. Attorney) David Goodhand if the grand jury investigation had concluded, to which he replied: "No. I can say it's continuing robustly."

    I like that word "robustly." :)

  28. [28] 
    Paula wrote:

    [23] Balthasar: I hear you.

  29. [29] 
    Paula wrote:

    [27] Kick: yes, Mueller may not be at fault in any of this in that Barr was hired into the job to obstruct and he's obstructing. America's fate due to the acts of traitors really shouldn't be dependent on one man's apparent obedience to his traitorous superior(s). (Or defiance.)

    What this criminal administration has taught us is that laws only matter when they are enforced - and GOP has no compunction about selective enforcement. We've also learned that many things have to be enshrined into law because "norms" don't count and relying on "honor" or the characters of people isn't sufficient. And every horrible belief I have developed over the years about Republicans being corrupt rotten bad faith actors has been fully vindicated.

    Whether Mueller has fail-safes locked in will become clear. Whether Mueller will share info with Dems/public in the face of clear suppression - if that's our only hope - remains to be seen. Whether Dems in the House, for instance, summon him to testify or the like, remains to be seen.

    Where we are now is in a place of suppression by people operating in bad faith.

  30. [30] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Neil M -16

    "Currently a large portion, maybe even a majority, of medical research is conducted by companies and research organizations in the U.S. because they know that have a market that will be heavily overcharged for their new products. These same product, when released in Canada, the U.K., France, etc. cannot command the same margins."

    This analogous to the Japanese camera industry in the 1060's. My uncle introduced a lot Japanese brands into the United States market. Cameras and film were among them. I asked him to bring me back a high end model on his next trip to Japan. He told me to "take the train downtown and buy one, cameras are a lot more expensive in Japan." The captive Japanese consumer subsidized the economy of scale that made unit cost cheaper for the rest of the world and presumably optimized profits flowing into the camera business.

    In my opinion, a high wall ought to strictly separate drug research from drug production and marketing. We have have seen what an unfettered drug industry does (including writing its own regulations).

    The research for new medical drugs and appliances(including efficacy and safety) should only take place at universities and nonprofits and be funded by government grants. The funding process should emphasize new drugs that target critical medical needs, not minor tweaks to old drugs in order to extend patents until the end of time. The drug manufacture/marketer's job is to make a product to a high standard as cheaply as possible. Let competition run high at universities, nonprofits and manufacturing firms, but keep them out each other's lanes.

  31. [31] 
    Paula wrote:

    Q-poll today says majority of Americans do not think the report exonerates Blotus - the % of people who think Blotus is guilty actually went up.

    Suppressing the report is the act of guilty people.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes - but nobody round here said any of that Michale, except for the voices in your head.

    Maybe not those exact words.. But that's the gist of what ya'all have been saying for the last 2+ years..

    You yourself has used the bullshit "be patient, Mueller's gonna nail Trump" concept more times than can be counted..

    You even said it AFTER ya'all got totally and utterly deflated by Mueller and the facts..

    Let me be totally clear and transparent here.

    YOU LOST

    Mueller TOTALLY and UTTERLY exonerated President Trump over Russian Collusion..

    Ya'all's credibility, which was sub-zero BEFORE Mueller's report, has actually gone LOWERS.. Which is an amazing feat when you consider it..

    Now, EVERY TIME ya'all come up with another Trump/America hater conspiracy theory, I'll be around to point out:

    "Yea?? That's what you said about Russia Collusion... Why should anyone believe you now when you have been WRONG about everything re: President Trump in the past??"

    It is sad.

    No, what is SAD is you going on and on about "patience, Mueller will find something about Russia and Collusion" for 2+ years and when Mueller finally confirms after 2+ years that you are full of shit?? You double down and say Mueller is wrong..

    THAT is what is sad..

    If this is all you have, get a hobby.

    I have a hobby..

    Pointing out ya'all and all ya'all's Trump/America hating bullshit...

    It's a great hobby that keeps me real buzy.... :D

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Give It Up, Democrats. The Russia Investigation Is Over.

    There's no need to turn the Russia investigation into the next Benghazi.

    For nearly two years, Democrats desperately hoped that Robert Mueller would ride in on a white horse and save the country from Donald Trump’s corrupt presidency. But three days after the special counsel submitted his report to the Department of Justice, one thing is clear: The Russia investigation no longer poses a mortal threat to this presidency. Trump’s future is now in the hands of a divided, hyper-partisan Congress that agrees on almost nothing.

    Dejected Democrats may be tempted to keep fighting the administration over the Trump campaign’s connections to Russia and the question of whether he obstructed justice. They are expected to increase pressure on Attorney General William Barr to release not only Mueller’s full report, but all of the documents that informed it, and may even try to assume the mantle of the now-concluded Russia investigation. “There’s a difference between compelling evidence of collusion and whether the special counsel concludes that he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt the criminal charge of conspiracy,” Representative Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said on Sunday.

    It’s time for Democrats to quit their Russia obsession. Prolonging this investigation would be a grave political mistake and distract from more pressing—and more politically potent—inquiries into the president and his administration. It risks becoming a fool’s errand on par with the Republicans’ Benghazi boondoggle.
    https://newrepublic.com/article/153396/give-up-democrats-russia-investigation-over

    Great advice.. I have to wonder if Democrats (and ya'all) have the wisdom to heed the advice..

    Of course ya'all don't...So you won't..

    Ya'all MUST have President Trump's head on a pike and you don't care how it happens....

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Donald Trump flat-out lied about how wonderful healthcare would become under his leadership.

    Just like Odumbo "flat-out lied" about how wonderful it will be to close Gitmo...

    Funny how you don't hold Obama responsible for HIS "flat out" lies...

    How come??

    Oh, that's right.. Obama has a -D after his name..

    Trump made a campaign promise.. It hasn't panned out exactly as planned..

    Big woop..

    President Trump still has 5+ years to make good on his campaign promise..

    Odumbo will ***NEVER*** make good on his promise to close Gitmo...

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Resistance Media Weren’t Ready for This
    After years of accruing retweets and Patreon donations with fevered speculation about Mueller, anti-Trump internet personalities are scrambling to figure out what’s next.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/muellers-conclusion-scrambling-resistance-media/585721/

    And THIS comes from some Left Wing rag...

    Ya'all KNOW Dumbocrats are in hurtin' status when the Left Wing rags start pointing out how frak'ed Dumbocrats are...

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump vows to release FISA docs now that Mueller probe is concluded, slams 'treasonous' FBI
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-vows-to-release-fisa-docs-now-that-mueller-probe-is-concluded-slams-treasonous-fbi

    Trump has been promising to release the full un-redacted FISA documents..

    We come to learn there was a very good reason not to release them while Mueller was investigating..

    Now that Mueller is done and has COMPLETELY and UTTERLY exonerated President Trump over Russia collusion, there is absolutely NO REASON to keep those documents and files secret...

    It's gonna be a FIELD DAY on Democrats who are named in those documents.. :D

    Jail time For Dumbocrats??? Could be...

    Let's all find out together.. It's gonna be a hoot! :D

    "No, you know what?? It IS funny!! It's a HOOT!!"
    -Tony Stark, AVENGERS AGE OF ULTRON

  37. [37] 
    John M wrote:

    [34] Michale

    "Donald Trump flat-out lied about how wonderful healthcare would become under his leadership.

    Just like Odumbo "flat-out lied" about how wonderful it will be to close Gitmo..."

    You do know the two are not even remotely comparable, right?

    Since in one case it was a Republican Congress that stopped Obama from closing Gitmo. Obama didn't lie about his intentions to try to do so.

    On the other hand, Trump has never put forward a proposal of his won on healthcare. He has relied on the Congress (Republican) to do so. Democrats who now control Congress would happily welcome his support of their healthcare plan, as you well know.

    "Funny how you don't hold Obama responsible for HIS "flat out" lies...

    How come??

    Oh, that's right.. Obama has a -D after his name.."

    Funny how you don't hold Trump accountable for his 'flat out" lies. How come? Oh, that's right, because Trump has a -R after his name.

  38. [38] 
    John M wrote:

    I meant "own" not "won" :-D

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    You do know the two are not even remotely comparable, right?

    I know that, in YOUR mind, the are not comparable because one is a Democrat "flat out" lying and the other is a Republican "flat out" lying..

    But, in reality, they are both the same. The signal of intent..

    Funny how you don't hold Trump accountable for his 'flat out" lies.

    Because it wasn't a lie anymore than Odumbo's GITMO promise was a lie...

    The problem with ya'all is that ya'all have different standards for what constitutes a lie totally based on Party/Ideological slavery.

    Trump could say, "It's going to be a great day!!!" and you would call that a "lie" because it rained that day....

    Ya'all have absolutely NO CONCEPT beyond the ideological blinders ya'all wear...

  40. [40] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale

    Right now, our blog buddiesare saying "Nobody knows what Mueller said, because Barr's hiding some of it".

    Eventually, Mueller will speak up and confirm that either there was no collusion/conspiracy, or that the specific things people are choosing to identify as collusion/conspiracy, are actually not illegal.

    Then our blog buddies will say "See, there WAS collusion/conspiracy, but they let him get away with it"!

    NEVER are they going to say "Oh shit, we let our partisan passion overwhelm our common sense."

    You're pissin' in the wind man, you cannot win this argument on their terms!

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, since I know how much ya'all LOVE polls and swear by polls...

    POLL: APPROVAL 50%
    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows that 50% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Trump’s job performance. Forty-nine percent (49%) disapprove.

    The latest figures include 37% who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing and 41% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -4. (see trends).
    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_mar28

    And for the Dumbocrats, the HITS just keep on comin'!! :D

  42. [42] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Oops, make that read "Our blog buddys are" . . .

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    @CRS,

    Oh I know they will never concede how totally and utterly WRONG they were...

    Mueller has a history of correcting the record if people claims he said something he didn't say...

    If Barr characterizes Mueller's report in a certain way and Mueller feels it's even CLOSE to being wrong, Mueller will speak out and correct the record.. Like he has always done..

    Mueller's silence is his affirmation that everything Barr said is dead on ballz accurate..

    But, as you say, these Weigantians will NEVER concede that they were wrong... Their tongues would surely turn to fire if they had to admit that they were wrong and you and I were factually accurate...

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    If Barr characterizes Mueller's report in a certain way and Mueller feels it's even CLOSE to being wrong, Mueller will speak out and correct the record.. Like he has always done..

    Anyone who has even a SEMBLANCE of a rational bone in their body will acknowledge this is factually accurate..

    That's why I am waiting to see how CW addresses the facts...

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Right now, our blog buddiesare saying "Nobody knows what Mueller said, because Barr's hiding some of it".

    Besides, our "blog buddies" have already confirmed what they will say when Mueller confirms again that what Barr wrote was accurate...

    "He is a republican after all. Party before country always. Liars before truth."

    In short, nothing that anyone says will have ANY effect..

    They have their delusions and that is what they will believe regardless of any FACTS to the contrary..

    They will throw Mueller under the bus just as they threw Comey under the bus.....

Comments for this article are closed.