ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

"States' Rights" On Elections Cuts Both Ways

[ Posted Tuesday, July 30th, 2019 – 16:08 UTC ]

The way Mitch McConnell sees it, he's taking a bold stance against the federalization of elections in America. The way everyone else sees it, he's refusing to allow any bills dealing with beefing up the security of America's elections from going forward, thus becoming what was called during the Red Scare and the Cold War a "useful idiot" for Moscow -- because by his refusal to act, he is furthering the ability of Vladimir Putin to attack our elections once again. But while this is a fascinating exercise in political theater all around, today's news shows without a shadow of a doubt that the supposed Republican reverence for "states' rights" when it comes to conducting elections evaporates instantly when one of those states does something with which they do not agree. This has always been the case, really, when it comes to right-wing support for the concept of states' rights.

States' rights were elevated to prominence because racists didn't want the federal government telling the mostly-Southern states how they could and could not treat African-Americans. That's the ugly history of the concept, and it happened so long ago that most of the racists were actually Democrats (because this was before Ronald Reagan's "Southern strategy" realigned the partisan split between racists and those championing equal rights for all races). But partisanship aside, states' rights was the banner that conservatives flocked to, in order to explain why the federal government couldn't force states to integrate schools or get rid of all the Jim Crow "separate but equal" laws throughout the South.

Over time, however, the arguments surrounding states' rights have gone in directions no one arguing about them in the 1960s could have possibly imagined. Progressives found a new love for states' rights back in the 1990s when it came to legalizing marijuana. This, it should be mentioned, was so long ago that progressives were still proudly calling themselves liberals. But all the medicinal marijuana laws (and, later, the adult recreational legalization laws) were predicated on the idea that the federal government's power to dictate what happened on the state level was limited, at best -- and, where required, judged to be non-existent. To use an even older term (one also steeped in racism), this is a modern-day example of "nullification."

But back to the present. Mitch McConnell is trying to make the ethical case that all the election security bills -- even the ones written by Republicans or that have wide bipartisan support -- are nothing short of a gigantic plot by the Democrats to somehow weaken the Republican Party at the polls. This is sheer paranoia, it must be pointed out, since how anyone can think that a simple thing like requiring every precinct to use voting machines that produce a paper ballot is somehow partisan is simply incomprehensible. The only way having the ability to conduct a true recount of all the votes cast would give Democrats a partisan advantage is if Republicans are somehow already cheating on a widespread scale, after all. But that's not the way Mitch sees things.

Mitch sees elections as being under the sole control of each of the 50 states, period. Any interference from Washington at all, no matter how benign, undercuts this basic constitutional premise. At least, that's what he's been saying -- I have no real idea what he actually believes. Today, though, all that was put to the test, as Governor Gavin Newsom signed a bill into law in California which will require any candidate for the office of president to publicly release five years of income tax returns before they are allowed on the ballot -- in both the primary and general elections. If Donald Trump continues to refuse to release his returns, he will have to run as a write-in candidate in the most-populous state in the country.

This, it should be noted, will almost certainly not change the outcome in any way. Republicans in California (yes, they're a dying breed, but some of them still exist...) will likely just go ahead and write in Trump's name -- it's not that hard to spell, after all, so he will likely become the Republican nominee by winning the primary in a GOP write-in landslide. Trump will then not win the state in November, but then he never was going to be able to in the first place, so this won't change the Electoral College outcome by a single vote. So you might think that, since the outcome is pretty much preordained anyway, Republicans wouldn't be too worried about California's new law.

You'd be wrong, of course. The Republican outcry against the new law was swift and entirely predictable. "Unconstitutional!" they loudly cried. Strange how, to them, the Constitution seems to say that they can restrict the federal government's involvement in state election practices right up until a state does something they don't like.

What they're worried about isn't California, though. As previously mentioned, whether California institutes this law in 2020 or not, the outcome is going to be exactly the same. Democrats could run a ficus plant as their presidential nominee, and it would still get four million more votes than Trump in the Golden State. That's just reality. But there are other states out there with Democratic state legislatures and Democratic governors. If this becomes a new trend among blue states, then that could indeed threaten some of the states Trump is going to need if he has any chance of winning. So that's the real danger to Republicans -- that this could be just the start of a new legislative trend.

Republicans really are getting what they deserve in this fight. They've been quietly manipulating state election laws for decades to try and tilt the playing field in their direction. No wonder Mitch McConnell is nervous about Democrats passing election-reform laws, because every time the Republicans did this it was indeed to create a partisan advantage for their team. But there's a big difference between promoting the safety and security of America's election system on a national scale -- which is all congressional Democrats are trying to do, really -- and passing laws on the state level to annoy the other party (or suppress the other party's ability to turn out the vote).

This will all end up in the courts, of course. Democrats can win all the victories possible at the lower levels, but the real question is how the Supreme Court will rule on this idea. And past indications are that the court overcomes its reluctance to be seen as partisan when it comes to helping Republicans gain the White House (see: Bush v. Gore). So California's new law may become nothing more than a taunt to hurl against Trump, if the high court strikes it down. But even that's a useful thing, for Democrats.

The new California law is, quite obviously, intended to be a serious thumb stuck directly in Trump's eye. The reason it was even necessary is that Trump is, also quite obviously, hiding something monumental in his taxes. It's doubtful at this point that whatever it is would even matter to his voting base -- they really wouldn't care no matter how bad it was, in other words, they'd still support and vote for Trump regardless. But Trump has locked himself into refusing to release any of his taxes, becoming the first modern president to take such a stance. It is because he is so adamant that such a law is necessary in the first place.

Presidential politics aside, though, what is most amusing in this debate is to see Republicans try to argue both sides of an argument at the same time. That's some world-class Orwellian doublethink, folks. The federal government simply can't dictate to the states how to run their elections, but also California simply can't be allowed to run their elections they way they see fit, because that would hurt Donald Trump and the Republican Party. It's rare for such hypocrisy to be on display in so stark a fashion at the same point in time. Usually these arguments are separated by enough time that people's memory grows dim as to previous stances taken. Not so this time around. This time Mitch and his fellow travellers will have to make both sides of the same argument at once. Which should prove to be highly amusing, from the peanut gallery.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

95 Comments on “"States' Rights" On Elections Cuts Both Ways”

  1. [1] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    This kind of reporting reminds me of Doug Adams' phrase from his "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" comedies:

    “Oh, dear”, says God, “I hadn’t thought of that”, and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

    Would that Mitch McConnell and the rest of the modern GOP, confronted by their illogic and contradictions like the one you point out here, would vanish in a puff of logic.

    But they don't. They never have. The Dems, bless their sweet sweet souls, have their own share of (less evil) contradictions. No one has argued them out of existence or into consistency either.

    What, I wonder, actually drives change and, one hopes, progress in politics? What gets the voters to elect Obama, a basically decent and intelligent man, after eight years of George Bush's rancid buffoonery, and then re-elect him - only to subsequently vote in [sic] Trump, who makes young Bush look both honest and patriotic?

    Is there a point to pointing out hypocrisy and dishonesty in the other side? Will it change enough minds to affect the next election, or is it simply a soul-relieving vent?

  2. [2] 
    Kick wrote:

    Interesting debate. Joe Biden won the first night without even being there. :)

  3. [3] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Kick -

    My big takeaway was that this was the debate I had been waiting to see since at least 2016: moderation versus boldness. Dream big versus dream small.

    All else aside, I was glad Dems finally got to see such a debate, personally.

    John M from Ct:

    Yeah, I hear you, but it's kind of like working the refs. You may not get your call overturned, but you may influence their next call. Does that make sense?

    -CW

  4. [4] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW
    4

    My big takeaway was that this was the debate I had been waiting to see since at least 2016: moderation versus boldness. Dream big versus dream small.

    Whereas I think there was a preview/hint of that to come, but the current format simply hinders it. The majority of the Democratic coalition voters being moderates, I think it was incumbent on the far lefties to make their case for relitigating the entire healthcare issue, and I don't think they did that... so a draw goes to the moderate Democrats, Independents, and those ex-Republicans voting Democratic now.

    I also think "the Bern" has fizzled and shouldn't have agreed to a truce. By the time he figures that out, it'll be too late for him to recover from having done it. Not trying to be brutal... just my honest opinion.

    So Joe Biden won without saying a word because nobody took him on tonight. Wonder if he can win tomorrow actually being there!? ;)

    All else aside, I was glad Dems finally got to see such a debate, personally.

    And I still think that debate you're describing is coming soon to a debate stage in America. I also think either side could still win it, but it's going to be a much harder sell for the far lefties for obvious reasons. Regardless, Biden better be on his toes because Harris and Warren are very good at 'splaining things. :)

  5. [5] 
    Kick wrote:

    ^^^ EDIT ^^^

    CW
    3

    I goobed the number.

  6. [6] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:


    Is there a point to pointing out hypocrisy and dishonesty in the other side? Will it change enough minds to affect the next election, or is it simply a soul-relieving vent?

    Yes, it is called “presenting the facts”. Will it change enough minds to affect the next election? That is not the point. Would you suggest that stating the truth is only a useful action as long as you can guarantee the results it will produce? Truth should never be used only when it is convenient for those who possess it.

  7. [7] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I'm with Kick on this. Biden won walking away.

    Now's the big test..can he do it in person?

    Stay tuned...

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    When Democrats start supporting photo ID for voters, then... and ONLY then.. will it be believable that Democrats care about Vote security...

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, it is called “presenting the facts”.

    No.. It's called "spin"..

    Truth should never be used only when it is convenient for those who possess it.

    That is REALLY funny, coming from you.. :D

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    According to the Drudge Poll and other sources, Williamson won the debate!!

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Yea.. We can sure take the Democrat Party seriously.. :D

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    With regards to Trump's big win..

    Considering that Candidate Trump went into the election with only a 2% chance of winning???

    President Trump's win was YYYYUUUGGGGGEEEEEEE..

    The BIGGEST upset win in the history of elections..

    Spin all ya want.. But facts are facts.. :D

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, just to put to lie a bullshit claim from yesterday... That means you, Blathy...

    Trump sees his base growing from Democratic sparring
    The president’s reelection campaign hopes to use some of the Democratic presidential candidates’ most liberal stances to draw new working-class and independent voters to Trump.

    politico.com/story/2019/07/30/donald-trump-democratic-2020-sparring-1440498

    The numbers don't lie – Trump movement growing by putting America first
    cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2019/07/29/numbers-dont-lie-trump-movement-growing-putting-america-first/1855914001/

    TRUMP EFFECT
    NBC News poll of the South: Voters' support for Trump grows, residents see race relations improving

    nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/nbc-news-poll-south-voters-support-trump-grows-residents-see-n1031851

    Growing Movement of Black Conservatives Supporting Trump—Pastor Mark Burns
    youtube.com/watch?v=IaQp9BFwvsI

    Trump’s Electoral College Edge Could Grow in 2020, Rewarding Polarizing Campaign
    Re-election looks plausible even with a bigger loss in the national popular vote.

    nytimes.com/2019/07/19/upshot/trump-electoral-college-edge-.html

    The Numbers Are Better for Donald Trump Than You Think. Here's Why
    time.com/5419515/donald-trump-numbers-reelection/

    No matter how you slice the facts, it's clear you GOT no facts to support your bullshit claim that President Trump is losing support..

    And, since you refuse to answer how a Democrat candidate who supports Open Borders, Free Full Health Care For Illegal Immigrants, Reparations and yanking ALL Americans off their health care plans is going to appeal to Independents, NPAs and Trump voters.....

    It's clear not even YOU believe that Democrats will win in 2020...

    :D

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's clear from the comments that Party Purity is way WAY a priority than electability...

    As predicted.. :D

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Sanders and Warren are peddling bad policies like Medicare for All, free everything, and impossible promises that will turn off independent voters and get Trump re-elected."
    -John Delaney

    Yep, exactly...

    But Democrats don't care..

    Party Purity Uber Alles

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    As to Joe Biden winning because nobody mentioned him??

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Of course nobody mentioned him..

    Because the 2 morons who attacked him won't be on the stage til tonight...

    DUH......

    "Did IQs suddenly drop while I was away???"
    -Ripley, ALIENS

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Axelrod warns Medicare-for-all, immigration proposals unpopular with voters

    Former President Obama aide David Axelrod Tuesday warned that many of the proposals endorsed by Democratic presidential candidates disregard many polls that show these positions unpopular.

    He noted that polls show large numbers of Americans oppose Medicare-for-all, decriminalizing illegal border crossings and giving free healthcare to illegal immigrants.

    “It does seem if you’re running for president that you ought to take into consideration what the country wants,” Axelrod said during CNN’s post-debate analysis.

    A majority of the 20 candidates in the debates support some version of Medicare-for-all, which would eliminate private insurance. A majority of voters oppose single-payer, according to a new Marist poll. All 10 candidates raised their hands during the second night of debates last month when asked if they would provide health care for illegal immigrants.

    “Do we move forward with these idealized proposals that are going to beg opposition and make it easier for Donald Trump to make his case and win re-election when the stakes are so high?” Axelrod added. “This is what a lot of Democrats are worried about.”
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/former-obama-aide-warns-dems-medicare-for-all-immigration-proposals-unpopular-with-democratic-voters

    There is simply NO WAY to get around the FACTS..

    All Dem candidates are taking position that will GUARANTEE that they will lose in the General election...

    This is fact..

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Just when Democrats thought it was safe to ignore Baltimore again...

    We come to find out that it just ain't Baltimore..

    The top 10 rat-infested cities are ALL Democrat shitholes..

    Why Do Democrats Run All Of The Dangerous And Rodent Infested Cities?
    https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2019/07/28/why-do-democrats-run-all-of-the-dangerous-and-rodent-infested-cities-n2550734

    And not a SINGLE person here can explain exactly how President Trump's Baltimore tweets are "racist"... :eyeroll:

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Congressman Elijah Cummings may honestly believe that his district in West Baltimore doesn’t stink.

    But it does.

    I’ve been there, I’ve seen and smelled it.

    Bernie Sanders called it “the third world" back in 2016.

    Sometimes the truth hurts. Especially to those bathed, clothed, and dipped in the intoxication of corrupt power, but that’s why sunlight is so helpful.

    And disinfecting!

    Rep. Cummings, while being very obsessed with Russia, seems utterly bewildered with the idea that anyone could dare question why so many billions of federal dollars flow to places like West Baltimore when they are obviously doing no good.

    Newsflash for ya'all here....

    Just because one lay out the FACTS about a person who happens to be black, doesn't make one racist...

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Look at other cities in similar dilapidation and there holds a unique truth: Democrats run them all.

    How long will sewage run down the streets of San Francisco? How long will St. Louis, Detroit, and Baltimore, continue to rotate as the nation’s most dangerous crime infested metros? And how long will federal dollars keep chasing bad money with new?

    None of the elected officials seem to know—much less care.

    How can Democrats claim they want to clean up the country when they can't even clean up their own cities???

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    But in San Francisco—or the West Coast version of West Baltimore—which is Nancy Pelosi’s home district, you literally can download an app to help navigate the streets with the least amount of fecal matter as possible.

    Seattle is just as bad. Los Angeles has zoomed past them both.

    And according to the FBI Uniform Crime Report and as reported in the USA Today (from Feb 19, 2019), the top 10 most dangerous cities in America are run by Democrats.

    Facts don't lie...

    Democrats can't govern fer shit.. As if we didn't know that after the Odumbo 8-year fiasco..

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    In Baltimore, Democrats have run everything for more than four decades. Federal dollars have flowed in, and yet the stench, sight, and symbolism of it all—stinks.

    In my life I’ve spent multiple seasons, time, and resources going to the actual third world. The heartbreak in places like Haiti, Guatemala, Ghana and the Congo, is that they have no opportunity to make their lives better. Those economies are largely run by corrupt governments whose only ambition is to use public office to enrich themselves. A lot like Cummings, Sanders, and Pelosi have done.

    The facts are clear.. President Trump was dead on ballz accurate with his tweets about Baltimore..

    And, true to form, when Democrats are confronted with their own corruption and incompetence, factually supported..???

    They play the race card... :eyeroll:

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:
  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    Woke Racism

    Well before Sigmund Freud formalized the idea of “projectionism”—the defense of one’s own shortcomings and sins by attributing them to others—it was a common theme in classical literature and the New Testament: the ridiculing of the mole on someone else’s nose to hide one’s own boil.

    The term projection more or less sums up much of the woke identity politics movement, in which obsessions with racial privilege and tribal exceptionalism are justified by accusing others of just such bias.

    While such racist projectionism can often be a psychological tic that assuages the guilt of one’s own rank prejudice, just as often accusing others of racism is a peremptory careerist move to win media attention, lucre, or job advancement.

    Ahhh... That explains a lot..

    The Democrat Party is merely trying to distract from it's racist roots by pretending that OTHER people are racist..

    Makes sense..

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Racists—those who assume those of different races always act collectively in predictable ways, usually far worse than does their own tribe—who charge racism assume that unlike the proverbial wolf crier, there is currently no downside to their hysterias and fantasies.

    That is, the racist who for a variety of reasons lobs “Racist!” at others assumes that, even when his tired charges are proven false, in our postmodern society he can argue that these accusations in theory always could be true, and therefore no one would ever accuse a self-identified victim as a racist perpetrator himself.

    It's funny how many FALSE accusations of racism come from Democrats...

    Jussie Smolletts

    Tawana Brawley

    North Carolina Lacrosse team

    Journo-list

    Occasional Cortex

    Cory Booker

    Kamela Harris

    Elijah Cummings

    The list of false accusations of racism is endless....

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    For example, a Louisiana State University student, who falsely claimed she encountered a noose on campus—supposedly planted by whites to intimidate African-American students such as herself—was hardly contrite about inflaming tensions with a false accusation when the “noose” turned out to be simply a dangling power wire cable. Instead of apologizing, the accuser redoubled her claims: “Considering what is currently happening in this country, someone hanging a noose certainly seems plausible . . . Black students all over are being threatened for speaking out. I’ve previously been threatened for talking about race at LSU.”

    And this EXACTLY illustrates the problem perfectly.

    The racist will ALWAYS play the race card.. Even though the connection to race is tenuous to non-existent..

    The George Zimmerman shooting proved that beyond ANY doubt....

    In that incident, race had nothing to do with anything..

    And yet, the Hysterical Democrats played the race card..

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    Jussie Smollett hired two black associates to dress up as white Trump-hatted supporters to stage a fake attack on himself. He hoped to gain sympathy as a victim of supposed rampant intersectional racist hatred in the age of Trump. Apparently, only that way would the pathetically desperate Smollett restore his sinking brand and jumpstart his fading acting career—through becoming an icon of the innocent black man symbolically lynched by predatory whites.

    Smollett, himself half-white, accused an innocent large segment of the U.S. population as racist without any worry of the consequences from such false charges. And rightly so: Smollett has faced little pushback, remains in the news, and believes that no one ultimately will dare to charge him as a racist who committed a hate-crime.

    When you get right down to it, that is EXACTLY accurate..

    Smollett is a racist who committed a hate crime..

    But he gets a pass because he is a Trump/America hater who has a -D after his name..

    Funny how that is, eh?? :eyeroll:

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Covington Catholic fiasco illustrated the same modus operandi. Native American activist Nathan Phillips sought media exposure and careerist advantage by deliberately confronting a group of young Catholic students on the National Mall. Phillips hoped the resulting staged optics would show privileged, male, young, white Christians with red MAGA hats haranguing a wizened Native American elder and Vietnam veteran.

    Phillips succeeded in his quest for universal victim status, media exposure, and the demonization of the Covington school students, despite being quickly exposed as a faker who never set foot in Vietnam and a serial racial provocateur.

    Another perfect example of lying Democrats and the sheep that follow...

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    The new racism is epidemic among those in the so-called squad, the self-referenced nickname for four media-obsessed, first-term congressional representatives, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), who without their daily charges of bias largely would be unknown back-benchers laboring away in obscurity.

    Take Pressley’s recent formulation of the new racism at a recent Netroots Nation conference:

    If you’re not prepared to come to that table and represent that voice, don’t come, because we don’t need any more brown faces that don’t want to be a brown voice. We don’t need black faces that don’t want to be a black voice. We don’t need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don’t want to be a queer voice. If you’re worried about being marginalized and stereotyped, please don’t even show up because we need you to represent that voice.

    In sum, Pressley just outlined the classic anti-Enlightenment mindset: we are all permanent captives of our superficial race, religion, and sexual orientation. We must at all times think, act, and speak in such tribal fashion—and do so monolithically and collectively, in adopting the party line as set down by such elites as those like Pressley herself.

    Blacks who oppose affirmative action, or Muslims who recognize Israel, or “queers” whose sexual preferences are incidental, not essential to their personas are thus declared not authentic and thus not to be welcomed by Pressley into the new racialist Democratic Party.

    Funny how no one here condemned Pressley for her racist comments.

    Why is that???

    Because racism is perfectly acceptable as long as the Political Party slavery lines up..

    :eyeroll:

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    I have just pulled relevant excerpts from this fascinating commentary...

    I highly recommend everyone read the whole thing if they are really interested in FACTS..

    :D Which excludes most everyone here... :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's funny..

    Back in March of this year, the NY Grime did a story on Baltimore that said much MUCH worse things about Baltimore than President Trump did..

    THE TRAGEDY OF BALTIMORE
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/12/magazine/baltimore-tragedy-crime.html

    Funny... I didn't see a SINGLE person here complain about the NY Grime "racism"...

    Why is that??

    Is it because ya'all only scream "RACISM" when you can use such false bullshit claims to beat someone over the head that has an -R after their name??

    The FACTS clearly prove that this is the case.. :eyeroll:

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hollywood reacts to Dim debates..

    We’re five candidates in and so far I feel confident about a Trump re-election.
    -Michael Ian Black

    This feels like a West Wing episode fucked an auction.
    -Bradley Whitford

  32. [32] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    It's funny how many FALSE accusations of racism come from Democrats...

    Jussie Smolletts

    Tawana Brawley

    And you know these people are Democrats how? Black people must be Democrats, right? You are nothing but a racist mall cop wanna-be reject!

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Interesting debate. Joe Biden won the first night without even being there. :)

    Using that utterly ridiculous reasoning, President Trump ALSO won the debate.. :eyeroll: Moron...

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    And you know these people are Democrats how?

    Because moronic Dumbocrats like YOU supported them...

    You are nothing but a racist mall cop wanna-be reject!

    Facts to support, cockholster??

    None?? Yea, ain't that ALWAYS the way it is... :D

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    Cockholster,

    Remind me again... Of the two of us... WHICH one belongs to the Party that were slave owners and WHICH Party started up the KKK??

    That would be you, moron..

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can Someone Please Vote CNN Off the Stage?
    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/someone-please-vote-cnn-off-034812093.html

    Hehehehehe Someone doesn't like the Dumbocrat Propaganda Arm.. :D

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    DEBATE'S SURPRISE STAR
    Williamson scores with attacks on 'dark psychic forces,' top Googled candidate

    https://www.foxnews.com/

    That's today's Dumbocrat Party!! :D

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    “At the end of the day, I won’t support any plan that rips away health care from individuals. This is an example of wish-list economics. It used to be Republicans that wanted to repeal and replace; now many Democrats do as well.”
    -Montana Gov. Steve Bullock

    Yep... Democrats are acting *EXACTLY* as they accuse Republicans of acting..

    "Yes, I do believe I read that somewhere.."
    -Colonel Nathan R Jessup, A FEW GOOD MEN

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Cockholster,

    Remind me again... Of the two of us... WHICH one belongs to the Party that were slave owners and WHICH Party started up the KKK??

    That would be you, moron..

    So, that fact makes YOU the racist, sunshine..

    Not I...

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    DETROIT — The Democratic Party’s ideological divide was on full display Tuesday night as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren faced a fusillade of incoming fire from more moderate presidential contenders determined to cast their proposals as too costly and unrealistic and a sure path to reelecting Donald Trump.

    Warren and Sanders fended off one blitz after another from low-polling centrists who repeatedly derided their government-heavy policies as “fairy tale” wish lists that would alienate swing voters, limit Americans’ freedoms and inevitably raise taxes on the middle class.
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/31/democratic_debate_winners_and_losers__140896.html

    We've seen this movie before..

    ELECTABILITY STRIKES BACK

    It didn't end too well for the Electability faction.. :D

    "Hey guys, you ever see that really old movie, Empire Strikes Back?"
    "Jesus Tony, how old is this guy!!"
    "I don't know!! I didn't carbon date him!! He's on the young side."

    -CAPTAIN AMERICA: CIVIL WAR

  41. [41] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "...by refusing to act he is furthering the ability of Vladimir Putin to attack our elections once again."

    And the Republicans change their arguments depending on how it might benefit Republicans.

    Just like the Democrats.

    The Dems are so upset at the "Russian interference" that only happened for the first time in 2016.

    The Dems are upset by big money in our political process that only began after the Citizens United decision.

    And they are now busy campaigning on those issues and the legislation they promise sometime in the future but will not deliver as promised if they gain control rather than take action now by simply running small donor campaigns.

    And by letting the Dems get away with this deception by refusing to act on informing citizens aboot One Demand you, CW, are furthering the ability of the big money interests to attack our elections once again.

    To paraphrase Elizabeth Warren:
    I don't understand why someone would bother to write aboot politics if all they are going to do is write aboot what can't be done and what can't be accomplished.

    Get Real.

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    “We are more worried about winning an argument than winning an election.”
    -Amy Klaubacher

    Good thing this woman doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of being the Dim Nominee..

    She might actually give President Trump a run for the gold..

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for. I don’t get it,” the Massachusetts senator said in response to Delaney. “…We need to have the courage to fight back against that, and until we're ready to do that, it's just more of the same. Well, I'm ready to get in this fight. I'm ready to win this fight."

    What Faux-chohantas doesn't understand is she will also be fighting against more than two thirds of the American people...

    Her policies don't stand ANOTHER snowball's chance in hell of happening. They *ONLY* thing she is doing is making herself un-electable in the General...

    That's it...

    Anyone with more than 2 brain cells to rub together and is NOT enslaved by Party dogma can see that..

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Fact-Checking Satire -- Is Snopes Serious?
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/31/fact-checking_satire_--_is_snopes_serious_140893.html

    This is why it's impossible to take Left Wing so-called "fact" check sites seriously..

    Their heads are so far up the Left Winger's butts, they haven't seen the light of day their entire existence..

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Today's Democrat Party

    Is it me or is Marianne Williamson making a lot of sense?
    Williamson’s debate highlights are all of them yet again.

    https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/7/30/20747997/marianne-williamson-democratic-debate-2020-memes-cnn

    Where someone like Marianne Williamson is a serious Dim candidate for POTUS...

    :eyeroll:

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    Notes of common sense at debate, but will the Democrats listen?
    https://nypost.com/2019/07/31/notes-of-common-sense-at-debate-but-will-the-democrats-listen/

    Ha!!! Shirley, you jest....

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    If Tuesday night’s debate had taken place six months ago, the questions and answers would have been dominated by Russia, Russia, Russia. But with the accusations that President Trump was a traitor exposed for the hoax they always were, the left had to come up with a new slogan. Enter racist, racist, racist.

    Democrats and their media handmaidens apparently insist that their team march to a one-word mantra of six letters that begins with an “r.” That way they can turn on a dime and nobody will really notice. Brilliant!

    Except that people notice because repeatedly calling the president a racist is obviously a fig leaf designed to hide a lack of substantive arguments. Even the partisan audience in Detroit didn’t seem impressed with the name calling, perhaps because it was coming from 10 white candidates.

    The Democrat Party uses the Journo-List playback.

    If you don't have a logical or rational argument or don't even have any FACTS to support your case..

    Just call the opponent a racist to shut them down..

    Yea, good call, Dumbocrats.

    The American people are wise to that bullshit...

    You lose.. AGAIN...

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    That said, there was enough coherence to notice a pleasant surprise. To wit, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren had a battle on their hands trying to justify their promises of endless free stuff.

    TOP ARTICLES
    5/5
    READ MORE
    Woman gets jail for feeding stray cats in town
    called Garfield Heights

    They were the only top-tier candidates on the stage and while their plans mostly set the agenda, they were forced to play defense for much of the two hours.

    Medicare-for-all was all but ridiculed by five of their opponents. Granted, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Gov. Steven Bullock and former Gov. John Hickenlooper, congressman Tim Ryan and former congressman John Delaney are also-rans at this point, but they consistently injected notes of common sense into the fray.

    Who would have thunked it..

    THat a Dim candidate for POTUS could actually sound rational and reasonable...

    Mind boggling..

    But then, against socialists and communists.... ANYONE could sound rational and reasonable..

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    Lemme try that again..

    That said, there was enough coherence to notice a pleasant surprise. To wit, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren had a battle on their hands trying to justify their promises of endless free stuff.

    They were the only top-tier candidates on the stage and while their plans mostly set the agenda, they were forced to play defense for much of the two hours.

    Medicare-for-all was all but ridiculed by five of their opponents. Granted, Sen. Amy Klobuchar, Gov. Steven Bullock and former Gov. John Hickenlooper, congressman Tim Ryan and former congressman John Delaney are also-rans at this point, but they consistently injected notes of common sense into the fray.

    Who would have thunked it..

    THat a Dim candidate for POTUS could actually sound rational and reasonable...

    Mind boggling..

    But then, against socialists and communists.... ANYONE could sound rational and reasonable..

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Frankly, I didn’t expect so much of it, nor did I expect it would be as effective as it was. After all, the party is clearly headed left in a fury, determined to put as much distance between itself and Trump, even if that comes at the expense of the concerns of middle-class, middle-American voters.

    For one night at least, viewers got to hear opposing points of view. Bullock, for example, called the Warren-Sanders plans “wish-list economics” and Hickenlooper called them “radical.” Klobuchar said she worried that some in her party were “more interested in winning an argument” than the election.

    Delaney, the most vocal and consistently sensible, scoffed at the top tier candidates’ approach as “political suicide.”

    He said if the nominee advocated for medicare-for-all, free college tuition and other similar giveaways, “it will get Trump re-elected.” He then rattled off a list of previous Democratic nominees who got slaughtered — George McGovern, Walter Mondale and Michael Dukakis — with the clear implication that they had all gone too far left.

    The voice of reason.. But Democrats are too blinded by hate and HHPTDS to comprehend..

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    Of the other three candidates, guru Marianne Williamson was the most spirited and seemed to be having the most fun, while the evening did nothing to interrupt the steady decline of Beto O’Rourke and Pete Buttigieg. Both appeared to be drained of any fire in the belly and gave every impression that they recognize the end is near.

    Not so long ago, they were taken seriously as possible nominees and were raking in big donor bucks. Watching them fade so quickly and early, it’s fair to wonder what all the excitement was about.

    If Democrats want a (once again) snowball's chance in hell of winning the General Election..

    They better hope Biden pulls a rabbit out of the hat..

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    The mass shooting on Sunday night that you haven’t heard about | Editorial
    https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/editorials/mass-shooting-philadelphia-elmwood-gun-violence-gilroy-garlic-california-20190729.html

    The Philadelphia shooting was not a mass shooting as it is defined..

    Don't worry, Paula.. The Philly shooting wasn't in Elijah Cummings district... :eyeroll:

    The Philly shooting was gang-related..

    By definition, a crowd based mass shooting has, as it's overriding component, random-ness...

    It's what makes a CBMS so much more terrifying than a gang shooting or a domestic shooting or some such..

    It's so utterly random, it can happen anywhere.. To anyone...

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    ‘Joe Biden needs to atone’: Ex-veep braces for debate pile-on
    The former vice president’s crime-fighting record was once a signature strength. In the current Democratic Party, it might be a liability.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/31/democratic-debates-joe-biden-crime-record-2020-1441932

    Indicates PERFECTLY how far Left the Democrat Party has gone...

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    The rapid evolution of the politics of racial justice have made what used to be a signature strength into a potential liability, forcing him to scuttle his positions and rhetoric from decades ago — or risk getting trampled by rivals questioning his civil rights record. The biggest test comes Wednesday night, when he’ll be flanked on stage by two of his sharpest critics on race, Sens. Kamala Harris and Cory Booker.

    Biden’s crime-fighting efforts were once praised by African-American leaders — including by the first black president, Barack Obama, who cited the then-senator’s role in passing the landmark 1994 crime bill when he chose Biden as a running mate in 2008.

    This is not longer Biden's Democrat Party..

    Hell, this isn't even Barack Hussein Obama's Democrat Party..

    This is the Venezuela Democrat Party... :eyeroll:

    And there ain't NO WAY that the American people will elect someone from the Venezuela Democrat Party..

    NO...... WAY.......

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    And for many, Obama is no longer enough to validate Biden’s credentials.

    “Joe Biden needs to atone. He needs to admit the error of his ways,” said Desmond Meade, president of the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition and leader of the successful 2018 effort to restore voting rights to as many as 1.4 million people with felony convictions. “As a person previously convicted of a crime, there was a level of atonement I needed to do. I couldn’t just say it was in the past.

    The criminal justice plan Biden unveiled last week was a major step in that direction. It takes a decidedly different approach toward law-and-order issues, most notably on the death penalty — which he now calls for eliminating after decades of support for it. For the first time, Biden has also called for the complete elimination of mandatory-minimum sentences at the state and federal level.

    Yep.. Sad to see..

    Joe Biden is excising everything about Joe Biden that made Joe Biden Joe Biden..

    I wish I could say I was surprised.. But, given that Biden ignored the very logical and rational advice to end his political career on a high note...

    It's hardly surprising that the Venezuela Democrat Party would drag Joe Biden far to the Left..

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    DCCC ousts white executive director — because of her race
    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/

    The Democrat Party apple sure doesn't fall far from the Racist Tree.... :eyeroll:

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    “It was a big mistake when it was made. There's still a systematic racism and it goes almost unnoticed by so many of us.”
    -Joe Biden

    And yet, no one can point to a single solitary FACT that proves it.

    All they have is nebulous "code words" and subjective "dog whistles"...

    If one relies on magical mystical subjective evidence....

    One can "prove" anything they want.. :eyeroll:

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    California Requires Trump to Release Tax Returns for Spot on Primary Ballot
    President’s lawyer threatens court challenge, calling new law unconstitutional

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/california-requires-trump-to-release-tax-returns-for-spot-on-primary-ballot-11564515926

    Clearly unconstitutional..

    The US Constitution sets out the requirements for being a Presidential Candidate..

    States can't add requirements...

    Another example of HHPTDS overriding reason and common sense..

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Nolte: Russia Hoax Queen Rachel Maddow’s Ratings Crash to Fifth Place In July
    https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/07/31/nolte-russia-hoax-queen-rachel-maddows-ratings-crash-to-fifth-place-in-july/

    Remember when MadCow was ya'all's cat's meow when she spewed bullshit about Russia Collusion and Trump's tax returns??

    And ya'all fell for it EVERY TIME!! :D

    Ahhhh good times.. :D

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Katy Perry, more stars attend Google summit on climate change in private jets, mega yachts
    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/google-summit-celebrities-climate-change

    This is exactly why it's IMPOSSIBLE to take Humans Cause Global Warming religious fanatics seriously..

    THEY don't even believe the bullshit they are spewing...

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    Perry, who's starred in UNICEF videos about combating climate change, was reportedly spotted in a Maserati SUV that gets only an estimated 15 miles per gallon.

    Hypocrite, thy name is Dumbocrat Party...

  62. [62] 
    neilm wrote:

    Listen [6]

    Yes, it is called “presenting the facts”. Will it change enough minds to affect the next election? That is not the point.

    History hasn't been kind to Joe McCarthy - and it won't be kind to Trump, and the people who stood up for the truth against the constant lies from Trump and his minions will have more power because of it.

    I also suspect that when Trump loses his power to primary Republican politicians they will get the daggers out and make him pay for what they were put through and how they had to debase themselves for 6 years.

    If I were the Trump family I'd be a lot more worried about what future Republicans will do to him than Democrats. He won't be able to claim partisanship against Mitt Romney, Lindsay Graham (who was one of John McCain's best friends), and a lot of other Republicans.

    In fact, Lindsay Graham might be debasing himself in the short term to ensure he is still in a position of power when Trump is a political nothing in late 2020.

  63. [63] 
    neilm wrote:

    Listen [6] part 2

    Chris Ladd has an interesting take on the push back to Trumpism outside of politics:

    Where democracy has failed, something strange and new is emerging.

    "According to several employees, Edelman reconsidered because of concerns that news of its relationship with the prison company would be leaked, leaving one of the world’s leading public relations firms with a potential public relations crisis."

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/business/edelman-geo-border-detention.html

  64. [64] 
    neilm wrote:

    Chris Ladd and the NY Times are suggesting that Trumpism activities by ICE, the Border Patrol, private prison firms, etc. are toxic in a services driven environment.

    Services companies utterly dominate our economy now, manufacturing and ag are small in comparison: services jobs account for more than 80 percent of U.S. private-sector employment, or 89.7 million jobs - source: BEA.

    Services companies compete on the skills of their employees, and the most powerful jobs require higher education.

    The better educated in our society are not happy with Trumpism and are not interested in supporting it via their work activities. Unemployment for graduates is significantly lower than that of high school level workers and high school drop outs (2.1% vs 3.9% and 5.7% respectively), and trust me, finding well qualified people in the U.S. right now is hard.

    Thus if a significant percentage of the $80K+ employees in a services organization push back on a contract, such as Edelman's above did with the prison company, the services organization will follow the example of Microsoft, Apple, Deloitte, McKinsey, SunTrust, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, BNP Paribas, Wells Fargo, and now Edelman in cutting ties to work that enacts Trumpism-based policies.

    Trumpism will haunt the Republican Party for a generation.

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    and it won't be kind to Trump, and the people who stood up for the truth against the constant lies from Trump and his minions will have more power because of it.

    Failed Trump Prediction # 120,765,439

    What part of YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN WRONG ABOUT TRUMP do you not understand??

    If I were the Trump family I'd be a lot more worried about what future Republicans will do to him than Democrats.

    Yea, if you were Trump, you would always be winning..

    But yer just a whiney Dumbocrat so yer always losing..

    Trumpism will haunt the Republican Party for a generation.

    Failed Trump Prediction # 120,765,440

    :eyeroll:

    Howz that Russia Collusion delusion workin' out for ya, Neil??

    BBWWHAHAHAAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  66. [66] 
    Michale wrote:

    Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz said Wednesday that after watching the second primary debate, none of the Democratic presidential candidates have a chance at beating President Donald Trump.

    "I don't see anyone out there that comes close to beating Donald Trump. I think Donald Trump is stronger politically than he has ever been,” the former chairman of the U.S. House Oversight Committee Chaffetz, R-Utah, told “Fox & Friends.”

    Ten Democrats faced off in the first of two debates in Detroit, Mich., competing to take on President Trump in the 2020 election.
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/jason-chaffetz-dem-debate-trump-stronger-than-ever-politically

    Yep... President Trump is going to sail thru re-election easily...

  67. [67] 
    neilm wrote:

    Congrats to Trump for standing up to the drug lobby and pushing for cheaper drugs from Canada - we've been ripped off for too long!

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    So...

    Is anyone ready to explain exactly how President Trump's Baltimore are racist??

    Or, are ya'all just admitting that Dumbocrats throw out racist accusations at the drop of a dime, regardless of any non-factual basis???

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    Congrats to Trump for standing up to the drug lobby and pushing for cheaper drugs from Canada -

    Especially since Odumbo worked WITH the drug companies to keep the prices high...

    Congrats to Neil for giving credit where credit is due.. Even to President Trump...

    One acknowledgement to facts and reality doesn't erase three years of HHPTDS...

    But you have taken your first step on your road to recovery..

    As long as you don't relapse, yer well on yer way... :D

  70. [70] 
    Paula wrote:

    [64] neilm: Trumpism will haunt the Republican Party for a generation.

    I hope so.

  71. [71] 
    Paula wrote:

    [6] Listen:

    Truth should never be used only when it is convenient for those who possess it.

    Yes.

  72. [72] 
    Paula wrote:

    I was out for the debate so reviewed some clips and lots of discussions and liveblogging. Takaways:

    1. The CNN moderators' questions all used republican framing.
    2. The plan seemed to be to try to pit the "moderates" against the "progressives" and, depending on where you stand, you either thought it was legit or stupid.

    3. Bernie did very well, especially in the first half.

    4. E. Warren did very well and appeared to nudge BS into second place. She was seen as the overall winner by many different observers. There was a CNN focus group post-debate. Out of the 9 people, 8 chose her as the winner. The 9th person made a clearly prepared statement about "moderates" and named 2 of the white guys - I forget who. Several of the others said words to the effect that BS was doing great first half, but in the second half seemed to lapse into his standard stump stuff & that's when he lost them. However, none of them are committed to any candidate yet. They will be commenting on tonight's debate as well.

    4. Mayor Pete has 3 or 4 standout moments that are keeping him relevant.

    5. Beto and Amy couldn't get much attention or traction. They didn't hurt themselves but probably didn't help themselves either.

    6. Marianne Williamson charmed several pundits and others.

    7. The moderate white guys tried but are just not resonating with enough people.

    8. Warren & Sanders did not attack each other.

    9. The moderators' constant cutting candidates off mid-sentence was an irritant.

    10. Beto should run for Senate in TX.

    11. Everyone's looking forward to the "real" debates which will commence AFTER the field is dramatically reduced. Tonight's will be all about Biden vs. Harris but the showdown will be when Biden, Harris, Sanders and Warren are all on stage together.

    12. Worth noting: apparently a bunch of healthcare companies advertised during the debate.

  73. [73] 
    Paula wrote:

    Here's a great clip of Warren with CNN moderators post-debate:

    https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1156430085672636418

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    1. The CNN moderators' questions all used republican framing.

    Funny how ya'all claim that facts and reality ya'all don't like are nothing but "Republican Framing" or "Republican Talking Points"...

    In other words, ya'all got Confirmation Bias up yer asses.. :D

    10. Beto should run for Senate in TX.

    Yea, he tried that. Epic fail..

    Typical for Dumbocrat..

  75. [75] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    6

    Yes, it is called “presenting the facts”. Will it change enough minds to affect the next election? That is not the point. Would you suggest that stating the truth is only a useful action as long as you can guarantee the results it will produce? Truth should never be used only when it is convenient for those who possess it.

    I love you, Russ. :)

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    I love you, Russ. :)

    That's cockholster to you... :D

  77. [77] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    62

    History hasn't been kind to Joe McCarthy - and it won't be kind to Trump,

    "Where's my Roy Cohn?"

  78. [78] 
    Kick wrote:

    Paula
    72

    Nice rundown.

    11. Everyone's looking forward to the "real" debates which will commence AFTER the field is dramatically reduced. Tonight's will be all about Biden vs. Harris but the showdown will be when Biden, Harris, Sanders and Warren are all on stage together.

    Yes, this! Around... hmmmmmm… the 6th debate, maybe?

    Based on what I've seen so far, I'm already down to believing there's only three of them who could actually win it anyway. Bring on debate 6! :)

  79. [79] 
    neilm wrote:

    Kick [78]

    Bernie, Joe and Liz?

    Joe, Liz, Kamala?

    I think there are 4: Joe, Liz, Bernie and Kamala.

    Anyway, I'm not engaging seriously until it is down to a debate with 5 or less people. This is an exercise in excessive "fairness" to ensure that there isn't a perceived bias like in 2016 - but it has gone on long enough. If you can't get 5% polling, you're out at this point.

  80. [80] 
    neilm wrote:

    So, Powell just kicked Trump in the nuts, and I expect a twitter tirade is imminent.

    Powell's post FMOC interview was way more hawkish than it needed to be and the market dived as soon as he opened his mouth. But you could see it coming when two of the votes were for no change. Nobody was pushing for 0.5% cut from the looks of things.

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    Funny how ya'all say that nothing is set in stone right now..

    Yet ya'all spent that last couple months being absolutely SURE about everything!!

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Ya'all are so self-deluded, it's laughable....

    Hay.. How did that Russia Collusion work out for ya'all??

    BBBWWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  82. [82] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, Powell just kicked Trump in the nuts, and I expect a twitter tirade is imminent.

    Facts to support??

    No???

    Shocking...

  83. [83] 
    Michale wrote:

    Following Another Water Incident, Assemblymen Propose Law Making Disrespecting Police A Felony
    Video Shows NYPD Traffic Cops Being Accosted In Woodhaven, Queens; If Bill Is Passed, Violators Could Face 1-4 Years In Jail

    https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/07/31/nypd-cops-doused-with-water-woodhaven-queens-assemblyman-mike-lipetri/

    Democrat cop-haters strike again...

  84. [84] 
    neilm wrote:

    Yup - the tweet storm has started :)

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1156666164732473345?s=20

    Hilarious!

  85. [85] 
    Patrick wrote:

    I found the coolest website today.

    https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/

    Its a rundown of all the stupid shit Trump does on a daily basis.

  86. [86] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    79

    Joe, Liz, Kamala?

    I don't think Bernie can win. Mayor Pete is correct that the GOP will paint Democrats as "socialists" regardless of their policy positions. Of course, they always do that so it only becomes an issue if the candidate actually spent a large portion of his political career describing himself and being described as a "socialist."

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAcQmfZJDwM

    for the same reason he couldn't win in 2016. I think Liz could still win, but she has some of the same logistical issue Bernie does.

    problem Bernie does. I think Liz has the same problem, but I'm not willing
    I think there are 4: Joe, Liz, Bernie and Kamala.

  87. [87] 
    neilm wrote:

    LOL Patrick :)

  88. [88] 
    Kick wrote:

    ^^^ EDIT ^^^

    Well, I goobed that up too!

    The part below the link should read:

    I also don't think Bernie can win for the same reason he couldn't win in 2016. I think Liz could still win, but she has some of the same logistical issues Bernie does.

  89. [89] 
    neilm wrote:

    I think Liz could still win, but she has some of the same logistical issues Bernie does.

    Thanks Kick. Can you give me the short overview on Liz's logistical issues?

  90. [90] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    89

    Thanks Kick. Can you give me the short overview on Liz's logistical issues?

    Well, I think I will just say "staffing issues" and leave it at that. Actually, let me do a quick search. Be right back.

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/sen-elizabeth-warren-fellowship-applicants-say-campaign-program-was-a-great-scam?ref=scroll

    There's a bit of info in there for you. There are similar other issues regarding "practicing what you preach" but nothing I've heard that can't be adjusted and remedied at this early stage. :)

  91. [91] 
    Kick wrote:

    Patrick
    85

    https://whatthefuckjusthappenedtoday.com/

    Its a rundown of all the stupid shit Trump does on a daily basis.

    Heh. Thanks, Patrick!

    This is certainly worthy of a |bookmark|... catchy title too! :)

  92. [92] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    A lot of these seem to be posted after Wed. debate. Just for everyone's info, my review of Night 1 is now up:

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/07/31/throwdown-in-motown-part-1/

    -CW

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yup - the tweet storm has started :)

    So, Neal.... President Trump lives fully and completely in your head..

    You even follow him on Twitter!!! :D

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    "Whatta marroon"
    -Bugs Bunny

    :D

  95. [95] 
    dsws wrote:

    As far as I know, none of the marijuana legalization measures amount to nullification attempts. Possession and use of marijuana was formerly prohibited both by state law and by federal law. Where legalization has passed, it is no longer prohibited by state law, but I don't think any state has claimed to have done away with the federal law.

Comments for this article are closed.