ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points -- Something Misbegotten In The State Of Denmark

[ Posted Friday, August 23rd, 2019 – 18:20 UTC ]

The great fear of those who did not support Donald Trump's election in 2016 was that if America hit a crisis point -- a virtual certainty, over a span of four years -- Trump would prove to be dangerously unstable and not know how to deal with it. The consequences could be alarming, as Ted Cruz joked about on the campaign trail at the time:

I don't know anyone who would be comfortable with someone who behaves this way, having his finger on the button. I mean, we're liable to wake up one morning and Donald, if he were president, would have nuked Denmark.

That was supposed to be a joke, mind you. This week, no actual nukes flew (whew!) but President Donald Trump did call off a trip to Denmark this week because their prime minister called the idea that they would sell Greenland to Trump "absurd." She was being honest, but Trump went into a snit and called her "nasty" (a label he's used more than once to describe female politicians who don't agree with him) By week's end, the Republicans were fundraising off the whole misbegotten fiasco by selling T-shirts that depict the United States, now including Greenland.

You just can't make this stuff up, folks.

But to get more serious, let's get back to the nervousness about what Trump would do in a crisis. We are not currently in such a crisis, but the economists are predicting one on the horizon. The longest expansion period in all of American history may be drawing to a close and the next inevitable recession may be about to happen. This is all at some point in the near-to-middle future, mind you. The crisis hasn't hit yet.

But the predictions of when it might hit are very bad news for Donald Trump and his hopes of getting re-elected. If America goes into a recession at some point during the next 12 months, it could easily doom Trump's chance of seeing a second term. This is historical reality -- when the economy tanks, the voters almost always look for someone new. This prospect frightens Trump, and this week we got a sneak preview at how stable he'd be in a true crisis. Which is "not very," obviously.

Here are two headlines from today's Washington Post, for two articles written by conservative pundits: "When Will Trump Supporters Finally Say 'Okay, This Is Not Normal'?," and: "The Speech We Want To Hear: 'This Is Madness'." That last one was written to beg the Democratic candidates to point out in no uncertain terms the craziness emanating from the White House.

That's what conservative writers are saying -- that Trump is a madman and not normal. Liberal writers aren't quite as polite. Just-the-facts journalists were hard-pressed to even keep up with the firehose of contradictions from Trump this week. From early in the week:

Tuesday turned out to be a busy day for President Trump. He poked another U.S. ally in the eye, questioned the loyalty of American Jews, backpedaled on gun legislation and undercut the denials of his advisers on the economy. It was just another normal day in the Trump administration.

Politico summarized the week just by citing some choice Trump quotes:

HIGHLIGHTS FROM PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP'S LATEST GAGGLE...

-- ON FIGHTING CHINESE TRADE PRACTICES: "I am the chosen one." (As he looked at the sky.)

-- DOUBLING DOWN ON ILHAN OMAR AND RASHIDA TLAIB: "You vote for a Democrat, you're being very disloyal to Jewish people and you're being very disloyal to Israel."

-- REVERSING HIMSELF on indexing capital gains taxes to inflation: "I'm not looking to do indexing."

-- AND WAFFLING ON GUNS: "I have an appetite for background checks. We're going to be doing background checks.... We already have very strong background checks, but we're going to be filling in some of the loopholes."

-- ON THE DANISH PM: "I thought that the prime minister's statement... was nasty."

Later in the week, the journalists were still struggling to keep up:

President Donald Trump offered a head-spinning range of policy positions this week, contradicting aides and even himself multiple times on gun control, tax cuts and his interest in buying Greenland.

Trump is no stranger to whiplash-inducing policy shifts that leave his aides and congressional allies flat-footed. And it's well-known that he often parrots the talking points of the last person he talked to on any hot-button issue.

But Trump's recent reversals were notable for their breakneck pace and their far-reaching impact, as they left lawmakers, foreign leaders and voters scratching their heads.

Today, the whiplash continued, as China announced it would be slapping new tariffs on American products, and Trump went completely around the bend, tweeting his fury at all his perceived enemies:

My only question is, who is our bigger enemy, Jay Powell or Chairman Xi?

He followed this up with a rather strange "order" for someone who rails against the dangers of socialism:

We don't need China and, frankly, would be far better off without them. The vast amounts of money made and stolen by China from the United States, year after year, for decades, will and must STOP. Our great American companies are hereby ordered to immediately start looking for an alternative to China, including bringing your companies HOME and making your products in the USA.

In the classic definition, socialism is government control of the means of production, just to remind everyone. Oh, and here's a fun trip down Memory Lane as well, which Trump tweeted at 2:50 A.M. on March 2, 2018 (emphasis added):

When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don't trade anymore -- we win big. It's easy!

Easy-peasy!

Trump is now off to a meeting of the G-7 this weekend, so we've got that to look forward to as well. The week's not over yet, folks.

There's so much craziness to unpack this week that we're going to have to shift into high gear and present them all as briefly and quickly as possible.

First, some old business. For approximately the 13,000th time, Trump was proven to be a megalomaniacal liar. When Trump visited hospitals in Ohio and Texas after the recent mass shootings, he was upset that in El Paso none of the shooting victims still being treated allowed him to meet with them. So he just made up some nonsense about how popular his visit was, claiming that doctors were actually coming out of operating rooms to shake his hand. The hospital in question responded that that was, of course, pure idiocy. Surgeons never just drop their scalpels and walk out of an ongoing operation -- even to meet the world's biggest egomaniac.

Then there's 13,001. Trump made a claim in a recent rally that he's made before, that a group in Michigan gave him a "man of the year award." He previously made this claim in Michigan, with a Republican congressman sitting beside him. Now that this congressman has left office, he's free to debunk Trump's idiotic and self-serving lie. And he should know, because he was the one who presented Trump with a framed document years ago -- the incident that Trump wrongly remembers as his "Michigan man of the year" moment. In reality, what Trump was presented with was a framed copy of Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. Which, obviously, Trump never read, since Lincoln's 272 words were far too many for his limited attention span.

Moving on to more nonsense coming out of Trump's pie hole, this week the president flip-flopped on an astonishing number of issues. On Tuesday, Trump addressed the rumors that the White House was considering some sort of tax cut in order to stave off a recession. Trump said: "We've been looking at that," and went on to list the tax cuts under consideration: "So we're talking about indexing, and we're always looking at the capital gains tax, payroll tax. We're looking at -- I would love to do something on capital gains, we're talking about that, that's a big deal, goes through Congress. Payroll tax is something we think about, and a lot of people would like to see that."

The very next day Trump told reporters: "I'm not looking at a tax cut now. We don't need it, we have a strong economy."

Trump was similarly all over the map this week on universal background checks. First he was for them, then against them, then denied that Wayne LaPierre had talked him out of it, then was kind of for them again, then spoke of defending Second Amendment rights. By week's end, nobody had any clue where Trump actually was on the subject. Oh, and just for the record, two more N.R.A. board members just quit, continuing the exodus.

We wrote about Trump's virulent anti-Semitism earlier in the week, but we had to add this amusing response to Trump telling Jewish voters that they were disloyal to Israel (itself an offensive suggestion) if they voted Democratic, from Bernie Sanders: "I am a Jewish man and I have no concerns about voting Democratic, and, in fact, I intend to vote for a Jewish man to become the next president." Congratulations, Donnie, you've just been Berned.

On Greenland, Trump first enthusiastically confirmed news reports that he was considering trying to buy the island from Denmark. Then Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen poured some cold water on the notion, stating: "Greenland is not for sale. Greenland is not Danish. Greenland belongs to Greenland. I strongly hope that this is not meant seriously. It's an absurd discussion." Trump at first thanked her for saving everyone "a great deal of expense and effort for both the United States and Denmark by being so direct," in the same tweet where he called off his upcoming visit. One day later, Trump called the comments "nasty." Actually, Frederiksen's comments were some of the mildest from Danes and Danish politicians -- others were much more scathing.

The real reason Trump decided to bail on his trip to Denmark, however, may have been that Barack Obama is scheduled to go there as well, a few weeks after Trump planned to be there. Which would inevitably mean both men's welcome would be compared by the press, and it's pretty much a certainty -- even before he started talking about buying Greenland -- that Trump's welcome would not have been anywhere near as warm as that given to Obama.

Speaking of Democrats, the 2020 presidential field has shrunk once again. Jay Inslee threw in the presidential towel this week in order to run for a third term as governor of Washington instead. John Hickenlooper, who quit the presidential race last week, officially announced he'll be running for a Senate seat in Colorado. And just today the news broke that Seth Moulton has also dropped out of the race (which will come to a surprise to many, because most voters weren't even aware he was in the race in the first place). This brings the total Democratic field down to "only" 21 candidates.

On a personal note, when we ran a contest a few weeks ago to see who could name the Democrats who would drop out of the race before the third debate round, we offered up our own guesses, in the order we thought they'd leave: John Hickenlooper, Steve Bullock, Michael Bennet, Seth Moulton, and Bill de Blasio. We nailed the first one and also named Moulton (out of order), but we blew it with Jay Inslee, bringing our average down. Who will be the next to go? Your guess is as good as ours, but with the deadline to make the cut for the next debate looming, we wouldn't be surprised to see two or three more hang up their spurs in the next week or two.

In contrast to the has-beens, Elizabeth Warren is having a good week all around. She gave a stellar performance at a meeting of Native Americans, even though all most of the media could talk about was her DNA test (to their credit, HuffPost did accurately cover what happened at the event, which we commented on earlier this week). Warren then followed this up with a rally in Minnesota which drew her biggest crowd to date (so big they had to move the event outside to accommodate everyone).

Pete Buttigieg is doing something more Democrats should be paying more attention to -- running some ads targeted directly at Iowa farmers. From one of these ads: "This reckless trade war is tearing apart the very fabric of rural America. And while subsidies might soften the blows temporarily, they can't repair the permanent damage being done to family farms." Farmers are being crushed by Trump's idiotic trade war, and the only way to get their votes is to speak to them. Buttigieg is doing so, and more Democrats need to pick up on this idea.

At the Senate level, there was some good news this week for the husband of Gabby Giffords. Astronaut Mark Kelly is running for John McCain's old seat in Arizona, and a new poll just out showed him up five points over Republican Martha McSally, who was appointed by the governor to take over McCain's seat. This would be a big pickup for Democrats, and would put control of the Senate one seat closer, so it's good news.

Astonishingly, there is also news from the Republican side of the presidential race, as more and more Republicans consider the possibility of running a primary race against their own sitting president, Donald Trump. While William Weld has already launched a bid, there are four other Republicans who appear to be either very close to announcing or at the very least strongly considering the idea: Joe Walsh, Mark Sanford, Jeff Flake, and John Kasich. Of the four, Flake appears to be the least likely to actually follow through, but the other three sound pretty serious. They all know what a longshot it would be to actually defeat Trump, but at the same time they are all aware that Trump could always completely melt down at any point in time, and if that happens the voters might be open to considering another Republican. While three of them sound very realistic about their chances, Joe Walsh seems to be spoiling for a fight just for the entertainment value of it all. Speaking of how he would run his campaign against Trump (Walsh used the term "bar fight" to describe what he'd do), Walsh summed up what he thought of Trump to the Washington Post: "He's a bully and a coward. Somebody's got to punch him in the face every single day."

While that would certainly be highly amusing to watch, Walsh isn't exactly held in high esteem by his own fellow Republicans. A former communications director for the Republican National Committee responded to a possible Walsh candidacy by pointing out: "No Republican pushed birther nonsense and jerk store politics more than Joe Walsh. No thanks, Joe. You were Trumpy before Trump." Ouch.

And finally, an item for the "Can they even do that?" file. If Trump is challenged in the primaries, the Republican Party in some states (such as South Carolina, one of the early-voting primary states) have a rather novel solution to the problem. Rather than see Trump defeated -- or even challenged -- they would just call off their state's GOP primary altogether. That's right -- if the outcome is in question, then just cancel the election and proclaim Trump the nominee. Heck, Trump himself has proclaimed he is The Chosen One, so why not just anoint him and be done with it?

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

We have a few Honorable Mention awards to hand out before a rather unusual Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award, so let's get right to it all.

To follow up from last week's MIDOTW, Elizabeth Warren will be introducing a bill in the Senate (a companion bill to one already introduced in the House) called the Remove The Stain Act, which would strip the 20 Medals of Honor that were awarded to U.S. soldiers over a century ago for their actions in the Wounded Knee Massacre. Warren explained why this is necessary:

At the Wounded Knee massacre, hundreds of Lakota men, women, and children were slaughtered by soldiers who received Medals of Honor. These acts of violence were not heroic; they were tragic and profoundly shameful. This bill respects and honors those who lost their lives, advances justice, and takes a step toward righting wrongs against Native peoples.

John Hickenlooper, who ended his presidential run last week, this week announced he was running for a Senate seat from Colorado. This is welcome news to Democrats, because he starts the race with a huge advantage in the polls over the Republican currently occupying the seat.

In other dropout news, Jay Inslee ended his presidential run and then decided to run for a third term as Washington's governor. The Onion finished their spoof story by stating that Inslee proceeded by "ethereally transforming into a majestic oak" at the end of his announcement. Inslee obviously thought this was pretty funny, tweeting the story out to his own followers with the line: "I think you'll like my new stump speech." So he's worthy of an Honorable Mention for his sense of humor alone.

Kidding aside, though, we have a pretty minor elected official for our main Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award, but an important one nonetheless. Because she represents a minority in politics that has more bias against it than any other minority, if polls are to be believed, because she is an atheist. Or at least an agnostic (the article didn't fully answer this question).

The article centers around a truly endearing event, which is the main reason it caught our eye in the first place:

A newly elected single mother of two wanted her kids to walk away from her swearing-in with an empowering message. So instead of placing her hand on a Bible to take her oath of office as councilwoman for St. Louis County, Kelli Dunaway chose "Oh, The Places You'll Go!" by Dr. Seuss.

Her 5-year-old son, Liam, and her 7-year-old daughter, Bella, held the book in their small hands as their smiling mother was sworn into office Aug. 13.

It was a choice with personal meaning. Dunaway said her single mom was a coal miner who would say if she believed in herself and worked hard, Dunaway could achieve anything.

"In my experience in life, that's been true," the graduate of UCLA School of Law said.

Dunaway went on to explain why she chose the book for her swearing-in ceremony:

The Democrat captured nearly 60 percent of the vote to represent the 2nd District for the county. Her victory, along with another Democratic woman's win, turned control of the council to the party. The governing body is seeing another first since 2010: majority women running it, according to St. Louis Public Radio.

With that green light and it being her daughter's first day of second grade and her son's first day of kindergarten, Dunaway said Dr. Seuss felt right.

"My kids are my only family in St. Louis, and I wanted them to feel part of this," she said. "They're making sacrifices to be part of public service, too, and [the book] has an empowering message."

Dunaway said she's seen a mixed bag of responses to her swearing in with a childhood classic, including those who are inspired by her making her own tradition to those who question whether she takes her role in office seriously.

"I understand it," she said. "A lot of people believe that without God, there can be no morality, and I just don't agree with that."

On the other hand, she says the positive responses give her hope for the future.

The article closes with a quote which starkly points out the headwinds any agnostic or atheist faces getting elected in America:

Dunaway didn't grow up religious. She said she also felt like a Bible wouldn't have been appropriate for her children who are half-Jewish.

She said the part where Seuss writes, "You have brains in your head and feet in your shoes," has resonance with the public.

"You get to direct your own destiny. If that message can spread, it can change the world," she said. "Although we do have to get past the people who think I'm a heathen."

In fact, one of the fastest-growing religious groups in America today is "no religion" or "not religious." But this constituency is one of the least-represented by public figures, because belief in God is seen as almost mandatory for elected officials by most voters -- although this may be slowly changing for the better.

For winning her race so decisively, for sticking to her own principles and choosing the book she wanted for her swearing-in, and for being a strong spokeswoman for the irreligious, we think she's a great choice for this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week, even if her office is a minor one as seen from a national viewpoint. It's rare indeed to see a politician take such a deeply unpopular stance, and the way she chose to do so was positively endearing (because who doesn't love Dr. Seuss?). So we're taking a break from national politics, because Dunaway impressed us more than anyone else this week.

[St. Louis County Councilwoman Kelli Dunaway was just sworn in, and the County Council hasn't yet updated their website with her new public contact information yet, so keep checking their site if you'd like to let her know you appreciate her efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

Once again, we find we don't really have a candidate for the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.

We briefly considered giving it to the three candidates that have recently dropped out of the presidential race (John Hickenlooper, Jay Inslee, and Seth Moulton), but they really don't qualify because the number of people that were disappointed by their announcements (their supporters in the presidential race, in other words) numbers only in the tens. Or perhaps "hundreds," on a good day, if the polls can be believed. So while their disappointment might be real, it's not on a large enough scale to qualify, as far as we're concerned.

So we'll just have to put the MDDOTW award back on the shelf for another week, unless anyone has an obvious nomination to make in the comments that we completely missed this week.

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 539 (8/23/19)

A theme emerges in this week's talking points, as we run down a list of who Donald Trump has insulted over the course of the past seven days. This list ranges from farmers to God, so it's a rather all-encompassing group. And then, at the end, we have yet another Republican denouncing Trump in the most scathing language imaginable. Maybe this is going to become a weekly thing? One can only hope....

 

1
   C.B.O. admits reality on deficit

Yet another big item in the "promises broken by Trump" master list.

"Remember Trump promising during his campaign that he'd wipe out both the yearly deficit and the entire national debt while he was in office, because 'only he knew how' to do it? Well, since then both the deficit and the debt have gone through the roof. Trump's big tax cut added trillions because 'tax cuts will pay for themselves' is always a big fat lie. This week the Congressional Budget Office admitted the reality of the situation, which is that there's a good chance that this year's deficit will top one trillion dollars and that we can look forward to trillion-dollar annual deficits as far as the eye can see, in what has been described as 'pushing the nation further into levels of debt not seen since the end of World War II.' Can everyone please remember this the next time the Republicans weep and wail about fiscal responsibility? I've said it before and I'll say it again -- the only time we ever see fiscal responsibility in Washington is when the Democrats are in control of things."

 

2
   #MoscowMitch trending!

Hoo boy. Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy. No, we mean that, really. Heh.

"Up until now, it's just been Democrats who have been calling the Republican Senate majority leader 'Moscow Mitch,' for his refusal to act to secure America's elections from foreign attacks from Russia. But now his fellow Republicans have also apparently had enough. The Republican lobbying group Republicans For The Rule Of Law is now running television ads in key GOP senators' states denouncing McConnell for his inaction and urging the Republicans: 'Don't let Mitch McConnell stand in your way' of moving the bills forward. All the ads warn of letting Russia get away with attacks on our elections, and feature other Republicans saying things like 'Russia's interference is a threat to our democracy.' Looks like Moscow Mitch is getting some heat from his own side of the aisle these days!"

 

3
   Trump insults farmers

Donald Trump and his administration insulted a whole lot of people this week, and that's not even including Denmark and Greenland. These next few talking points are a rundown of these insults, with a counter-insult at the end, just to change things up. First on the list is farmers, particularly those who grow corn in Iowa.

"While Democrats are busy travelling the back roads of Iowa in search of votes, Donald Trump apparently doesn't think Iowa's voters are all that important. Just this week the Environmental Protection Agency announced it was giving waivers to 31 petroleum refineries that exempt them from having to use ethanol. This is a very big deal to corn farmers in Iowa and elsewhere. During the entire time Barack Obama was in office, only 10 such waivers were granted, and now the Trump administration has issued more than three times as many in a single year. Chuck Grassley, Republican senator from Iowa, summed up his state's farmers' reaction to the Trump administration's move by bluntly saying: 'they screwed us.' The Minnesota Farmers Union tweeted out: 'This. Is. Wrong.' The president of the Iowa Corn Growers Association called the waivers a 'slap in the face to farmers.' This all happened right after Trump's head of the Department of Agriculture called farmers 'whiners,' please remember. No wonder the Democrats are out there talking to farmers on the campaign trail, because with Trump actively smacking them around like this, there are probably a whole lot of votes to flip out there in corn country."

 

4
   Trump insults the Medal of Honor

Just unbelievable.

"While mouthing words of praise for a Medal of Honor recipient this week, Donald Trump said the following: 'That was a big day, Medal of Honor. Nothing like the Medal of Honor. I wanted one, but they told me I don't qualify.... I said, "Can I give it to myself anyway?" They said, "I don't think that's a good idea."' Now let's all imagine that Barack Obama had joked about such a thing. Think right-wingers would be outraged? I do. Remember what a honkin' big deal dodging the draft was for Bill Clinton? But then it became a non-issue when the Republicans decided to get behind not just one but two draft-dodging presidents. Even suggesting that Donald Trump -- a man who got five draft deferments during Vietnam -- would somehow be eligible for the highest military honor in this country is a disgrace to every soldier that has ever worn this country's uniform, plain and simple. But for some strange reason, Republicans are silent and the media didn't even notice this insulting statement from the draft-dodger-in-chief."

 

5
   Trump insults Jews

Trump's double standard is alive and well.

"When Ilhan Omar asked why it wasn't okay to talk about people who, quote, push for allegiance to a foreign country, Republicans were aghast. They called her an anti-Semite, for suggesting that American Jews held dual loyalty to both the U.S. and Israel. The outcry was so loud, from people like Liz Cheney and Kevin McCarthy, that Congress passed a resolution clearly aimed at denouncing Omar. Now, though, Donald Trump comes right out and accuses Jews of a 'great disloyalty to Israel' when they vote Democratic, and where is the outrage from the right? In the same week, Trump also praised Henry Ford, who was a Nazi sympathizer and raging anti-Semite, just in case the message wasn't clear enough. Then in an astonishing development that most of the media completely ignored, the Department of Justice apparently sent out an email to all immigration court judges that contained a link to a white supremacist website. Yes, you read that right. They later claimed a contractor had made a mistake, but just for one minute think about what the right would have said if a Democratic president's administration had done such a thing, or anything even remotely close to it. And yet, all we hear from the right is total silence. Trump isn't just blowing a coded anti-Semitic dog whistle, he's coming right out and accusing Jews of divided loyalties while his Justice Department is disseminating white supremacist propaganda. So where is the outrage on the right?"

 

6
   Trump insults God

Seriously, we never thought we'd be using the term "deification" while discussing American politics, but here we are, folks.

"Donald Trump is not God. Let's just start by saying that, shall we? He just isn't. He's so far from the ideals expressed by the Christian Jesus that it's downright laughable to even consider the notion of Trump being God. But apparently Trump has been entertaining the idea of deification this week. First, he retweeted a conspiracy theorist who proclaimed that Israeli Jews consider Trump 'the King of Israel' and, for good measure, 'the second coming of God' (even though Jews don't believe in a "second coming" -- that's actually the Christians). Trump's reaction in his retweet: 'Wow!' Later, when Trump was asked about his destructive trade war with China, he proclaimed himself 'the Chosen One' while looking skyward. Maybe he should have been looking for lightning to strike him down, which would have been a fitting response to such blasphemy. Here on Earth, the best response I've yet seen came from one of the co-creators of The Daily Show, Lizz Winstead, who tweeted: 'Someone should tell the new "King of the Jews" that Jesus "King of the Jews" Christ was an immigrant that was counted in the census. #AntiChrist'."

 

7
   The Mooch insults Trump

Anthony "The Mooch" Scaramucci very publicly broke with Trump this week, with an opinion article he wrote which ran in the Washington Post. It's really an extraordinary screed, coming from a guy who used to be a total Trump sycophant. Last week, we ran an extended rant from Republican Joe Walsh, who is now considering running against Trump in the GOP primaries. This week, it's The Mooch's turn to unload on Trump. And it's worth noting that The Mooch wrote this before most of Trump's craziness this week.

However, in the yes-or-no matter of supporting the president, I have reached a tipping point.

For those paying attention, my public criticism of the president has been mounting over the past two years. His response to the neo-Nazi march in Charlottesville was repellent. I was appalled by the administration's child-separation policy along the southern border. His ranting about the news media as the "enemy of the people" was dangerous and beyond the pale. But the final straw came last month when Trump said on Twitter that four congresswomen -- all of them U.S. citizens, and three native-born -- should "go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came."

While it's difficult and embarrassing to admit my errors in judgment, I believe I still have the ability to make amends.

. . .

I broke from Trump because not only has his behavior become more erratic and his rhetoric more inflammatory, but also because, like all demagogues, he is incapable of handling constructive criticism. As we lie on the bed of nails Trump has made, it's often difficult to see how much the paradigm of acceptable conduct has shifted. For the Republican Party, it's now a question of whether we want to start cleaning up the mess or continue papering over the cracks.

I challenge my fellow Republicans to summon the nerve to speak out on the record against Trump. Defy the culture of fear he has created, and go public with the concerns you readily express in private. Hold on to your patriotism, and help save the country from his depredations. And to members of the so-called resistance, please leave room on the off-ramp for those willing to admit their mistakes.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground

 

71 Comments on “Friday Talking Points -- Something Misbegotten In The State Of Denmark”

  1. [1] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    It is one of those rare moments in time when I approve of the MIDDOTW (cue El Exigente music).

    But maybe you should have included the voters that voted for the atheist/agnostic in a dual award.

    Perhaps you should revisit Green Eggs and Ham which contains a valuable lesson aboot trying something you are afraid you won't like and finding out that you actually like it and apply that lesson to something that you have been avoiding trying.

  2. [2] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    It could be good
    and that's the truth
    Let's try it
    in the voting booth!

  3. [3] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    California's Governor deserves at least an honorable mention for the progressive accomplishments the legislature has already passed this year. And also for getting under the Orange One's skin.
    https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2019/08/23/this-is-checkmate-newsom-thrives-on-trumps-ire-over-auto-deal-1152154

  4. [4] 
    Paula wrote:

    Nice story re: most impressive Dem!

    In fact, one of the fastest-growing religious groups in America today is "no religion" or "not religious." But this constituency is one of the least-represented by public figures, because belief in God is seen as almost mandatory for elected officials by most voters -- although this may be slowly changing for the better.

    Yep.

  5. [5] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The "chosen one" thing looked pretty clearly like sarcasm. Calling jews who vote democratic disloyal to the u.s. and israel, not so amused.

  6. [6] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    CW

    TP2 "Moscow Mitch"

    The whole concept of foreign, Russian or otherwise, interventions constituting threats to "the integrity of American elections", is a total red herring, an invention of the CWs and the Kicks of the blogosphere, promulgated in a ridiculous attempt to rationalize the incomprehensible, the inconceivable, the impossible defeat of Hillary by the Orange Moron.

    You folks waited and promised relief from your PTSD for three solid yrs, once the Mueller Report arrived, and when it finally and fizzled in perhaps the greatest anticlimax of all dtime, then you decided to ignore it.

    You never even bothered to mention Russian intervention in connection with the mid-terms, 'cause you won. If we manage to get rid of Trump in 2020, you wont bring it up then, but if the idiot manages to get re-elected, then it'll be "blame it on Moscow Mitch", right?

  7. [7] 
    Paula wrote:

    [6] Stuck in his lies: Russian interference did happen and GOP wants it to happen again so they're blocking all efforts to combat it.

  8. [8] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    [7] Paul in her ignorance: I'm not saying "it didn't happen". It (Russian hackers revealing that Hillary stacked the Dem primaries to deny Bernie the nomination) definitely DID happen, nutjob, I'm saying it didn't affect the outcome.

    Only the severely retarded would be dumb enough to think Bernie's backers, the farthest left of the left, were so mad at Hillary that they voted for the orange moron!!

    Of course, there's no shortage of the severely retarded in the political world, and Paul appears to be one.

  9. [9] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    is this going to be another of those 'girls with penises' tangents?

  10. [10] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CRS-6

    CW presents a well researched and well written internet political column. Kick is quite astute. Yes, they have noted that the Orange Moron (way to turn a phrase) has some "interesting" ties to Russia, but when I Google:

    russian+influence+2016+elections

    I get 15 pages of hits that never mention either CW or Kick. When I dig deeper and click:

    "repeat the search with the omitted results included"

    I get 38 pages with nary a mention of either CW or Kick. So, why blame them for the news cycle? The first half of your post is a lame-o distraction from your thesis that Mueller concluded Trump did nothing illegal.

    Well, your claim is untrue. Mueller did not absolve the President of guilt on the Russian interference matter. Mueller wrote: "Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

    Fizzle, dud? Duds have a way of exploding at a later date if you don't bother (or can't) disarm them. A growing number of Republicans are acting increasingly worried about the potential lethal blast radius around Trump and are beginning to crouch low and creep away from him. They loathed Trump, then they loved him and now they are rethinking loathing him.

  11. [11] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CRS,

    You never even bothered to mention Russian intervention in connection with the mid-terms, 'cause you won. If we manage to get rid of Trump in 2020, you wont bring it up then, but if the idiot manages to get re-elected, then it'll be "blame it on Moscow Mitch", right?

    Why would the Russians be as interested in the mid-term elections as they were the presidential election? Your attempt at portraying midterm elections as having the same impact and ramifications as the presidential election is as idiotic as it is disingenuous — even for you.

    Of course you deny Russian interference had any measurable effect on the outcome of our elections, because it makes perfect sense that a foreign country would invest such time and money — or risk the ramifications if the interference could be proven — to interfere in a country’s elections if it wouldn’t have any effect on the outcome. Your hatred and fear of fellow Americans that you disagree with has become such a driving force in the last years of your life that you’d support a traitor just to feel like you were “hurting” liberals. What a great life you must live.

  12. [12] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Listen

    What's this "support a traitor" nonsense? I didn't vote for Trump, I deplore him every bit as much as all you Dems/Libs do. I just deplore him for rational reasons (hes's a stupid, incompetent, ignorant asshole of a human being), whereas you folks all deplore him because he's (currently at least) a "Republican". "party slavery", as Michale puts it.

    I fully realize that most of you Weigantians lack the wisdom that comes with maturity, but I don't hold your youth and unrealistic ideas about how the real world actually operates against you. I'm eternally optimistic that with age, most of you may eventually figure out how to discern between the real and the unreal.

  13. [13] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Listen

    I never said nor implied that the Russians would be "as interested" in the mid-terms as in the presidential election.

    But why WOULDN'T the russians be at least SOMEWHAT interested in the mid-term elections? Wouldn't Trump find it much easier to get his way with the legislative branch supporting him?

    You're just trying to rationalize you irrational arguments/attitudes about Russian interference.

  14. [14] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    given all that we know about donald ("stupid, incompetent, ignorant asshole"), what's really scary is that he'll probably be re-elected. someone whose judgment i trust a great deal on these matters (and who doesn't support donald at all) said it's a near certainty, and he predicted correctly the last time too.

  15. [15] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    poet

    He may well be re-elected, based on the slate of potential candidates the Dems have to oppose him. We can all hope that he doesn't, but I'd be hesitent to bet against him.

    I lost faith in the wisdom/common sense of the U.S electorate when they picked LBJ over Goldwater, because they believed the Dems' claim that Goldwater would get us into war. You know, 'war', kind like that Vietnam thing, right? Or was all that before you were born?

  16. [16] 
    dsws wrote:

    Blah blah blah Trump blah blah blah ....

    Who cares? I already know I'm not going to vote for him. I can't possibly be any more not-going-to-vote-for-him than I already am, so what's the point?

  17. [17] 
    TheStig wrote:

    12, 13 and 15 are crocodile jeers...insincere criticisms of Trump intended to jab Democrats.

  18. [18] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @crs,

    i was born during gerald ford's tenure, so goldwater was a bit before my time. however, i have heard stories. basically the last honest politician, right? and now look where we are.

    JL

  19. [19] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I have to jump in with support for Johnson over Goldwater. Yes, Johnson escalated the Vietnam war, but Nixon kept it going.

    Johnson also did the entire safety-net thing, which we take for granted today.

    Goldwater was old-school "nuke 'em" at that point, and a LOT of Americans didn't want nukes in the world. That's why Americans wouldn't vote for him. Goldwater, at that point, was too crazy for America.

    Just as Trump is today. Sorry nypoet, but he's going DOWN.

  20. [20] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @balthasar,

    who's going down, goldwater? he went down fifty years ago, and has been down ever since. i'm of the opinion that we can disagree with someone's policy objectives and still respect them as a person and a public figure. i felt that way about bush 41, and based on what i'm told the same would apply to goldwater. johnson had super policy objectives, created the great society, the civil rights act of 1965, and said, "I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years."

    it's two different questions. barry failed one, lbj failed the other, and donald fails both.

    JL

  21. [21] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    correction, civil rights act of '64, it was the voting rights act of '65.

  22. [22] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    barry failed one, lbj failed the other, and donald fails both

    Sounds fair to me.

  23. [23] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    ...And this is what America's friends are saying.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/newspolitics/when-the-world-stopped-listening-to-america/ar-AAGj2wj?ocid=spartandhp

    Oh well, 'we'll see what happens' when Trump is winkled from the White House next year. And make no mistake, he will spat out of office, only a 'trumped' up war can save him at this point, and he left his bollocks in his other suit.

    LL&P

  24. [24] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Stig

    Please note that I clearly stated in my [6] that the notion that foreign interventions constitute a threat to the integrity of American elections was a red herring "created by the CW's and the Kicks (BOTH PLURAL) of the world".

    So, then you Googled the subject and discovered "53 pages without a single mention of OUR CW, or OUR Kick", and proudly implied that I must therefore be wrong in my appraisal of the situation.

    Why did your Google search omit the millions of other (the generic) CW's and Kicks???

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    someone whose judgment i trust a great deal on these matters (and who doesn't support donald at all) said it's a near certainty, and he predicted correctly the last time too.

    Why.. Thank you, Joshua...

    Oh wait.. :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    When a country (USA) is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good, and easy to win. Example, when we are down $100 billion with a certain country and they get cute, don't trade anymore -- we win big. It's easy!

    And yet... China Blinks..

    China announces it seeks 'calm' end to trade war, as markets tank and currency hits 11-year flatline

    China signaled on Monday it was now seeking a "calm" end to its ongoing trade war with the U.S., as Asian markets crumbled and China's currency plummeted to an 11-year low following the latest tariffs on $550 billion in Chinese goods announced last Friday by the Trump administration.

    Trump said Monday that officials from China called U.S. officials and expressed interest to "get back to the table,” The Wall Street Journal reported. He called the discussions a “very positive development.”

    “They want to make a deal. That’s a great thing,” he said.
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/china-announces-it-seeks-end-to-trade-war-as-markets-tank-and-currency-hits-11-year-flatline

    Apparently, President Trump knows more about fighting a trade war than the lot of ya'all...

    :D

    But, once again.. I have to be honest and call a spade a spade..

    President Trump is WRONG...

    *I* am NOT getting tired of winning.. :D

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    @ Nuck,

    Oh well, 'we'll see what happens' when Trump is winkled from the White House next year.

    Yea, you keep saying that.. And yet, you have been WRONG at every prediction you have made about President Trump..

    Especially galling for you, I am sure, is that Mueller TOTALLY and COMPLETELY exonerated President Trump on your pet delusion, Russian Collusion.. :D

    How it must suck to be totally and completely WRONG about everything Trump.. :D

    Maybe you should worry about your own Fallen Angel, Trudeau.. We can handle things in our country just fine, thank you very much.. :D

    Peace out, dood.. :D

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Stig,

    I get 38 pages with nary a mention of either CW or Kick. So, why blame them for the news cycle? The first half of your post is a lame-o distraction from your thesis that Mueller concluded Trump did nothing illegal.

    So, basically you just proved CRS's point..

    You just proved that there are "38 pages" (your words, not mine) of CWs and KICKs... Which is EXACTLY what CRS had stated..

    I have noticed that, in your throes of HHPTDS, you have a tendency to prove your opposition's points for them.. :D

    Keep on truckin' dood.. :D

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Russ,

    Sorry to leave you hanging on our gun discussion before.. Duty called and I had to answer.. :D

    Let me catch up with all that I missed and I'll respond to your comments... Fasten your seatbelts and keep all arms and legs inside at all times!! :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    The "chosen one" thing looked pretty clearly like sarcasm.

    Of course it was sarcasm.. Probably based on the Obama as Messiah complex

    I mean, it was Obama who said that his election has hearladed the seas would cease rising and the planet would begin to heal itself.. :eyeroll:

    Of course, no one here batted an eye or said dick about Creepy Obama Worship..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI-BCbKuJGA

    Most people here can't get past the HHPTDS... They take Trump literally or seriously ONLY when it suits their agenda to do so...

    Calling jews who vote democratic disloyal to the u.s. and israel, not so amused.

    While it certainly can be.. spin'ed?? spun?? spun'ed??.. that way, once you look at the words in the context that they were given...???

    It's clear that it's simply more of TRUMP IS A RACIST type spin...

    Total bullshit when the *facts* are examined..

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:

    The longest expansion period in all of American history may be drawing to a close and the next inevitable recession may be about to happen.

    Ya'all have been predicting..nay.. HOPING for a recession since before President Trump has took office!!

    When ya'all gonna learn??

    When ya'all base your predictions on NOTHING but yer HHPTDS, ya'all are gonna be wrong.. WRONG... IMPRESSIVELY WRONG...

    "Failed.. FAILED... IMPRESSIVELY FAILED!"
    -NASA Doctor, ARMAGEDDON

    The problem with ya'all's predictions.. The reason they are always wrong... It's because you don't base your predictions on FACTS or reality..

    Recession? Headlines in Search of a Story

    Refusing to take the economy’s soundness for an answer.
    https://spectator.org/recession-headlines-in-search-of-a-story/

    Ya'all base your predictions on delusion and how you WISH the reality would be..

    It's no wonder ya'all are always wrong...

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    California's Governor deserves at least an honorable mention for the progressive accomplishments the legislature has already passed this year. And also for getting under the Orange One's skin.

    California??

    Yea, that's the state that is run by Democrats that has big cities ALSO run by Democrats who have a problem cleaning up human shit on their streets..

    How's that homelessness in California going??

    California is literally a shithole because they care more for illegal immigrant criminals than they do for American citizens...

    As a native, it pains me to say this.. But facts are facts...

    I could literally fill pages and pages (38 of them.. :D
    ) here in Weigantia of the problems and malfeasance and corruption of California's so-called "Leaders"..

    I'll be happy to do so if you don't want to accept the facts... :D

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    i felt that way about bush 41, and based on what i'm told the same would apply to goldwater. johnson had super policy objectives, created the great society, the civil rights act of 1965, and said, "I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years."

    In the interests of fairness, it's not definitive that LBJ made that exact quote.. Fact checking shows that there is no definitive quote that is attributed to LBJ. However, in various contexts and based on other quotes that LBJ has made, it's likely that LBJ did say that or something close to that at one point or another..

    In short, while there is no definitive, specific quote you can point to, given LBJ's character and actions at the time, it's likely the quote is accurate..

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    who's going down, goldwater?

    I think Balthy means that Trump is "going down"..

    But, Balthy said that Trump was "going down" in 2016, so..... Take that prediction with a HUGE grain of salt.. :D

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    CRS,

    "party slavery", as Michale puts it.

    Did you miss me!!?? :D

    "Did you miss me!!??"
    "With every shot so far..."

    -MARRIED WITH CHILDREN

    :D

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's what conservative writers are saying -- that Trump is a madman and not normal.

    SOME Conservative writers have been saying that since 2015...

    So????

    Ya'all ignore those writers every other time??

    Why do you believe them now??

    Oh.. That's write.. Because NOW they say what you want to here.. (have a ball, JL!! :D )

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's funny..

    Ya'all go on and on about President Trump's low approval numbers...

    Bias has killed the ‘Gray Lady’ — and Dean Baquet fired the fatal shot

    While reading the transcript of a New York Times staff meeting, a Lily Tomlin line came to mind: “No matter how cynical you get, it is impossible to keep up.”

    In this case, it is also impossible not to be disheartened and furious. The transcript shows that the rot of bias at the Times is far beyond the pale and there is no hope of recovery. Yet not a single person there declared the obvious — that the paper is ­betraying its principles.

    Rigor in reporting and restraint in judgment once made the Gray Lady noble. Now she is dead, her homicide an inside job.

    The transcript, leaked to Slate, reveals a confederacy of ignorance and bigotry involving hundreds of people. The ringleader is executive editor Dean Baquet, who fires the fatal shot into the credibility of his paper.
    https://nypost.com/2019/08/24/bias-has-killed-the-gray-lady-and-dean-baquet-fired-the-fatal-shot/

    Yet, the Leftist media and Democrat CongressCritters would KILL to have President Trump's great numbers.. :D

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    dsws,

    Blah blah blah Trump blah blah blah ....

    Who cares? I already know I'm not going to vote for him. I can't possibly be any more not-going-to-vote-for-him than I already am, so what's the point?

    Exactly.. :D

    No one here, except me and JL, are going to vote for President Trump...

    So, the only point I can see to all the comments is a race to the bottom..

    To see who can hate on President Trump more.. :D

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rather than confusing everyone and forcing everyone to flip back to previous commentaries and comments, I am going to simplify things and bring my responses forward so they can all be consolidated into one commentary thread...

    Since we seem to be finished with the 23rd's commentary, let's move on..

    "Season.... 7....{ssiiggghhhhh} Moving On.."
    Bryan Doyle Murray, SUPERNATURAL

    :D

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Third Nuclear Option

    He's concerned that not only may the Democrats take control of the chamber away from him next year, but that they could then move to abolish the legislative filibuster altogether.

    One would THINK that Democrats learned their lesson by the 5-4 (soon to be 6-3) solid conservative SCOTUS...

    That's the problem with Democrats.. They only think short-term gain and ignore the long game...

    It ALWAYS comes back to bite them on the ass...

    If Schumer had kept his FILIBUSTER powder dry with Gorsuch, there was a VERY REAL possibility that Dems could have prevented Justice Kavanaugh..

    But Schumer played the short game and lost it all..

    Democrats NEVER learn...

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Of course, another obvious reform -- and one I've supported in the past -- would be to make the senators actually filibuster once again. Make them stand and deliver their hours-long speeches, as they used to have to do. Make it a lot harder to filibuster anything, and it might not be used so often.

    I would completely support this as well..

    Making the filibuster easy is nearly the SOLE reason why filibusters are more common place..

    They took away the pain of filibusters so there is no reason NOT to employ them..

    "Death, destruction, disease, horror. That's what war is all about, Anan. That's what makes it a thing to be avoided. You've made it neat and painless. So neat and painless, you've had no reason to stop it."
    -Captain James T Kirk, STAR TREK, A Taste Of Armageddon

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Paula

    So if we're damned if we do and damned if we don't I say let's do it, push as much through as fast as possible and see what happens.

    I can guarantee you what would happen..

    If, in the VERY unlikely event Dumbocrats do take the Senate and try to push thru their host of Anti-America legislation, as Paula advocates..

    The American people will resoundingly reject the Democrat governance and give the Senate back to the GOP..

    Not that we have to worry about it. There is simply no way Democrats will win the Senate in 2020.. It's even unlikely that the Dims will retain the House..

    But we really don't have to give Dumbocrats control of the Senate to see what their governance will look like..

    All we have to do is look at San Francisco... Baltimore... Los Angeles.... Puerto Rico...
    Cuba... Venezuela.... And all the other shithole cities, states and countries that have Democrat/Socialist/Communist governance..

  43. [43] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "I think Balthy means Trump is going down."

    Let's hope Balthy is wrong.

    I'm sure Ivanka has already suffered enough. :D

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Russ,

    White males have a long history of a condition known as “situational bigotry” —

    You have a tendency to equate racism with bigotry..

    Racism is Bigotry.. Bigotry != Racism.. Not always anyways...

    Having said that...

    a sudden willingness to set aside their racist views if sex is a possibility.

    ANY logic or rational thought goes out the window if sex is a possibility.. :D

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Moving On...

    Trump Can't Have It Both Ways On Israel

    In Trump's mind, good Jews in America are loyal to their people, loyal to Israel, loyal to the Republican Party, and (of course) loyal to Trump -- and not necessarily in that order.

    And what.. EXACTLY is the problem with that??

    Let's look at the facts..

    By and large Democrats hate Israel... They hate the Israeli leadership... "The Squad" has proven that beyond any doubt..

    So, if a jew is loyal to Democrats, who hate Israel, then said jew is being disloyal to Israel..

    I fail to see the issue here??

    This concludes today's episode of "Irony Is Dead." Tune in next time, because you just know this isn't going to be the last time Trump's going to be held to a completely different standard than those he attacks.

    Ooohhh puuullleeeese.. You don't recall all times Odumbo didn't have dual standards??? Or that Dumbocrats don't, to this day, have dual standards???

    :eyeroll:

    Funny how no one here complains about DEMOCRAT dual standards...

    Irony may be dead.. But ya'all are taking Hypocrisy to new heights...

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:

    liz,
    did you read how michale is voting for biden if he wins the primary?
    JL

    Elizabeth Miller wrote:
    No, but I like the sound of it. :)

    Tell her the FULL deal, JL.. :D

    Liz, the bet is thus:

    If Biden is Democrat nominee at the time of the General Election, both Joshua and I will vote for Biden in the General Election..

    If ANYONE but Biden is the Democrat nominee at the time of the General Election, both Joshua and I will vote for President Trump in the General Election..

    As an aside to the moderator....

    Is there any legality issues with bartering our votes in such a manner??? Just curious... :D

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's hope Balthy is wrong.

    I'm sure Ivanka has already suffered enough. :D

    hehe.. I was trying to figure out a way to get that in my response..

    Kudos...

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    OK Gonna take a break to let ya'all catch up...

    Or mustard... baa daa da :D

  49. [49] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump Versus The Democratic Field

    I am pretty much going to ignore this commentary..

    I am sure everyone will agree that using current polls to predict Nov 2020 has as much relevance and accuracy as chicken bones and the blood of a virgin penguin...

    Having said that...

    "What’s not to like about Vermont?"
    -Joe Biden

    'What's wrong with that?' you might ask...

    Biden was in New Hampshire when he said it.. :^/

    In and of itself, it's meaningless. But taken in context with Biden talking about Obama being assassinated and all the other gaffes and faux paus.....

    One can't help but get that creepy Captain Kirk/Deadly Years vibe.....

    JL, I hope you don't have a physical reaction to voting President Trump.. :D

    I find it curious how ANYONE can point to a Presidential Election poll with a straight face considering how utterly and completely lousy polls did in 2016... :D

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Paula,

    A nice antidote to the dark splooge that is Blotus is this joyous bit of video showing Liz Warren running up a path and ramp to a platform with a screaming crowd.

    Trump has those every campaign stop and 3 times as big..

    What's yer point???

    Having pointed out the facts, I'll concede you may be right.. Lie-awatha might be the Dim nominee..

    And THAT is the candidate that President Trump is hoping most to face..

    Because there is NO WAY that Independents and NPAs will turn to Warren.. They will flock to President Trump or they will stay home...

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Balthy,

    But polls are polls.

    Yea.. And polls were polls in 2016..

    And they ALL turned out to be wrong..

    So, with this FACT in mind, please explain your faith in polls....

    OTHER than the fact that they say what you want to hear...

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    So what to do? There are presently (of course) two camps in the Democratic party. One says, "Well, Hillary was a centrist, and couldn't beat him, we should go Bold." The other says, "Hillary actually beat Trump by five million votes. We just need a few more in the right districts to beat him at the polls."

    I'm in the latter camp. America, like it or not, is a center-right country, and going Bold is a good way to end up getting our clocks cleaned AGAIN.

    So, you agree with me that the US is a center-right country..

    Thank you..

    In the same spirit of friendship and devotion heh :D... Allow me to explain to you where your logic fails.

    Let me do so by asking you some questions..

    First... Do you agree that the enthusiasms and "rock star" treatment are with the Far Left candidates??? That they are the hare to Biden's tortoise...

    Secondly... Do you agree that the candidates of the Far Left, Warren, Sanders et al will NOT attract the Independent and NPA voter.

    I'll stand by

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Media Can't Admit They Were Wrong About Warren's DNA Test

    You relay a few stories about supporters of Warren who are Native Americans, but ignore the words of those Native Americans who condemn her actions of which there are TONS more...

    Why is that???

    The reality is, far more Native Americans have a problem with Warren's play acting as an Native American to get ahead...

    That's the reality whether anyone here can admit it or not..

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Balthy

    It's true. The made-up native-american debacle is over.

    I'll remind you of this prediction if Warren is the Dem nominee.. :D

    Backpedal in 3.... 2.... 1....

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    @Paula

    And in the annals of how Republicans/Conservatives are almost entirely full of sh!t:

    Says the girl who only quotes far far Left rags as her sources.. :D

  56. [56] 
    Paula wrote:

    Elizabeth Warren drew 15,000 people to her rally in Seattle. She did the selfie line afterwards for something like 4 hours.

    Per this piece: Elizabeth Warren Manages to Woo the Democratic Establishment

    The party insiders at the DNC’s summer meeting seemed unexpectedly drawn to the senator from Massachusetts.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/elizabeth-warren-dnc-summer-meeting/596791/

    At this point in Warren’s campaign, it’s not a surprise anymore when she spends hours working a “selfie line” after a major event, as she did following two massive rallies she’s held in the past week. But it was a surprise when more than 150 of the Democratic Party’s biggest donors similarly lined up on Thursday night after her speech at a dinner here—and it struck even some of the Democrats waiting to take photos with her.

    “These are people who should not like her,” said one attendee, who spoke to me on the condition of anonymity to avoid showing favoritism. “And they love her.”

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Elizabeth Warren drew 15,000 people to her rally in Seattle. She did the selfie line afterwards for something like 4 hours.

    Double that and she ALMOST comes close to President Trump's numbers.. :D

  58. [58] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Double that and she ALMOST comes close to President Trump's numbers

    You mean the time that it takes to get to the point? Yeah, that's about right, give or take an hour.

  59. [59] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    You have a tendency to equate racism with bigotry..

    Racism is Bigotry.. Bigotry != Racism.. Not always anyways...

    Racism is bigotry, you said it yourself. So it is proper for me to equate racism with bigotry, as racism is a form of bigotry. Bigotry is an all encompassing definition for intolerance and prejudices towards a certain group.

    If I were equating bigotry only with racism, then I might be incorrect as race could have nothing to do with my intolerance — example: sexism or ageism.

    “Although bigotry can mean any form of intolerance or prejudice, when the word is used alone, it is most often understood to mean racial bigotry. “ — from Vocabulary.com

    ANY logic or rational thought goes out the window if sex is a possibility.. :D

    Since this is true regardless of who the intolerance is focused at, the use of “bigotry” is not incorrect.

  60. [60] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CRS,
    You never even bothered to mention Russian intervention in connection with the mid-terms, 'cause you won.

    Yes, they did! When we discuss Russian interference in our elections, that means ALL elections. It is why Democrats have continued to push for legislation to help protect our elections from outside interference while the Republicans continue to block their efforts! They didn’t focus on the Russian interference in the 2018 elections because the Russians were not as successful as they had been in 2016. When you are trying to point out how damaging their interference in our elections can be, it’s better to focus on examples of when their interference was successful than when they failed!

    But why WOULDN'T the russians be at least SOMEWHAT interested in the mid-term elections? Wouldn't Trump find it much easier to get his way with the legislative branch supporting him?

    While their interference didn’t end, they were not nearly as many attacks as our intelligence agencies had identified and cut off access to the ways they had interfered in 2016. Putin got everything he could have hoped for in Donald Trump.

    If Trump couldn’t get legislation passed when the Republicans held both houses of Congress, then it was clear Trump wasn’t going to be known for his ability to get legislation signed. No, Trump was put in place to destroy America’s standing in the world by crippling it from within.

  61. [61] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CW,

    Did I get snagged again? Tried to post something about Liz Warren and it is a no-show after I hit “submit”. Not sure what I am saying that the filters don’t like.

  62. [62] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    @Russ,

    Sorry to leave you hanging on our gun discussion before.. Duty called and I had to answer.. :D

    Let me catch up with all that I missed and I'll respond to your comments... Fasten your seatbelts and keep all arms and legs inside at all times!! :D

    No worries! I really enjoyed that discussion and look forward to your responses.

    -R

  63. [63] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: She was being honest, but Trump went into a snit and called her "nasty" (a label he's used more than once to describe female politicians who don't agree with him).

    Trump is so transparent:

    * Kim Jong-un referred to Trump as a "dotard," yet Trump often speaks about their "love" and correspondence like a bleating sheep.

    * He practically grovels at the feet of Putin whenever he's nearby and near constantly functions as Vlad's personal agent in America.

    * And yet, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen refers to Trump's idea to buy Greenland as "absurd," and he whines like a little bitch that she is disrespecting the "United States."

    *laughs*

  64. [64] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: On a personal note, when we ran a contest a few weeks ago to see who could name the Democrats who would drop out of the race before the third debate round, we offered up our own guesses, in the order we thought they'd leave: John Hickenlooper, Steve Bullock, Michael Bennet, Seth Moulton, and Bill de Blasio.

    You called Moulton! :)

    Also on a personal note, I want full credit for getting these all totally wrong.

  65. [65] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Walsh summed up what he thought of Trump to the Washington Post: "He's a bully and a coward. Somebody's got to punch him in the face every single day."

    Endorsed. ;)

  66. [66] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    Did you see where Trump told reporters how Melania had really gotten to know and respect Kim Jong Un — only to have the White House put out a statement that the two had never met.

    To be fair, I have mistaken Sarah Huckleberry Sanders for Kim Jong Un on multiple occasions, so I kinda understand how he could have been confused!

  67. [67] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    10

    but when I Google: russian+influence+2016+elections
    I get 15 pages of hits that never mention either CW or Kick.

    We're on page 14 toward the middle. ;)

    So, why blame them for the news cycle?

    It's obviously an ignorant troll thing. :)

  68. [68] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    38

    So, the only point I can see to all the comments is a race to the bottom..

    To see who can hate on President Trump more.. :D

    Wrong again! The majority of the comments on this blog are made by a Trump worshiper, sycophant, sucker. :)

  69. [69] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    66

    Did you see where Trump told reporters how Melania had really gotten to know and respect Kim Jong Un — only to have the White House put out a statement that the two had never met.

    I know, right!? Such are the perils of being a con artist and pathologically lying dotard in the throes of dementia.

    To be fair, I have mistaken Sarah Huckleberry Sanders for Kim Jong Un on multiple occasions, so I kinda understand how he could have been confused!

    Heh.

  70. [70] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I finally watched the Avengers: Endgame.

    The end with Steve and Peggy was so … so … oh, heartwarming.

    So, is this the end?

  71. [71] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Please help me understand why you have concerns about Biden's ability to take on Trump in a debate/campaign in light of Bidenisms.

    I mean, seriously … how fun it will be after a Trump/Biden debate when the media types count and compare the gaffes with the lies. Oh, right, they won't compare and contrast, they'll just count. I think American voters understand the difference and know which one defines the promise of America.

    Reporters must be hanging on every syllable, all the time. I doubt they do the same for anyone else.

    Did you see the clip of the female soldier - in uniform - who spoke with Biden at an event and hoped out loud that he is the next president.

    A former general speaking on CNN said that was a big problem, especially since she was in uniform. He said with a very slight semi-grin that he was sure that there were some in the military who would not support Biden. What's good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.

    I have noticed over the years, particularly remembering General McCrystal's insulting comments about Biden, while acting under the Obama administration. Where does this sentiment in the military come from, I would like to understand.

Comments for this article are closed.