Friday Talking Points -- Disrespecting The Troops

[ Posted Friday, September 4th, 2020 – 17:46 UTC ]

It has been three weeks since we've done this, since for the past two Fridays we were still writing up our notes on the Democratic and Republican National Conventions. Now that all that hoopla is over, we can return once again to our usual Friday Talking Points format.

We're not even going to try to cover all three of those weeks today, since that would be a monumental task. So much happens so fast these days that it is almost impossible to keep up. And no, this is not just hyperbole -- while reading a little history of political haircuts (after Nancy Pelosi's now-infamous visit to a salon), we came across the following extraordinary reminder of the way things used to be in the political world:

In 1993, The Washington Post's Reliable Source revealed that President Bill Clinton got a haircut aboard Air Force One as it sat on a Los Angeles International Airport runway. Other outlets reported the trim had delayed commercial flights. The rumors of an air-traffic jam turned out to be untrue, but the cost of the haircut -- $200 -- was still a scandal. (That's about $360 in 2020 dollars.)

Hard to believe now with our warp-speed news cycle, but the controversy dominated headlines for at least six weeks, and "blemished [Clinton's] public image." The stylist, Cristophe of Beverly Hills, became pre-Twitter famous.

Got that? The "Hair Force One" scandal lasted at least six weeks in the headlines. Six freakin' weeks! Can anyone imagine anything scandalous lasting six weeks in the current political atmosphere? We can't. Six days is now an eternity. And yet, back in the dim and distant days of 1993, one presidential haircut was enough to fill the headlines for a month and a half. So, no, stating that the fact that it's now impossible to contemplate reviewing three whole weeks is not overstating the case, especially considering how things used to be.

It's not that there is a dearth of scandal these days -- quite the opposite, in fact. We get so many scandals on a daily basis that it's tough to keep track of them all. If these were normal times (for instance), reports that the president of the United States called American soldiers killed in action "losers" would be an enormous scandal -- well worth six full weeks of headlines, in fact. If a Democratic president had said anything remotely like what Donald Trump is reported to have said, impeachment articles would have already been drafted by now. And yet Republicans just shrug it off, as they've shrugged off all the incendiary and disgusting things Donald Trump has said and done over the past four years (such as, this week, comparing a police officer killing an unarmed suspect to a pro golfer "choking" by missing a 3-foot putt). "No biggie, as long as we get our conservative judges and tax cuts for the rich," seems to be their go-to response these days.

Trump, according to the report in The Atlantic, not only called dead soldiers losers, he also: didn't want to honor John McCain after his death, called George H. W. Bush a "loser" for being shot down in battle, and also called the 1,800 Marines who were killed at Belleau Wood "suckers." Trump refused to visit the cemetery, because he thought the rain would muss his hair, and he was mystified at why anyone would honor soldiers' graves in the first place. During the same trip, he also asked aides: "Who were the good guys in this war?"

That's worth a week of headlines on its own -- the president of the United States had to be told which side were the 'good guys' in a World War. He has previously confused World War I with World War II, when he stated that the Spanish Flu caused the end of the second world war.

Trump also reportedly asked that wounded soldiers not be included in his plans for a military parade, because: "Nobody wants to see that." Trump has visited wounded warriors a total of four times since he became president. Obama made 29 such visits in his eight years in office.

It's really hard to imagine anything more scandalous from a sitting president, than such naked contempt for those who serve this country. And yet, by next week we'll almost certainly have moved on to a newer and fresher scandal, leaving the most disgraceful and disrespectful comments towards the military ever uttered by any U.S. president in the dust behind us. It is what it is, in Trump's America.

Joe Biden and veterans everywhere are reacting strongly to Trump's disrespectful attitude towards those who serve. As well they should. Interestingly, in a Military Times poll conducted before any of this happened (taken before the conventions, even), Joe Biden is doing better among those currently serving in uniform than Trump. Biden has 41 percent support among the troops, while Trump only has 37 percent. So much for the myth that the military loves Trump (even before his disdain for them was fully exposed).

Also before this scandalous story broke, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff had to reassure Congress that the Pentagon would not interfere in the election in any way:

I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military. In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military. I foresee no role for the U.S armed forces in this process.

If these were normal times, such a question would never even have to be asked, of course.

Meanwhile, other scandals are also swirling out of the Trumpnado. Donald Trump is now urging his supporters to commit voter fraud -- ironically, in an insane attempt to prove that there isn't any voter fraud. Voting twice (once by mail-in ballot and once in person) is illegal -- a felony, in some states -- and yet that's precisely what Trump is instructing his followers to do. This will have the (intended) side-effect of making Election Day lines longer and slower at the polls, and it will almost certainly delay the accurate counting of votes. Trump doesn't care, because any such perceived chaos will just add fuel to the fire of claiming the election was stolen from him. Earlier this year, in May, Trump confidently stated: "If you told a Republican to vote twice, they'd get sick at even the thought of it." I guess that statement is "no longer operative," now that he's explicitly telling them to do so.

Attorney General William Barr has now converted the Justice Department into a wing of Trump's re-election team. He'll do or say anything to help Trump get elected, including lying his face off about the possibilities of mail-in voter fraud. Twice this week he's been caught just makin' stuff up to scare everyone. The first time, he said foreign governments are printing up lots of ballots and will be sending them in by the truckload (false, and even if it were true they'd be thrown out due to security procedures already in place). The second time, he came up with this whopper:

Elections that have been held with mail have found substantial fraud and coercion. For example, we indicted someone in Texas -- 1,700 ballots collected from people who could vote, he made them out and voted for the person he wanted to.

Except that none of it was true. The case Barr was referring to came up with one single ballot being fraudulently cast in a local election. So Barr was only off by a factor of 1,700. And as the fact-checkers noted:

A Washington Post analysis of data collected by three vote-by-mail states with help from the nonprofit Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC) found that officials identified 372 possible cases of double voting or voting on behalf of deceased people out of about 14.6 million votes cast by mail in the 2016 and 2018 general elections, or 0.0025 percent.

Another analysis over a longer period also found a very low rate of fraud. "There were 491 prosecutions related to absentee ballots in all elections nationwide between 2000 and 2012, out of literally billions of ballots cast," Richard L. Hasen, an elections expert at the University of California at Irvine, wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.

None of this has stopped Donald Trump or Bill Barr from just flat-out lying their faces off about the non-existent risk.

In other "Trump trying to rig the election" news, Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz tried to personally tour two mail-sorting facilities today, but was turned away by armed guards both times:

U.S. Postal Service police officers barred a Florida congresswoman from scheduled tours at two mail processing complexes Friday, blocking entry to the facilities and threatening to escort her from the property if she refused to leave.

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) had arrived at the Royal Palm Processing and Distribution Center in Opa-Locka, Fla., for a 4 a.m. tour to find the parking lot entry roped off with caution tape and a U.S. Postal Inspection Service cruiser blocking the gate. Local Postal Service officials informed her and union leaders waiting to accompany her into the building that national USPS leadership had directed them to bar the group from the building.

At 6:30 a.m., Wasserman Schultz was denied entry at the Miami Processing and Distribution Center 10 miles away by a local Postal Service official as two armed Postal Inspection Service officers stood in front of turnstiles in the lobby.

Wasserman Schultz was not happy about this situation, as she tweeted: "After seeing alarming pictures of delayed mail, some pieces undelivered since July, I arranged a tour of So Fla to see how idle sorting machines have impacted workflow. But when I arrived this AM I was greeted with police tape and armed guards blocking my entry." This was backed up by the Union leader who helped plan the congresswoman's visit:

"The disrespect of a Congress member who sits on the Oversight and Reform Committee that is protecting the post office and they're denying her coming in," said Nick Mosezar, the president of the National Postal Mail Handlers Union Local 318 who helped plan Wasserman Schultz's visit. "Unbelievable."

. . .

"Carriers were ordered off the streets at 5 o'clock whether you finished your route or you didn't finish your route," said Al Friedman, president of the Florida State Association of Letter Carriers. "That was everywhere. That was all over Florida."

Problems at the Royal Palm facility had been mounting in recent weeks, Mosezar said. On Thursday afternoon shortly before Wasserman Schultz informed the Postal Service of her planned visit, mail sat in pallets on the shop floor that was supposed to be delivered on July 22 -- 43 days late -- according to photos of the mail taken by postal workers and provided to Mosezar.

The article contained one more ominous detail:

The week after [Postmaster General Louis] DeJoy took office, the Postal Service removed a Flat Sequencing System, a gargantuan machine that sorts "flats," or larger paper mail items such as magazines and ballots, by Zip codes and into delivery sequence for letter carriers.

Note that "such as magazines and ballots" phrase. So it's pretty obvious what Postmaster General DeJoy has to hide, here -- including piles of mail from over a month ago and missing machines that process ballot envelopes.

In campaign news, both Donald Trump and Joe Biden visited Kenosha, Wisconsin this week. Biden spent over an hour with the family of Jacob Blake, while Trump refused to even talk to them on the phone. Trump staged a photo op in front of a burned-out store, but the owner of the store refused to be used as a political prop, so Team Trump had to substitute a former owner for their Potemkin photo op. This continued a false-video trend from the GOP convention, where three New York City tenants were featured in a video but later said they had no idea their interview would be used for this purpose, and that none of them supported Donald Trump: "I am not a supporter of his racist policies on immigration. I am a first-generation Honduran. It was my people he was sending back." And the immigrants filmed in a naturalization ceremony for use at the GOP convention were likewise not informed how their images would be used politically.

So far, it seems that both political parties' conventions has not really moved the needle at all -- post-convention polling shows a race little changed from where it was three weeks ago. Joe Biden has a lead of 7 to 10 points nationally, and Biden leads in almost all of the battleground states (some with closer margins than the national one). So Trump's "let's scare the heck out of the suburbanites" strategy doesn't seem to be paying off one bit.

Trump still sees this as a winner, in fact, so he announced this week that he'd be cutting off funding to "anarchist cities" that he doesn't like (because they are run by Democrats, of course). In other words, while falsely accusing Joe Biden of wanting to "defund the police" Trump thinks the answer to the problem is to cut off all federal funding for police to certain cities. Yea, that's the ticket!

Six days from now, however, we'll all likely have moved on to whatever outrages Donald Trump has perpetuated in the meantime. The election can't get here soon enough, folks.


Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

It hasn't happened yet, but for the first time the House of Representatives will get a chance (sometime this month, it has been promised) to vote on legalizing marijuana at the federal level, by completely descheduling it. This would still leave it up to the states to chart their own course, but it would completely remove the federal ban on weed. So we've got that to look forward to.

Joe Biden gave an excellent speech this Monday, which is his kickoff to the general election campaign. Thankfully, the original plan of waiting until after Labor Day was scrapped so that Biden could both forcefully respond to all the lies told about him during the Republican National Convention, as well as travel to Kenosha, Wisconsin later in the week.

The speech Biden gave is well worth reading in full, or watching on video. Biden essentially reminds everyone: "This is who I am -- not that strawman Republicans created last week." So Biden deserves at least an Honorable Mention for starting his campaign off with a barn-burner of a speech.

But this week the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award has to go to Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts, for winning his primary race.

Now, normally, a sitting senator winning a primary challenge isn't all that big of a deal, but Markey's challenger this time was Representative Joe Kennedy, of the dynastic Hyannis Port Kennedys. His loss was historic, because this is the first time in Massachusetts history that a Kennedy has lost any election for any office.

In somewhat of a twist, the youthful Kennedy was backed by the establishment of the Democratic Party while Markey (who is a bit longer in the tooth, shall we say) was championed by the progressive youth movement (Markey collaborated with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to write the Green New Deal).

Markey will likely only serve one more Senate term, due to his age. So Joe Kennedy may get a second shot at this seat in six years. But his loss shows the diminishing value of the Kennedy name. Younger voters certainly don't remember J.F.K. or R.F.K., and many of them don't even remember Teddy. The times (in Massachusetts) are a-changin', it seems.

For winning his primary race -- against a Kennedy -- by a healthy double-digit margin, Senator Ed Markey is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.

[Congratulate Senator Ed Markey on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]


Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

We didn't even consider giving the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week to Nancy Pelosi this week. She thought she was following the rules, she only removed her mask when getting her hair washed, and the whole thing was nothing short of a tempest in a teapot. This story is not going to be around six days from now, never mind six weeks.

But we are awarding one Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week to California Democrats. All of them, in fact, in the state legislature.

The legislative session wrapped up this week, in complete and utter chaos. Here is merely the worst of what happened:

And in the waning moments, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks appeared on the floor with her crying, 1-month-old daughter Elly after being denied the right to vote by proxy.

"Please, please, please pass this bill," she said as she held her swaddled child. "And I'm going to go finish feeding my daughter."

After a long debate and multiple votes, lawmakers did as Wicks exhorted them to and passed a fiercely contested housing bill -- but it was too late. The Assembly acted with only minutes to spare, leaving no time to send the measure to the Senate for final approval.

. . .

The Senate long ago concluded remote voting was constitutionally sound and authorized it, allowing Republicans to participate. The Assembly thought otherwise, worrying about legal challenges invalidating votes -- and then Speaker Anthony Rendon faced a backlash for not extending a limited proxy voting system to Wicks, concluding the new mother was not sufficiently at-risk.

They had a deadline of midnight, and they blew it. And this wasn't the only important bill that died through nothing short of sheer incompetence.

Senate President pro tem Toni Atkins (D-San Diego) was not pleased her bill had withered for lack of time.

"To send over S.B. 1120 at 11:57 -- that was impossible, and those votes were there days ago," a weary Atkins said some time after 2 a.m., decrying the "the absolutely needless delay of housing bills."

The housing measure wasn't the only one to fall for lack of time. Major criminal justice reform bills introduced in the wake of George Floyd's death never got floor votes. Law enforcement opponents successfully ran out the clock on a bill to decertify police officers who break the rules -- ignoring a late lobbying push by celebrities like Kim Kardashian West -- and a measure to restrict the use of rubber bullets and tear gas.

Why were dozens of important bills voted on at the very last possible moment? Incompetence. Why were dozens of other important bills not even voted on? They didn't have the time, because of their own incompetence. These votes could have been scheduled days or even weeks ago, but they were not. Democrats absolutely dominate the legislature, so they really have no one to blame for this fiasco but themselves. So we're collectively awarding them all a group Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award, in response.

We have a second MDDOTW to hand out as well, since this election is not the time or the place to be cracking jokes. Here's the story, in a nutshell:

Twitter on Tuesday forced a Democratic House candidate to delete a tweet that urged supporters of President Donald Trump to vote the day after this November's election, a company spokesperson confirmed to Politico.

The company said an Aug. 18 tweet by the campaign for Elizabeth Hernandez, who is challenging GOP Rep. Kevin Brady for his seat in Texas' 8th Congressional District, violated its rules against voter suppression.

Hernandez's campaign told Politico that a staffer had posted the tweet in jest.

. . .

In response to a Twitter user who wished Hernandez luck in her race and said they have "relatives in Texas who are tRump supporters" [sic], the official @LizForTX8 account wrote: "Thank you! And remind all of your Trump supporting relatives to vote on Wednesday, November 4! (Since they're Trump supporters, they might fall for it. Just saying....)"

The tweet included a laughing emoji. The account has more than 26,000 followers.

As we mentioned, this particular election is not a laughing matter. Jokes like this are common, but not from actual politicians (or wannabe politicians). And the campaign's reaction was less-than-impressive as well:

"In a jovial exchange with supporters on Twitter, one of our campaign staff was a little too loose with their words. The emoji at the end of the tweet indicates that the tweet was made in jest, not intended to actually mislead anyone," spokesperson Christopher Phipps said in an email. "But when Twitter brought the tweet to our attention, we took action to take it down, out of an abundance of caution."

Now, Hernandez is a longshot because the Texas district she's running in is solidly red. So it's unlikely that she'll actually make it to the House. But even so, we feel that the best way to call out Republican election interference is for Democrats -- all Democrats -- not to engage in such practices themselves. Which is why this rises to the level of a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award, in our opinion.

[Contact the California Legislature via their web pages, to let them know what you think of their actions. Elizabeth Hernandez is a candidate for office, and our policy is not to link to campaign websites, so you'll have to search her contact information out yourself.]


Friday Talking Points

Volume 587 (9/4/20)

Democrats looking for good talking points to use this week really need look no further than the speech Joe Biden gave this Monday. It was a remarkable speech, covering many aspects of the campaign but for the most part it was a rebuttal of the charges that Trump flung at Biden during the Republican National Convention. Biden clearly disavows all political violence and explains how he would be doing things far differently than how Trump is reacting to the various crises we're now experiencing.

Instead of trying to compete with Biden's fine words this week, we're going to offer up instead some extended excerpts from an interview that ran recently in Salon. Stuart Stevens worked as a Republican strategist for three decades, including working on the campaigns of George W. Bush, Mitt Romney, and John McCain. He's written a new book with the catchy title: It Was All A Lie: How The Republican Party Became Donald Trump.

Stevens is blunt in his appraisal of where the Republican Party finds itself today, and he does not mince words at all. Here's just a sample:

I say this in all sincerity: Can anybody make a credible case that if these Republicans had been around in 1776, that we would not be celebrating the Queen's birthday today? These Republicans are not going to stand up to Donald Trump. Would today's Republicans have fought against the king of England and the most powerful army in the world? Are you insane? Maybe we should not be surprised by their cowardice. Maybe we should instead remember just how unusual courage is.

Stevens is now advising the Lincoln Project, a group of Republicans working hard to defeat Trump and elect Joe Biden. But his insights are so damning for the Republican Party as a whole that they're worth reading (the entire interview is well worth a full read, in fact). What follows are the seven passages that leapt out at us. The last one, in particular, is downright frightening.


   Tell us how you really feel...

Stevens keeps topping his own rhetoric, when asked about the current state of the Republican Party, with increasingly dire metaphors:

Watching the Republican Party is like watching your friend drink himself to death. The Republican Party has legitimized hate. History tells us that once such forces are unleashed, that is very difficult to undo. That hatred is not going to be even partially defeated until Donald Trump is defeated. The whole situation is very sad.

It is difficult when you are in the middle of any moment, of course, to realize the consequences of that specific moment. But I think the Republican Party and Donald Trump are unlike anything in the country's recent history. The only thing I can liken it to is the collapse of Communism and the Soviet Union. A major political force has become so disconnected that it just collapsed under its own weight. Chernobyl is basically a more benign version of the Republican Party.


   Nothing like the party of family values

For many decades, Republicans took the high road of "supporting family values." Sometimes this was code for "discriminating against families we don't approve of," and sometimes it was just used as a political club to beat Democrats with. But this just isn't possible anymore, as Stevens points out:

I didn't want to believe that the political party that I'd worked in and helped build would go along with a guy who was a failed casino owner who talked in public about having sex with his daughter. It just seemed kind of impossible.

Then, once Trump won, the Republican Party just completely collapsed and supported him. I went through a period of denial, telling myself that this was not really the Republican Party. But I could not sustain that denial. The Republican Party is now the party that endorsed Roy Moore and attacks John Bolton. Those are just facts.


   How will it end?

Towards the end of the article, Stevens is asked to write the epitaph of the Republican Party. He responded with a shorter version of the excerpt below: "The Republican Party was killed by a changing America. It became a white party and there were not enough white people."

I liken the Republican Party to the subprime mortgage crisis in 2007. How it's going to end is more obvious than how long it will take. The future of the Republican Party is pretty clear. It's California. California was the beating heart of the Republican Party. It was the electoral citadel, and now we're in third place. Not second -- third. That's what's going to happen to the Republican Party. It's inevitable.

Half the Americans 15 years old and under are non-white. It is the end of the Republican Party. It is just a question of how long that outcome will it take. Ronald Reagan won something like 44 states in 1980 with 55% of the white vote. In 2008, John McCain loses the election with 55% of the white vote.


   No higher moral good

Stevens foresees some time in the wilderness for true conservatives:

I believe that we are in for a period of center-left government for a good while. Eventually it will go too far, and then some coherent, moral center-right argument backed by policy will develop. At present, I do not know anyone on the right who can articulate a credible theory of conservative government.

I worked for more than 30 years at the highest levels in the Republican Party and even I cannot tell you what being a conservative means right now. Right now, all the Republican Party cares about is power. The Republican Party exists to elect Republicans. That's it. In that way, it is like a cartel. There is no higher moral good. All they exist to do is beat Democrats.


   An international child-rape ring

There are many examples of the completely amoral nature of both Trump and the Republican Party today, but this is perhaps the worst of the lot:

For example, the president of United States, at the White House, actually wished a woman well who was just arrested at the center of an international child-rape ring. In response, the Republicans, for the most part, did nothing. Republicans complain to us at the Lincoln Project, "Why do you guys want to burn the Republican Party down?" We didn't burn it down. We didn't walk away. It was today's Republican leaders who did. If you can't object to the head of your party and the president of the United States supporting a woman who was arrested in an international child-rape ring, then what is your existence as a public figure about? That is why we at the Lincoln Project are trying to beat Trump and elect Joe Biden.


   A national emergency

Yet another shocking reversal for the Republican Party is their foreign policy attitudes, which would have made Ronald Reagan's head explode were he alive today to witness what Trump has done to his party.

Normal people believe that when we see someone acting abnormally, they will eventually revert to normality. They'll come to their senses. That is a great weapon and tool that Donald Trump has used because he is not a normal person. He senses weakness. Trump saw that the Republican Party was full of weak people and he could just come on in and take over.

Donald Trump also understood that racial animus was a root, unifying principle of the Republican Party. That meant that he could just walk on in and say things that other people would not. Want a Muslim ban? He's 100 percent for it. Trump gave Republican voters a raw, unfiltered version of what they really want. Donald Trump is a national emergency. I do not understand how you can call yourself a patriotic American and support someone who was elected with the help of the Russians. I've seen a lot of things during my time working on campaigns, but -- man, I never woke up and worked on the same side as the Russians. Today's Republicans do.


   A very plausible nightmare scenario

Imagine "The Brooks Brothers Riot," except this time with guns.

I wake up every day to fight against that outcome. In terms of the law and Trump delaying the election or doing other things? He is not going to ask permission. He will just do it. I have challenged Republicans with the following scenario. I have not found one who can sensibly respond.

In November there are reports of voting irregularities in Dade County, Florida. There usually are. They usually do not mean anything. Donald Trump orders Chad Wolf to send those camo-wearing paramilitaries who were deployed in D.C. and Portland into the Dade County Courthouse and they seize the boxes of votes. The courts go crazy. They order the boxes returned. But let's say some of those boxes are opened. Now there is a problem with the chain of custody.

What happens then? Are the votes in Dade County thrown out? How do you have a national election without Dade County? Who would stop this? Security guards at the Dade County courthouse aren't going to stop guys in camouflage with automatic weapons. Trump would give those orders to seize the boxes and interfere with the 2020 election. Trump is testing whether the Republicans will stand up to him. Bill Barr won't stop him. That is for sure.

Moreover, why do all these people around Donald Trump keep getting arrested? It is because they are crooks. It's not as if they didn't want to work in presidential politics before. It was just that no one would hire them. The campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, the foreign policy adviser, the national security adviser, the chief political adviser -- all those guys are felons. Now Steve Bannon's been arrested, and he'll probably be a felon too. Donald Trump is a wannabe gangster. Gangsters hire other gangsters.

-- Chris Weigant


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

Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground


107 Comments on “Friday Talking Points -- Disrespecting The Troops”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    As scandalous as Trump is, he has a pretty good chance of winning a second term. Why that is would be a pretty good subject for another column, depressing as it would be to write and read ... :(

  2. [2] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    i'll boil it down for you in 4 words:

    most people are stupid.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, Joshua, do you think this latest Atlantic piece will be a tipping point, at least with the military and, especially, with active duty military?

  4. [4] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


  5. [5] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    I'm happy to once again have an FTP to read with my Saturday morning breakfast. Thanks much, Chris.

  6. [6] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    Re: Clinton's haircut scandal.
    A quick Internet search informs me that FOX News didn't begin broadcasting for another 3 years. The "mainstream media", including CNN, kept this story going for so long. Is it any surprise that America is where it is today?
    In a recent 1A "Friday News Round-up" (which I highly recommend for other news junkies), a reporter expressed exasperation at the press frenzy over Biden's " ain't Black" comment. She rightly noted that there are urgent issues that the media MUST report to the American voters in this moment. If I'm not mistaken, she was a FOX (!) reporter, too!

  7. [7] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    To my knowledge, the media still hasn't undertaken a thorough review, much less admitted, the part they played in Trump's election win. As I remember it, during the autumn of 2016, every Hillary sneeze was "a cover-up of illness" and every "no comment" made her a "secretive" candidate. Never mind that Hillary had released several years of taxes, her medical history, and a raft of policy papers.
    Meanwhile, the cable talking heads, New York Times, Washington Post, and other "sober" newspapers couldn't get enough of the latest "Can you believe this?" tweet and lie by Donald Trump.

  8. [8] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    I nominate Joe Biden for MDDOW. He could have demanded several conditions before agreeing to debate President Trump: "release your taxes", "release your medical history", etc. He has real leverage; Trump would surely have refused, which would make HIM the "bad guy".

  9. [9] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    And I'll end with an interesting tidbit that nicely combines the media circus in the United Sates reporting AND Trump insulting "the troops" (dead and alive). There ARE some good reporters working at FOX News, though I don't know how they look at themselves in the mirror in the morning (even if the employment opportunities are ever-harder to find).
    'Fox News’ national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin posted a long Twitter thread Friday afternoon confirming key points of the bombshell article that cited multiple reports of Trump denigrating fallen service members by saying they were “losers” and “suckers,” and details of the president’s refusal to visit the graves of America’s war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery while he was in France in 2018.

    Griffin also tweeted that she discovered Trump once said it was “not a good look” to include “wounded guys” in a Fourth of July military parade.'

  10. [10] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    LizM [3]

    do you think this latest Atlantic piece will be a tipping point, at least with the military and, especially, with active duty military?

    How could it be? What is actually new? Big Orange can just call it Fake News as long as this bunch of dopes and babies refuse to go on the record.

  11. [11] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    All the praise for Chris Wallace is very misguided. He works for an organization that undermines its own reporters. Fox confirmed the Atlantic report and then immediately went back to calling it fake news. There are no standards there and no bottom. He disgraces himself by working there.

  12. [12] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Stuart Stevens is just another rat jumping off the sinking ship that he built. Drumpf didn't create the current GOP. He took advantage of it. Stevens created it.

  13. [13] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    These terrist Trumpanzees have repeatedly utilized the ISIS tactic of driving cars into crowds of people. It's both astonishing and completely unsurprising that nobody's been arrested for the most recent example in NYC. Defunding the police seems more reasonable every day.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    So, what are you putting in your not-so-early-morning breakfast, these days? :)

    What sort of leverage do you suppose Biden has over Trump and the presidential debates?

    Or, is it that you believe Biden isn't up for a debate with Trump, hmmm? And, you'd like to see him wiggle out of it, any way he can??

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    How could it be? What is actually new? Big Orange can just call it Fake News as long as this bunch of dopes and babies refuse to go on the record.

    Well, there's nothing new, that's for sure. Just more of the same.

    Guess I'm just wondering how low people in the military are willing to go with him in disrespecting their own kind. Think about that for a minute!

    If Trump ends up leaving the White House in January, the next President is going to be facing a monumental mess formerly known as the USA and it will be on the order of magnitude of the Augean Stables, again.

  16. [16] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    How is McCrae Dowless still unincarcerated and filing for reelection? This country is hopeless.

  17. [17] 
    John From Censornati wrote:


    I'm just wondering how low people in the military are willing to go with him in disrespecting their own kind.

    Obviously pretty low, but if you're referring to the likes of John Kelly, Fat Donny is his own kind. He has never apologized for smearing Frederica Wilson. He is about as low as it gets.

  18. [18] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey, JFC, speaking of General Kelly, doesn't silence mean assent? :)

  19. [19] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Obviously pretty low, but if you're referring to the likes of John Kelly, Fat Donny is his own kind. He has never apologized for smearing Frederica Wilson. He is about as low as it gets.

    I was referring to active duty military mostly but, I had forgotten that Trump is Kelly's own kind. My memory is very bad and getting worse, it seems ... :(

  20. [20] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You know, on further thought, it would be a sea change, wouldn't it, if Biden could say he has the support of the majority of the military ... well, probably won't happen ...

  21. [21] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Although, there was that recent Military Times poll where Biden got more support than Trump. Of course, neither one got very close to 50%. so ...

  22. [22] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    They won't be singing My Old Kentucky Home at the Derby today, but the bugler will play it. Seems like one of those compromises that's unlikely to make much of anybody happy.

  23. [23] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    John From C [22]

    Somehow "It's summer, the persons of color are gay" just doesn't cut it, right?

  24. [24] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Try to keep up C R. They've been singing "the people are gay" for years, but you're right that changing one word doesn't cut it.

  25. [25] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    As scandalous as Trump is, he has a pretty good chance of winning a second term.

    Pretty good chance? How do you figure?

    Trump has never achieved 50% approval. He has never tried to appeal to anyone besides his low-40 percentile base. Under Trump 180,000
    and counting Americans are dead and our economy has cratered. And Trump is not running as an unknown outsider against Corporatist Hillary this time around.

    In light of this do you really think that Joe Biden would trade places with "pretty good chances" Trump? I didn't think so.

  26. [26] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Italy Rusty-9. Fox News fears the worst and has assumed "the crash position."

  27. [27] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    It'll be interesting if the reality TV orangutan tries to smear Sully. We'll have to see what happens!

  28. [28] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    “I always tell people that to know President Trump is to know someone whose word is his bond” - Mike Pence

    Apparently, he thinks that a cult of personality is transferable to a dullard with no personality.

  29. [29] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    There are so many things that can go wrong in this presidential election that I've lost count.

    Biden will have to work very hard, tooth and nail, to win this election. He'll have to keep harping on the fact that Trump doesn't understand how to stop the virus; that he is the law and order candidate, not Trump; that looters, arsonists and other rioters will be prosecuted in a Biden administration; that there can be no economic renewal while the virus runs out of control; that Democratic economic policy, while not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, takes into account the welfare of all Americans while the Republican cult of economic failure leads only to disaster.

    If Biden can get through to American voters - Democratic, Republican and Independent - on these critical issues, then I fully expect him to win. But, not in a landslide! And, knowing what I do about American voters, even all of this may not be enough to edge Trump out of the White House.

    My point to you, MtnCaddy, is that it is never wise to count your chickens before they are hatched. It's always wise to work hard because nothing worthwhile ever comes easily. These are the lessons of 2016 ...

  30. [30] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:



    TCM is showing 'The Kids Are Alright' tonight!

  31. [31] 
    dsws wrote:

    As scandalous as Trump is, he has a pretty good chance of winning a second term. Why that is would be a pretty good subject for another column,

    Three components.

    1) We have an electoral system where 40% of the popular is fairly likely to be pluralities in enough states for a majority of the electoral vote.

    2) About 40% of US voters are absolute psychopaths. They're in favor of putting babies in cages for no lawful reason, if it's their side that's doing it. They're in favor of disrespecting the troops, if it's their side doing it. They're in favor of policies and behaviors that cause 100,000+ utterly avoidable US deaths from covid, if it's their side doing it.


    3) It's pretty much the same 40%.

  32. [32] 
    dsws wrote:

    [29] LizM
    He'll have to keep harping on the fact...

    Harping on facts is a guaranteed way to lose a US election. He'll have to keep playing the feelings, and projecting the image, associated with those issues.

  33. [33] 
    dsws wrote:

    The first time, he said foreign governments are printing up lots of ballots and will be sending them in by the truckload (false, and even if it were true they'd be thrown out due to security procedures already in place).

    You have an inside line on this administration's collusion with the Russians? If he says he's working with them on something that he isn't clever enough to have come up with on his own, it seems as though we ought to believe him.

    Nor do I share your confidence in the ability of a dozen or so swing-state election systems to all beat everything the Russians can come up with.

  34. [34] 
    dsws wrote:

    For winning his primary race -- against a Kennedy -- by a healthy double-digit margin, Senator Ed Markey is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.


    (Disclosure: I voted for him.)

  35. [35] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @dan [31]

    chilling thought, but probably accurate.

  36. [36] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller [14]: during the three-week drought with no FTPS, I discovered 'The Daily Moth'.

    I don't know ASL, so thank goodness for close captioning. And I'm picking up a 'few phrases' along the way. :)

  37. [37] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller [14]: Re: Biden's leverage in the debates.
    If I comprehend correctly from your past comments, you are Canadian, so perhaps aren't aware of the 'extensive negotiations' between the two parties. Every 4 years, the two camps decide how many, where, the format (town hall, moderator questions only, etc), and even which television networks will be allowed to cash in on the spectacle.
    Biden could have chosen to add the pre-conditions that I listed, and others, in order to participate, or to 'walk away' as the ONLY candidate who is honest and transparent with the voters. IMO Trump is desperate to appear on the debate stage. And since he also is trailing in every poll I've read about, these demands would put Trump 'between a rock and a hard place'.

  38. [38] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    TheStig [26]. I wish I could agree. It seems that FOX News continues its schizophrenic ways.
    “I gotta give them credit for coming up with something this—pretty disgusting,” Gutfeld said. “It feels like this was created in a lab, and unleashed at a time when they saw Joe [Biden] collapsing. This is the first Hail Mary of maybe 50 Hail Marys that you’re gonna see.”'

    FOX Viewers don't seem to mind. I've often wondered if they enjoy the Jerry-Springer-like clashes; at least ONE of the people they're watching is 'bearing false witness', but they never are bothered enough to change the channel.

    Whoever wins in November, FOX News is certain to retain its loyal viewership, so they really have nothing to fear. And certainly no reason to change their 'business model'.

  39. [39] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    BTW, I don't take credit for the 'additional demands' idea.

  40. [40] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    And for your Sunday morning laugh, there's this, which one Twitter wag described with the caption, "Hello, I'd like to report an excessively on-the-nose metaphor in progress."

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    Ah, yeah, I'm aware of the negotiations. They can't really be used to feign cancelling the debates altogether. Sure, Biden could have done as you suggested. But, it would have been an asinine move and he doesn't make many of those, as a rule.

    Good luck putting Trump between a rock and a hard place. :)

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    BTW, I don't take credit for the 'additional demands' idea.

    I believe I commented on that piece back in July! With almost 4000 comments, though, I'm not going to try to find it just to quote myself. But, I can imagine what I said. Heh.

  43. [43] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Biden doesn't make many asinine moves?

    How about:
    Nothing will fundamentally change.
    I will NOT ban fracking.
    Financing his campaign with big money.
    Supporting the military industrial complex.
    Supporting war after war after war.
    Not wanting to end fossil fuel subsidies.
    Picking Kamala Harris.
    Not speaking out against the Wisconsin primaries?
    Pretty much anything he says or does.

    Can anybody make a credible case that if Biden and the more of the same incremental change Deathocrats of today were around in 1776 that we would still be celebrating the Queen's birthday?

  44. [44] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    ...That we would NOT be still celebrating the Queen's birthday.

  45. [45] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I knew what you meant. :)

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Got any plans for tonight?

  47. [47] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Biden and the Deathocrats that are responsible for creating the problem of President Trump are now telling us that they are the ones that can fix the problem they created.

    How is that different than Trump saying the he is the one that can fix the problems he created?

    It isn't.

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, somebody has to fix it, and fast.

  49. [49] 
    TheStig wrote:


    The crash position is just a hedge against possible disaster. The Fox Empire is positioning its news outlet (which employs some credible journalists and at least one credible talking head)to remain credible if Biden wins. "We saw it coming."

  50. [50] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    that trump stands a good chance of winning in spite of everything he's done to exacerbate the pandemic and its economic effects, says something about us. and it isn't something good.

  51. [51] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Again, why in the world do you think that "Trump stands a good chance of winning?"

    He never broke 50% approval, has never tried to reach anyone but his base, has at one time or another pissed off everyone, whose incompetence has killed 200K Americans and created a Great Recession or Depression out of a good economy. Just what does Trump have going for him besides 40-ish percent of Americans that "always vote Repug, no matter what?"

  52. [52] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Pay attention!

  53. [53] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    It turns out that the Postmaster Genital has always been a dick and a gangster. It's shocking that the prez would hire the criminal type.

  54. [54] 
    dsws wrote:

    Just what does Trump have going for him besides 40-ish percent of Americans that "always vote Repug, no matter what?"

    The de-facto gerrymandering of state lines.

    The 50-ish percent of Americans who don't vote.

  55. [55] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Plus, the power of the incumbency, used to the hilt. And, the fact that the country seems ill-prepared for 3X the normal load of mail in votes.

    And, we can't discount the fact that many Americans have a very mistaken impression of Joe Biden. Even among the ones who actually like him don't think he is capable of governing - and that was long before Trump and his attempts to belittle Biden.

    If Biden wins, it will be a small miracle ...

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    I hope you are beginning to see the light and will stop asking the same question, over and over again. :)

    The CW Sunday Night Music Festival and Dance Party is up soon - hope to see you there!

  57. [57] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    The name of this song got me thinking about the protesters In The Street athough that’s not what it’s about. Even if you’ve never heard of Big Star or heard this record, there’s a good chance that you’ll feel like you have.

    Wish we had a joint so bad!

    Big Star was an influential group that never achieved commercial success. Here’s a little hero worship from The Replacements, one of my very favorite bands. Alex Chilton was the singer for The Box Tops when he was a teenager before moving on to Big Star.

    Children by the million wait for Alex Chilton when he comes 'round
    They say "I'm in love. What's that song? I'm in love with that song."
    I never travel far without a little Big Star

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, here we go!

    I have to go out for a bit but I will be back ...

  59. [59] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    (remember ... no more political comments until tomorrow, CW time ... but, the tunes may be as political as we wish!)

  60. [60] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm talkin' to YOU, Russ.

  61. [61] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    But I worked for like two hours on it! Fine, I’ll save it until tomorrow.

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


  63. [63] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I've been very much enjoying my new 45-year-old Neil Young album, Homegrown, released just a few months ago but recorded in '74/'75, the missing link in his catalogue.

    It seems he couldn't stand to listen to it as it brought back some bad memories of a love gone wrong. So, he sat on it for 45 years!

    Here is the first track, Separate Ways - which he has performed live before ... Enjoy!

  64. [64] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I like the Big Star sound and they look like nice chaps, too.

    Here they are with Watch the Sunrise,

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The Replacements, too ... I could listen for a long while ...

    I'll Be You,

  66. [66] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Did you catch this line from I'll Be you?

    Lonely, I guess that's where I'm from
    If I was from Canada then I'd best be called lonesome

    Did you recognize the In The Street?

  67. [67] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    The Replacements were anti music videos. Try Bastards of Young. It was my introduction to them. I was hooked.

  68. [68] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Did you catch this line from I'll Be you??

    I did! I always check the lyrics first and have them up while I listen to something new ...

    I shall check out Bastards of Young. Did you ever see them live? Where did they tour?

  69. [69] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    In the Street didn't really sound familiar. Should it? I'm not a good judge for that ... I may have heard it before but have forgotten it. :)

  70. [70] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I saw them numerous times. You never knew what to expect. Here is their version of Like A Rolling Stone, which I love. They had a self-deprecating alternate name - The Placemats.

  71. [71] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TCM has another night of concert films and documentaries tonight so I'm splitting me time here and there.

    Last night it was Shine A Light and The Kids Are Alright.

    First, I'll check out Like a Rolling Stone by the Placemats! Heh.

  72. [72] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Like a Rolling Pin! Ha! They're impersonators, too ... :)

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Led Zeppelin and Jimi Hendrix are up next on TCM tonight.

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The Rolling Stones sure are making a big thing about Goats Head Soup 2020 ...

  75. [75] 
    nypoet22 wrote:
  76. [76] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [74] I listened to it the other day. IMO it's just a weak album. Angie and Star Star are the only songs I really like a lot.

  77. [77] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    nypoet22, do you recognize In The Street?

  78. [78] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The best thing about Sunday nights - I get to broaden my musical horizons. Ahem.

    I'm appreciatin' Prism more and more with each passing week! Heh.

    Speaking of which, a Prism ballad, coming up ...

  79. [79] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    ... You're Like the Wind, you're always changin'

  80. [80] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    did someone say goat's head soup?

  81. [81] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm going to be sorry I mentioned that.

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But, first, here are the Rolling Stones and Like a Rolling Stone ...

  83. [83] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller

    (remember ... no more political comments until tomorrow, CW time ... but, the tunes may be as political as we wish!)



    Let's put this moron out of his misery. :)

  84. [84] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I have something special for you, Kick, a little later on ...

  85. [85] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    But, first, a little something from The Song Remains the Same, from TCM tonight, Led Zeppelin Live at MSG,

    Stairway to Heaven,

  86. [86] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That Stairway is from their 1976 appearance at MSG.

  87. [87] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey, Kick, this is the song you meant to post, right?

    The Trump Ramp


  88. [88] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, I guess all is fair in love and politics ...

    Hairy Legs!

  89. [89] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, THAT's the deal!

  90. [90] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Seriously, folks,

    Here is the unofficial theme song for the Rolling Stones' UNZIPPED exhibition in Kitchener next November, unless someone knows of another fine tune with 'unzipped' in the lyrics, I'll consider it ...

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Has anyone ever heard of Leonid and Friends? They are a bunch of guys from Russia who love Chicago, the rock band.

    I just found out about them the other day while listening to my favourite radio station and they mentioned these guys after playing Chicago's 25 or 6 to 4.

    So, I checked them out and was pretty much bowled over. It's so hard to tell the difference between Chicago and the Leonid and Friends' cover. I thought for sure somebody was pulling my leg and this wasn't for real.

    Check it out for yourselves!

  92. [92] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    that 70's show theme song?


  93. [93] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    I hope you can play this video from the facebook page of StringKatz; they will be playing with Queen Flash and this is a video montage of Bohemian Rhapsody ...

  94. [94] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I may have that info wrong but, the StringKatz sure sound good playing the music of Queen; they do all kinds of classic rock songs ...

  95. [95] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [92] Bingo! Cheap Trick re-wrote it for That 70's Show.

  96. [96] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    I'm not exactly sure where you're at but I'm hoping that you are safe from the wildfires that are burning in the high country...take good care!

  97. [97] 
    Kick wrote:

    Chris Weigant

    If these were normal times (for instance), reports that the president of the United States called American soldiers killed in action "losers" would be an enormous scandal -- well worth six full weeks of headlines, in fact.

    I know, right!? Trump keeps insisting he didn't say these things because gaslighting the gullible masses is what Trump does. It's nothing personal to the troops; Trump thinks most everyone is a "sucker," a "loser," and quite obviously thinks lots of people are gullible morons because he can quite obviously see they believe his utter nonsensical bullshit.

    Over three linked tweets, Trump wrote:

    I was never a big fan of John McCain, disagreed with him on many things including ridiculous endless wars and the lack of success he had in dealing with the VA and our great Vets, but the lowering of our Nations American Flags, and the first class funeral he was given by our Country, had to be approved by me, as President, & I did so without hesitation or complaint. Quite the contrary, I felt it was well deserved. I even sent Air Force One to bring his body, in casket, from Arizona to Washington. It was my honor to do so. Also, I never called John a loser and swear on whatever, or whoever, I was asked to swear on, that I never called our great fallen soldiers anything other than HEROES. This is more made up Fake News given by disgusting & jealous failures in a disgraceful attempt to influence the 2020 Election!

    "I swear I never! Ask Melanie... She was in DC when I called and told her all about it." What a bullshit artist. *laughs* Lie on top of lie on top of lie. Melania was in Paris when Trump spewed his quite standard and customary typical insults.

    Donald J. Trump

    Via @fitsnews: “Donald Trump: John McCain Is ‘A Loser’”

    Donald Trump: John McCain Is “A Loser”
    Billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump's "say anything" presidential campaign rolls on...

    4:45 PM * Jul 18, 2015

    Yes, Trump called John McCain a loser and also memorialized himself doing it via a tweet shortly thereafter. The gullible rubes can deny it until the cow come home, but let's stop kidding ourselves that Trump didn't say it, and let's stop kidding ourselves that Trump doesn't think America is full of idiots who are gullible enough to believe his asinine gaslighting con artist bullshit. Trump thinks you're stupid or he wouldn't keep lying to your face even about what's staring you right in the face. Trump thinks those who would serve their country for little monetary gain are stupid. This ain't rocket science, people.

  98. [98] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    i'll boil it down for you in 4 words: most people are stupid.

    And, HOW!!!

    I just read about gender reveal parties in California and Arizona that are responsible for wildfires that have burned more than 80,000 hectares, not to mention the lives and property destroyed!

    Biden may not have a snowball's chance in Hell ...

  99. [99] 
    John M wrote:

    The Trump campaign just withdrew and stopped advertising in Arizona. Apparently they have now given up on Michigan and Arizona, and possibly Pennsylvania. Looks like they are going to try to hold the line on Texas, Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio, and try to win with Wisconsin and Florida.

  100. [100] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Gender reveal parties with smoke-generating pyrotechnic devices in one of the hottest and driest and most on fire places on the planet?

    Are Americans for real?

  101. [101] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    John M

    The Trump campaign just withdrew and stopped advertising in Arizona. Apparently they have now given up on Michigan and Arizona, and possibly Pennsylvania.

    Trump should have more than enough campaign money to keep advertising in those states — of course that would require him to return some of the campaign donations that he has pocketed for himself and his family.

  102. [102] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    (Please bear in mind I'm reading and responding as I go along, starting at the beginning.)


    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    So, what are you putting in your not-so-early-morning breakfast, these days? :)

    What sort of leverage do you suppose Biden has over Trump and the presidential debates?

    Or, is it that you believe Biden isn't up for a debate with Trump, hmmm? And, you'd like to see him wiggle out of it, any way he can??

    Trusting that this was a sincere comment Elizabeth, the answer is, Joe could have, for example, demanded Trump release his tax returns in return for three debates. Debates that Trump needs far more than Biden. Even if Joe doesn't get the Trump tax returns he highlights Trump's hiding of the truth.

    And no, I see no reason in the world that Joe is or should be afraid to debate Trump. I think any Biden debate performance that clears the low "didn't drool on himself" bar will thence be inherently reality based, and that favors ole "Hey do I look like a Marxist bomb thrower?" Joe Biden. Relax, we got this

  103. [103] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Hey Don,

    Remind us just how many candidates are running only small donation campaigns in this election? I looked at your website and could find none.

    This is still my favorite line on your website:

    ” One Demand will not be making contributions to or endorsing any candidates so contributions to One Demand will only be used to maintain and improve the website, advertising, legal advice, representation and actions when necessary and reasonable compensation to myself and others (see “About the Founder”).

    Based on the information found in “About the Founder

  104. [104] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Whoops...where is that “EDIT” button when I need it?!?!

    Based on the information found in “About the Founder”, it would be unreasonable for you to accept any compensation.

  105. [105] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Was that the post you were working on for two hours?

  106. [106] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Relax, we got this.

    Just like 2016?

  107. [107] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller

    Just like 2016?

    Why do so many keep acting as if 2018 didn't happen?
    I guess it's all for the best, though, and people vote accordingly. :)

Comments for this article are closed.