A thread for Democrats Only
POSTED BY: THGRRI
UPDATED: Monday, September 14, 2026 11:03
VIEWED: 756680
PAGE 29 of 73
Stop Americans From Filing Their Taxes for Free
In 2008, TurboTax was a market leader, but only a small portion of Americans filed their taxes online. By 2019, nearly 40% of U.S. taxpayers filed online and some 40 million of them did so with TurboTax, far more than with any other product.
But the success of TurboTax rests on a shaky foundation, one that could collapse overnight if the U.S. government did what most wealthy countries did long ago and made tax filing simple and free for most citizens.
For more than 20 years, Intuit has waged a sophisticated, sometimes covert war to prevent the government from doing just that, according to internal company and IRS documents and interviews with insiders. The company unleashed a battalion of lobbyists and hired top officials from the agency that regulates it.
Internal presentations lay out company tactics for fighting “encroachment,” Intuit’s catchall term for any government initiative to make filing taxes easier — such as creating a free government filing system or pre-filling people’s returns with payroll or other data the IRS already has. “For a decade proposals have sought to create IRS tax software or a ReturnFree Tax System; All were stopped,” reads a confidential 2007 PowerPoint presentation from an Intuit board of directors meeting. The company’s 2014-15 plan included manufacturing “3rd-party grass roots” support. “Buy ads for op-eds/editorials/stories in African American and Latino media,” one internal PowerPoint slide states.
The centerpiece of Intuit’s anti-encroachment strategy has been the Free File program, hatched 17 years ago in a moment of crisis for the company. Under the terms of an agreement with the federal government, Intuit and other commercial tax prep companies promised to provide free online filing to tens of millions of lower-income taxpayers. In exchange, the IRS pledged not to create a government-run system.
Since Free File’s launch, Intuit has done everything it could to limit the program’s reach while making sure the government stuck to its end of the deal. This year, Intuit was close to realizing a long-held goal: enshrining the Free File program in law, effectively closing the door on the IRS ever creating a free tax filing system. But an outcry followed ProPublica’s reporting on the matter and Intuit’s treatment of its customers, prompting the provision to be dropped and state and federal investigations into Intuit’s practices.
Yet even after this setback, the company remained steadfastly confident that its clout in Washington would win the day. Intuit revved its lobbying machine. A group of Republican lawmakers, led by TurboTax’s hometown congressman, wrote to the agency arguing that there was no reason for the government to “compete” with the “well-established” private tax prep companies. Intuit’s lobbyists also went above the OMB and pressed their case directly to the White House, Forman recalled.
At the IRS, “all hell broke loose,” remembered Terry Lutes, who was then the head of electronic filing at the agency. Intuit’s clout on the Hill meant that lawmakers were soon accusing the IRS of making “secret plans to undercut the industry,” Lutes said. The agency ran the risk of seeing its funding cut if it were to pursue the Free Tax Filing software plan.
Intuit’s success has made the men who run the company rich. Smith, the CEO who stepped down last year and is now executive board chair, had a stake worth $20 million when he became chief executive. It ballooned to $220 million by last year. Co-founder Scott Cook is now among the country’s wealthiest people, his fortune soaring to $3.3 billion.
More at www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-fight-to-stop-ameri
cans-from-filing-their-taxes-for-free
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:6ix, you are thinking small. As far as I know, you can't remember details from one day to the next, except your bitterness at how poorly you have it in life, something I see in nearly all Trump lovers. Trump voters who are rich don't love Trump. It is too obvious to them how dishonorable and greedy he is.
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Somehow, I don't think I'm being programmed, but rather the bottom 50% are programmed to accept their fate without violence against people like me:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
That's why I hate you Democrats so much for the last 10 years and pushing me to that side.
Open your fucking eyes and see that the other side of the Legacy Media arm is programming you dumb fucks the exact same way.
They're all in cahoots.Quote:I don't have to do a damn thing to protect myself because the GOP protects people like me from people like you by keeping the minimum wage at a minimum and by lowering my taxes. On the other hand, the Democrats don't protect me from higher wages and higher taxes. Maybe I should vote for Trump next time?
Between 1989 and 2018, the top one percent increased its total net worth by $21 trillion. The bottom 50 percent actually saw its net worth decrease by $900 billion over the same period.
www.commondreams.org/news/2019/06/14/eye-popping-analysis-shows-top-1-
gained-21-trillion-wealth-1989-while-bottom-half
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Oh... that's right. I woke up this morning and forgot entirely that you're rich.
Thanks for our daily reminder of how great you are.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
6ix, you have not been able to put what few details you remember to good use in building a prediction model of how the world works and people react in order to predict what will happen next. Knowing what is likely to be next gives you a huge advantage over people who can't, or won't, do it, people who live in the eternal now with no larger purpose than birds, pets, and bees have - Jayne Cobb, for a fictional example and Adam Baldwin for a real example. Today, Baldwin only has 172 bird tweets, because he keeps erasing older tweets and forgetting his past. The only thing he clearly remembers in detail is his bitterness at his enemies. Trump remembers his past. He has 45,200 tweets and he obviously does have a prediction model of how the world works and people react. Too bad about what he uses his model for.
https://twitter.com/AdamBaldwin
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
There's no evidence that I don't remember everything since I sobered up, nearly 3 years ago.
There is plenty of evidence that you chucklefucks can't remember what happened in the news 2 weeks ago (Caused by 1 part ADD and 1 part it's-the-only-way-to-justify-your-otherwise-constant-state-of-hypocrisy).
When do you hear me bitching about my life?
I'm out here solving problems all the time and making constant improvements.
You're out here projecting again.
You're rich. STFU and take a dip in your golden coin tower, McDuck.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Stop Americans From Filing Their Taxes for Free
In 2008, TurboTax was a market leader, but only a small portion of Americans filed their taxes online. By 2019, nearly 40% of U.S. taxpayers filed online and some 40 million of them did so with TurboTax, far more than with any other product.
But the success of TurboTax rests on a shaky foundation, one that could collapse overnight if the U.S. government did what most wealthy countries did long ago and made tax filing simple and free for most citizens.
For more than 20 years, Intuit has waged a sophisticated, sometimes covert war to prevent the government from doing just that, according to internal company and IRS documents and interviews with insiders. The company unleashed a battalion of lobbyists and hired top officials from the agency that regulates it.
Internal presentations lay out company tactics for fighting “encroachment,” Intuit’s catchall term for any government initiative to make filing taxes easier — such as creating a free government filing system or pre-filling people’s returns with payroll or other data the IRS already has. “For a decade proposals have sought to create IRS tax software or a ReturnFree Tax System; All were stopped,” reads a confidential 2007 PowerPoint presentation from an Intuit board of directors meeting. The company’s 2014-15 plan included manufacturing “3rd-party grass roots” support. “Buy ads for op-eds/editorials/stories in African American and Latino media,” one internal PowerPoint slide states.
The centerpiece of Intuit’s anti-encroachment strategy has been the Free File program, hatched 17 years ago in a moment of crisis for the company. Under the terms of an agreement with the federal government, Intuit and other commercial tax prep companies promised to provide free online filing to tens of millions of lower-income taxpayers. In exchange, the IRS pledged not to create a government-run system.
Since Free File’s launch, Intuit has done everything it could to limit the program’s reach while making sure the government stuck to its end of the deal. This year, Intuit was close to realizing a long-held goal: enshrining the Free File program in law, effectively closing the door on the IRS ever creating a free tax filing system. But an outcry followed ProPublica’s reporting on the matter and Intuit’s treatment of its customers, prompting the provision to be dropped and state and federal investigations into Intuit’s practices.
Yet even after this setback, the company remained steadfastly confident that its clout in Washington would win the day. Intuit revved its lobbying machine. A group of Republican lawmakers, led by TurboTax’s hometown congressman, wrote to the agency arguing that there was no reason for the government to “compete” with the “well-established” private tax prep companies. Intuit’s lobbyists also went above the OMB and pressed their case directly to the White House, Forman recalled.
At the IRS, “all hell broke loose,” remembered Terry Lutes, who was then the head of electronic filing at the agency. Intuit’s clout on the Hill meant that lawmakers were soon accusing the IRS of making “secret plans to undercut the industry,” Lutes said. The agency ran the risk of seeing its funding cut if it were to pursue the Free Tax Filing software plan.
Intuit’s success has made the men who run the company rich. Smith, the CEO who stepped down last year and is now executive board chair, had a stake worth $20 million when he became chief executive. It ballooned to $220 million by last year. Co-founder Scott Cook is now among the country’s wealthiest people, his fortune soaring to $3.3 billion.
More at www.propublica.org/article/inside-turbotax-20-year-fight-to-stop-ameri
cans-from-filing-their-taxes-for-free
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
12 years of public school and they never bother to teach you how to fill out a 1040. I blame that.
Filing your own
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It is not school's fault that 90% of Americans are stupid about money. (90% are stupid about politics, too.) As a 12 year old child, I was filling out my income tax return. I must have let my Father mail it, because I don't have a copy of that 1964 return, but I do have all of them from 1968 to today. In 1968 my wages were $1,236.84. My interest was $248.07. I paid $111.70 to the IRS. If I had been paying more attention to Warren Buffett, who was already famous, than my Burger King manager Father, I would have placed my money in the stock market rather than the Savings and Loan.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
12 years of public school and they never bother to teach you how to fill out a 1040. I blame that.
Filing your own taxes for a majority of Americans is so ridiculously simple that I don't feel bad for anybody who doesn't do it.
www.forbes.com/profile/warren-buffett/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:It is not school's fault that 90% of Americans are stupid about money.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
12 years of public school and they never bother to teach you how to fill out a 1040. I blame that.
Filing your own taxes for a majority of Americans is so ridiculously simple that I don't feel bad for anybody who doesn't do it.
Yes. Yes it is.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In 1968 my income were $1,484.91.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:It is not school's fault that 90% of Americans are stupid about money.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
12 years of public school and they never bother to teach you how to fill out a 1040. I blame that.
Filing your own taxes for a majority of Americans is so ridiculously simple that I don't feel bad for anybody who doesn't do it.
Yes. Yes it is.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Adjusting for inflation, $1,484.91 in 1968 equals $10,955.86 in 2019. Way back then I could have been making more than 6ixStringJack makes today. I did that while working only on Saturday and half of Sunday. (Went to Church in the afternoon). The rest of the week, Monday through Friday, I was either at school or vacation. Those were the good old days. I could have married my wife then instead of 11 years later. (I was worth waiting for, she says. She's being nice.) My oldest daughter would be 50 years old today rather than a 39 y.o. And I could have avoided Vietnam. But then I might have ended up as Burger King manager, same as my Father. Those are the trade-offs.
www.in2013dollars.com/us/inflation/1968?amount=1484.91
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:OMG. Given, yanno - who you are online - it sounds like they're in a hostage situation.
Originally posted by second:
my wife
My oldest daughter
And I sure hope their politics never, ever strays one iota from yours, otherwise you'll do anything from fire them in the meanest way possible to bragging about how good a shot your are with a rifle and talking about how death is too good for them.
The insane never-Trumpers will be driven even more insane in the wash/rinse/spin/repeat/ cycle they mistake for reality.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The embarrassing epilogue to the media’s obsession with Hillary Clinton’s emails
Maybe Clinton’s emails shouldn’t have been covered as if they were the single most important issue facing 2016 voters?
We can all finally stop worrying about Hillary Clinton’s emails.
Last week, Congress received a brief, nine-page report from the State Department, which summarizes the department’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account to conduct work business while she was secretary of state. The report can be fairly summarized in two sentences: She shouldn’t have done that. But it wasn’t that big of a deal.
Thus, America finally has closure on a minor scandal that many of the nation’s most powerful and influential news editors treated as if it were the most important issue facing voters in the 2016 election. “In just six days,” according to an analysis of 2016 coverage published in the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), “the New York Times ran as many cover stories about Hillary Clinton’s emails as they did about all policy issues combined in the 69 days leading up to the election.” And the Times was hardly alone in this regard.
By contrast, the Times’s piece on the State Department report concluding that her emails weren’t actually that big of a deal ran on page A16 in print.
More at www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/10/22/20924795/hillary-clinton-em
ails-new-york-times-state-department
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Same as it ever was - no change for Russian hacking in upcoming 2020 election:
https://wapo.st/35XSFbF
"Facebook takedowns show new Russian activity targeted Biden, praised Trump
The company disabled a network of accounts that posed at times as locals in swing states to post on divisive political issues and the upcoming presidential election
By
Tony Romm and
Isaac Stanley-Becker
Oct. 21, 2019 at 6:46 p.m. EDT
Facebook on Monday said it removed a network of Russian-backed accounts that posed as locals weighing in on political issues in swing states, praising President Trump and attacking former vice president Joe Biden — illustrating that the familiar threat of Russian interference looms over the next U.S. presidential race.
Facebook said the network bears the hallmark of the same Kremlin-backed group that interfered in the 2016 election by sowing social discord, seeking to boost Trump and attacking Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The new disinformation campaign appears to follow the same playbook.
This time, a coordinated group of Russian accounts that appears to show some links to the Internet Research Agency largely took to Facebook’s photo-sharing app, Instagram, to post content this year about U.S. politics and memes targeting Democratic presidential contenders.
The operation demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the schisms within the Democratic Party as it labors to choose a nominee to face Trump in 2020. One Russian account, which portrayed itself as a black voter in Michigan, used the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to hammer Biden for gaffes about racial issues. Some of the accounts boosted one of his rivals on the left, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The Russian network was the subject of one of four takedowns Facebook announced Monday; it also disabled three misleading campaigns originating in Iran. Researchers said the efforts demonstrated how those seeking to interfere in U.S. politics continue to exploit radioactive topics, including racial and religious fault lines. And they said it offered fresh evidence that foreign actors are pursuing new platforms that rely on a steady stream of images, making detection more difficult despite Facebook’s heightened investments in election security."
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
As a reminder of how a little Russian influence can go a long ways:
You Could Fit All the Voters Who Cost Clinton the Election in a Mid-Size Football Stadium
While nearly 138 million Americans voted in the presidential election, the stunning electoral victory of Donald Trump came down to upsets in just a handful of states that Hillary Clinton was expected to win. It has been cold comfort for Democrats that Clinton won the popular vote—at the last count, she was up by about 2.5 million votes, and climbing, as ballots continue to be counted. Even more distressing is the tiny margin by which Clinton lost Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—three states that were supposed to be her firewall in the Rust Belt, but that ultimately tipped the electoral college map decisively in Trump’s favor.
Trump’s margin of victory in those three states? Just 79,316 votes.
This latest number comes from Decision Desk’s final tally of Pennsylvania’s votes, where Trump won 2,961,875 votes to Clinton’s 2,915,440, a difference of 46,435 votes. Add that to the official results out of Wisconsin, where Clinton lost by 22,177 votes, and Michigan, which she lost by 10,704 votes, and there you have it: 0.057 percent of total voters cost Clinton the presidency.
It is not entirely unusual for the electoral college to be lost by such a slim margin. In 2000, Al Gore lost Florida (and therefore the election) by 1,754 votes, triggering a painfully drawn out recount drama that only ended with a Supreme Court ruling. And in 2004, John Kerry lost to George W. Bush by losing Ohio by a little over 118,000 votes. But it is worth considering just how few voters ultimately set the country on its current, arguably terrifying course. The 79,316 people who voted for Trump in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—all states that Democrats carried since 1992—is less than the entire student body of Penn State (97,494 students). If you put all these voters in the Rose Bowl, there would be slightly over 13,000 seats left over.
More at www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/hillary-clinton-margin-loss-votes
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Same as it ever was - no change for Russian hacking in upcoming 2020 election:
https://wapo.st/35XSFbF
"Facebook takedowns show new Russian activity targeted Biden, praised Trump
The company disabled a network of accounts that posed at times as locals in swing states to post on divisive political issues and the upcoming presidential election
By
Tony Romm and
Isaac Stanley-Becker
Oct. 21, 2019 at 6:46 p.m. EDT
Facebook on Monday said it removed a network of Russian-backed accounts that posed as locals weighing in on political issues in swing states, praising President Trump and attacking former vice president Joe Biden — illustrating that the familiar threat of Russian interference looms over the next U.S. presidential race.
Facebook said the network bears the hallmark of the same Kremlin-backed group that interfered in the 2016 election by sowing social discord, seeking to boost Trump and attacking Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The new disinformation campaign appears to follow the same playbook.
This time, a coordinated group of Russian accounts that appears to show some links to the Internet Research Agency largely took to Facebook’s photo-sharing app, Instagram, to post content this year about U.S. politics and memes targeting Democratic presidential contenders.
The operation demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the schisms within the Democratic Party as it labors to choose a nominee to face Trump in 2020. One Russian account, which portrayed itself as a black voter in Michigan, used the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to hammer Biden for gaffes about racial issues. Some of the accounts boosted one of his rivals on the left, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The Russian network was the subject of one of four takedowns Facebook announced Monday; it also disabled three misleading campaigns originating in Iran. Researchers said the efforts demonstrated how those seeking to interfere in U.S. politics continue to exploit radioactive topics, including racial and religious fault lines. And they said it offered fresh evidence that foreign actors are pursuing new platforms that rely on a steady stream of images, making detection more difficult despite Facebook’s heightened investments in election security."
Oh well... It's called the Internet man. The only way to lock that down is to tie every single post and activity directly to individual people and go full blown Orwellian police state on the internet. Is that what you want?
In the mean time, the French have been rigging the election against Donald Trump.
Oh. Wait...
That was Mitt Romney's sockpuppet.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/21/mitt-romney-pierre-de
lecto-twitter-slate/
Quote:
“Why are we talking about Pierre Delecto,” one person asked.
“WTH is a Pierre Delecto & why is everyone going crazy about it?” another wanted to know.
On Sunday, Twitter users lost their collective minds when they learned that Pierre Delecto wasn’t a bot or a random Romney superfan, but an account run by the Republican senator himself. As Delecto, Romney, who has become one of President Trump’s most vocal GOP critics, used the account to like critical tweets about the president, while also occasionally defending himself against detractors. By early Monday, the unusual pseudonym was a trending moment on Twitter and had been mentioned in more than 47,000 tweets.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Same as it ever was - no change for Russian hacking in upcoming 2020 election:
https://wapo.st/35XSFbF
"Facebook takedowns show new Russian activity targeted Biden, praised Trump
The company disabled a network of accounts that posed at times as locals in swing states to post on divisive political issues and the upcoming presidential election
By
Tony Romm and
Isaac Stanley-Becker
Oct. 21, 2019 at 6:46 p.m. EDT
Facebook on Monday said it removed a network of Russian-backed accounts that posed as locals weighing in on political issues in swing states, praising President Trump and attacking former vice president Joe Biden — illustrating that the familiar threat of Russian interference looms over the next U.S. presidential race.
Facebook said the network bears the hallmark of the same Kremlin-backed group that interfered in the 2016 election by sowing social discord, seeking to boost Trump and attacking Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton. The new disinformation campaign appears to follow the same playbook.
This time, a coordinated group of Russian accounts that appears to show some links to the Internet Research Agency largely took to Facebook’s photo-sharing app, Instagram, to post content this year about U.S. politics and memes targeting Democratic presidential contenders.
The operation demonstrated a sophisticated understanding of the schisms within the Democratic Party as it labors to choose a nominee to face Trump in 2020. One Russian account, which portrayed itself as a black voter in Michigan, used the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag to hammer Biden for gaffes about racial issues. Some of the accounts boosted one of his rivals on the left, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
The Russian network was the subject of one of four takedowns Facebook announced Monday; it also disabled three misleading campaigns originating in Iran. Researchers said the efforts demonstrated how those seeking to interfere in U.S. politics continue to exploit radioactive topics, including racial and religious fault lines. And they said it offered fresh evidence that foreign actors are pursuing new platforms that rely on a steady stream of images, making detection more difficult despite Facebook’s heightened investments in election security."
Yep, to true G. I'm pretty sure these big social media companies are going to be regulated like main stream media. After all, it called social media. It can't happen soon enough for me.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
Yep, to true G. I'm pretty sure these big social media companies are going to be regulated like main stream media. After all, it called social media. It can't happen soon enough for me.
Of course you can't wait.
You're an authoritarian jackboot thug.
You would have made an excellent Nazi in the mid 40's.
But seriously. Nobody is worried about your type.
If and when you morons manage to bleach and sanitize the mainstream social media sites, and Mika gets her wish that Morning Joe will control what everyone thinks, everyone with half a brain will have already jumped ship to alternative media sites that are already on the rise.
I'm just fine with two Internets.
You can have the millennials who are mostly going to stay over there. Gen Z will be following Gen X to the cool side.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
T 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll remember you posted that cartoon when you hate on her next week.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"You Could Fit All the Voters Who Cost Clinton the Election in a Mid-Size Football Stadium"
Shit, you could fit all the people who cost Clinton the election in one chair.
She was the one who ran such a lousy campaign it was that close over many, many states.
MEANWHILE, we still have the electoral college because GUESS WHAT!! it's written in the Constitution. Get over it ... unless you really like being anti-American.
The insane never-Trumpers will be driven even more insane in the wash/rinse/spin/repeat/ cycle they mistake for reality.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Tomorrow's another big day for Trump. 10 am streaming live on C-span, can a sitting president be indicted? Looks like he can so far. The sitting judge says Trumps assertion he could not was repugnant. Look it up. Trumps lawyers appeal tomorrow, federal district court.
tick tock
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's the actual court document, since you can't even be bothered to provide a link to a Legacy Media article that boils a 75 page document down to a one sentence sound byte with a big word like repugnant in it.
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/d396
4ebc-adb2-4ff9-9364-9fda4b4ae025/note/9c4663de-c5c5-495e-ace4-757acc13e0de.pdf#page=1
Who is Victor Marrero?
- 78 year old Senior Judge of the US Court for the Southern District of New York, originally from Puerto Rico.
- Appointed by Bill Clinton in October of 1999.
- Preceded by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
At the end of the day, I don't even disagree with the assertion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Unlike our rabid lefty partisans here, I can recognize how bending the laws today to get what you want will lead to the next guy or gal bending them even further until one of them breaks the whole damn thing off.
That being said, however, let's not kid ourselves that this particular Judge was ever going to side with Trump on anything, however benign it may have been.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
"You Could Fit All the Voters Who Cost Clinton the Election in a Mid-Size Football Stadium"
Shit, you could fit all the people who cost Clinton the election in one chair.
She was the one who ran such a lousy campaign it was that close over many, many states.
MEANWHILE, we still have the electoral college because GUESS WHAT!! it's written in the Constitution. Get over it ... unless you really like being anti-American.
The insane never-Trumpers will be driven even more insane in the wash/rinse/spin/repeat/ cycle they mistake for reality.
Even the Legacy Media is turning against Hillary.
I'm starting to have my doubts that she will be a late entry into the race. It's not good when the Clinton News Network is taking jabs at her over her comments on Tulsi.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/22/politics/tulsi-gabbard-hillary-clinton-
russia/index.html
This is just one of quite a few articles and videos from CNN on the topic. They've gone as far as to actually say the words "conspiracy theorist" when referring to Clinton here.
And as far as I can find, none of the other Democrat candidates still in the race agree with Clinton's tweet either. Sanders and Buttigieg have both come out defending Gabbard.
But, overall, the Democrats are scared. They know they have nothing.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/22/us/politics/democratic-candidates-2
020.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
Quote:
Anxious Democratic Establishment Asks, ‘Is There Anybody Else?’
Party leaders who are fatalistic about Democrats’ chances in 2020 are musing about possible late entrants to the race. Sherrod Brown? Michelle Obama?
This has even given AOC the opportunity to make the tweet of her short political career:
https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1186633016807964673
Quote:
If ~2 years and 20+ candidates aren't enough for ya, I don't know what to tell you.
Priceless.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Follow jacks link and read pg. 68. Trump loses. Judges says Trump does not have immunity from prosecution. Jacks a moron. He posted proof of what I posted. Thanks moron...
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/d396
4ebc-adb2-4ff9-9364-9fda4b4ae025/note/9c4663de-c5c5-495e-ace4-757acc13e0de.pdf#page=1
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Read my post, idiot. I didn't argue that.
Fucking moron.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Despite the wealth tax being the shiny object for those wanting to tax the rich, why should Dems put all their chips on a tax that could easily fall short of hyped expectations?
Economic Analysis: Risking the Wrath of 900 Billionaires
www.taxnotes.com/featured-analysis/economic-analysis-risking-wrath-900
-billionaires/2019/10/18/2b1m3
You can safely ignore the possibility of a U.S. wealth tax. But you should not ignore the political and economic developments that are putting it in the news.
About the impossibility of a wealth tax: First, as is common knowledge, there may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House and keeping the House, but their taking the Senate is a long shot. And even in the unlikely event of a Democratic hat trick, the Dems would have to use the budget reconciliation process or invoke the nuclear option (repealing the Senate rule requiring 60 votes to proceed) to enact any tax increase over Republican objections. Those are some high hurdles. (Perhaps the Democrats’ chances improve in 2022, but we’ll wait on that.)
Second, and more fundamentally, despite the wealth tax being the shiny object for those wanting to tax the rich, why should Dems put all their chips on a tax that could easily fall short of hyped expectations? Reforms of existing taxes can achieve similar objectives. On the estate tax: Raise the rates, get rid of the valuation allowance for family limited partnerships, and adopt a half-dozen other estate tax reforms drafted at Treasury during the Obama administration. On the income tax: Raise the capital gains and dividend tax rates, raise the regular income tax rates at the top end, and — to effectively tax the superrich — tax capital gains on an accrual basis or repeal the step-up in basis at death. Lawmakers have a record of starting with a bold, complicated reform like a wealth tax and settling for something less grandiose. For example, in 1993 what started as a Btu tax ended up as a simple hike in the gas tax. What started in 2004 as an intricate corporate integration plan ended up as just a cut in the dividend and capital gains rate.
Part 1: A Provocative Book
Now let’s move on to why the current conversation about a wealth tax is prevalent, even if it has about as much chance as Tulsi Gabbard becoming president.
More at www.taxnotes.com/featured-analysis/economic-analysis-risking-wrath-900
-billionaires/2019/10/18/2b1m3
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
First, as is common knowledge, there may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House and keeping the House, but their taking the Senate is a long shot.
Common knowledge, huh?
I guess Moody's didn't get the memo.
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/article/2019/president-electio
n-model.pdf
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:To quote Moody: "The model did not account for the individual attributes of the candidates other than whether they belonged to the incumbent political party. In other words, it assumed Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were generic candidates, which they were not. In 2020, President Trump will be as much the nongeneric candidate as he was in 2016, and Democrats may also nominate a candidate who is a break from past party nominees".
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
First, as is common knowledge, there may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House and keeping the House, but their taking the Senate is a long shot.
Common knowledge, huh?
I guess Moody's didn't get the memo.
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/article/2019/president-electio
n-model.pdf
Do Right, Be Right. :)
If Mike Pence and Joe Biden were running for President, rather than Trump and Who-knows-who-the-Democrat, then the Moody model assumption of generic candidates is true. Otherwise, the Moody model does not work. Just flip a coin to see who wins. That would be about as scientific. There may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
A Generation of Sociopaths: How the Baby Boomers Betrayed America.
The boomers, according to Bruce Gibney, have committed “generational plunder,” pillaging the nation’s economy, repeatedly cutting their own taxes, financing two wars with deficits, ignoring climate change.
Sean Illing: Who are the baby boomers?
Bruce Gibney: The baby boomers are conventionally defined as people born between 1946 and 1964. But I focus on the 1946-1958 boomers because their experiences are pretty homogeneous: They were raised after the war and so have no real experience of trauma or the Great Depression or even any deprivation at all. More importantly, they never experienced the social solidarity that unfolded during war time and that helped produce the New Deal.
But it’s really the white middle-class boomers who exemplify all the awful characteristics and behaviors that have defined this generation. They became a majority of the electorate in the early ’80s, and they fully consolidated their power in Washington by January 1995. And they’ve basically been in charge ever since.
Sean Illing: So how have they broken the country?
Bruce Gibney: Well, the damage done to the social fabric is pretty self-evident. Just look around and notice what’s been done. On the economic front, the damage is equally obvious, and it trickles down to all sorts of other social phenomena. I don’t want to get bogged down in an ocean of numbers and data here (that’s in the book), but think of it this way: I’m 41, and when I was born, the gross debt-to-GDP ratio was about 35 percent. It’s roughly 103 percent now — and it keeps rising. This year the debt will increase by 4.6% www.crfb.org/blogs/debt-could-reach-record-levels-2030
The boomers inherited a rich, dynamic country and have gradually bankrupted it. They habitually cut their own taxes and borrow money without any concern for future burdens. They’ve spent virtually all our money and assets on themselves and in the process have left a financial disaster for their children.
We used to have the finest infrastructure in the world. The American Society of Civil Engineers thinks there’s something like a $4 trillion deficit in infrastructure in deferred maintenance. It’s crumbling, and the boomers have allowed it to crumble. Our public education system has steadily degraded as well, forcing middle-class students to bury themselves in debt in order to get a college education.
Then of course there’s the issue of climate change, which they’ve done almost nothing to solve. But even if we want to be market-oriented about this, we can think of the climate as an asset, which has degraded over time thanks to the inaction and cowardice of the boomer generation. Now they didn’t start burning fossil fuels, but by the 1990s the science was undeniable. And what did they do? Nothing.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=oJ3Q
Sean Illing: Why hasn’t this recklessness been checked by the political system? Is it as simple as the boomers took over and used power to enrich themselves without enough resistance from younger voters?
Bruce Gibney: Well, most of our problems have not been addressed because that would require higher taxes and therefore a sense of social obligation to our fellow citizens. But again, the boomers seem to have no appreciation for social solidarity.
But to answer your question more directly, the problem is that dealing with these problems has simply been irrelevant to the largest political class in the country — the boomers. There’s nothing conspiratorial about that. Politicians respond to the most important part of the electorate, and that’s been the boomers for decades. And it just so happens that the boomers are not socially inclined and have a ton of maladaptive personality characteristics.
Sean Illing: It’s interesting that Ronald Reagan is elected right around the time that boomers become a majority of the electorate. Reagan himself wasn’t a boomer, but it was boomers who put him into office. And this is when w
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
39% of Americans take mixed ideological positions. Peek beneath the surface of that number, and you find that many of these 39% are not ideologically moderate; they are ideologically mixed up. In many cases, they hold an eclectic assortment of extreme positions.
Something analogous is also true of the two political parties. Assuredly, Democrats and Republicans are much more purely left-wing and right-wing, respectively, than they were 50 years ago. Certainly, Republicans are more hostile to government than are Democrats. Ideologically, the parties stand on opposite shores. But they still are far from internally coherent in any philosophical sense. Democrats are divided between market-oriented technocrats and self-declared democratic socialists. Republicans are in the grip of a populist takeover that defies the relatively libertarian, internationalist orthodoxy of their heretofore dominant Reaganite wing. Are the Democrats center-left or socialist? Both. Are the Republicans populist or libertarian? Again, both. We are not seeing a hardening of coherent ideological difference. We are seeing a hardening of incoherent ideological difference.
And that is really the essence of what feels like a growing division in our country.
More at "Rethinking Polarization"
www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/rethinking-polarization
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:To quote Moody: "The model did not account for the individual attributes of the candidates other than whether they belonged to the incumbent political party. In other words, it assumed Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were generic candidates, which they were not. In 2020, President Trump will be as much the nongeneric candidate as he was in 2016, and Democrats may also nominate a candidate who is a break from past party nominees".
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
First, as is common knowledge, there may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House and keeping the House, but their taking the Senate is a long shot.
Common knowledge, huh?
I guess Moody's didn't get the memo.
https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/article/2019/president-electio
n-model.pdf
Do Right, Be Right. :)
If Mike Pence and Joe Biden were running for President, rather than Trump and Who-knows-who-the-Democrat, then the Moody model assumption of generic candidates is true. Otherwise, the Moody model does not work. Just flip a coin to see who wins. That would be about as scientific. There may be at least even odds of Democrats winning the White House.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Justify your wishful thinking however you want. But a few things first before you lie to yourself too much.
1. EVERYBODY said that Trump was going to lose and lose big last time. Only two polls ever showed that wasn't the case, and they were largely ignored.
2. Trump was running against a well known Clinton. She's a piece of shit, but (at least back then) everybody still loved Billy.
3. The only people that Trump have pissed off are the people who are still screwed in the head that he won in the first place after being lied to for a year.
4. Trump already has several keys to the white house, as well as the incumbent advantage. There are also easily as many hard core Trump fans out there are people who hate the guy.
5. The loud minority on the Left has become insane and completely out of touch with the rest of the country. Just ask Bill Maher about his frustrations that Democrats on the debate stage keep pandering only to people that were already never going to vote Trump, as well as people who can't even legally vote (felons, illegal aliens, etc.) Outside of socialists, and the rich white woke crowd, their messages don't resonate at all with the people who are going to vote.
The Democrat candidates are so bad this time that they're a plus in Trump's favor. Their lack of any legitimate platform for the people are Trump's biggest ally.
The only coin flip here is how many people are going to vote, and how many are going to stay on the couch. Which is exactly what Moody's says. Only in the extreme case of record voter turnout do Democrats have a chance at eeking out a victory. Trump wins in all other scenarios, and if voters are demoralized and stay home, he could get 380 electoral votes this time.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In 2016, 538 predicted Trump had a 50% chance of winning. It fluctuated, but Trump's chances were always better than the chance that an oil well would be a gusher. Gushers are what keeps Texas #1! We don't get depressed by chances less than 50%. We keep drilling. Trump kept drilling. Trump hit a gusher. He could do it again in 2020. Or, just maybe, it will be a Democrat who hits the gusher. There can only be one gusher at a time. No sharing. Never two.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Justify your wishful thinking however you want. But a few things first before you lie to yourself too much.
1. EVERYBODY said that Trump was going to lose and lose big last time. Only two polls ever showed that wasn't the case, and they were largely ignored.
2. Trump was running against a well known Clinton. She's a piece of shit, but (at least back then) everybody still loved Billy.
3. The only people that Trump have pissed off are the people who are still screwed in the head that he won in the first place after being lied to for a year.
4. Trump already has several keys to the white house, as well as the incumbent advantage. There are also easily as many hard core Trump fans out there are people who hate the guy.
5. The loud minority on the Left has become insane and completely out of touch with the rest of the country. Just ask Bill Maher about his frustrations that Democrats on the debate stage keep pandering only to people that were already never going to vote Trump, as well as people who can't even legally vote (felons, illegal aliens, etc.) Outside of socialists, and the rich white woke crowd, their messages don't resonate at all with the people who are going to vote.
The Democrat candidates are so bad this time that they're a plus in Trump's favor. Their lack of any legitimate platform for the people are Trump's biggest ally.
The only coin flip here is how many people are going to vote, and how many are going to stay on the couch. Which is exactly what Moody's says. Only in the extreme case of record voter turnout do Democrats have a chance at eeking out a victory. Trump wins in all other scenarios, and if voters are demoralized and stay home, he could get 380 electoral votes this time.
Look at the data: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
6ixStringJack is economically anxious. How does anxiety affect voters?
Quote:https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/stop-saying-trumps-win-had-nothin
Trump, as FiveThirtyEight contributor Jed Kolko noted immediately after the election, won most counties — and improved on Romney’s performance — where a large share of jobs are vulnerable to outsourcing or automation. And while there is no standard measure of economic anxiety, a wide range of other plausible proxies shows the same pattern. According to my own analysis of voting data, for example, the slower a county’s job growth has been since 2007, the more it shifted toward Trump.1 (The same is true looking back to 2000.) And of course Trump performed especially strongly among voters without a college degree — an important indicator of social status but also of economic prospects, given the shrinking share of jobs (and especially well-paying jobs) available to workers without a bachelor’s degree.
g-to-do-with-economics/
Vote your fears and anxieties, 6ixStringJack!
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Have you got a minute? MASH-UP: Trump’s al-Baghdadi Speech & Obama’s Bin Laden Speech
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Who says I'm economically anxious?
When I do work again, it's going to be another near minimum wage part time job, just like the last one I worked. Those are easy to find no matter who is president. ;)
In the mean time, have you gleaned any expressed concern I have about not currently working?
I'll answer that for you.
No. No you haven't.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And you're going to lie and say that 538 or anybody said it was a cointoss now?
I also predicted this would happen.
Guess I have to put another win in my column.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Brett Kavanaugh has got a problem with his ethics. That Is Not a Surprise!
Just how friendly should US Supreme Court justices be with friends of the court, the amici who file briefs based on their interests in a case where they aren’t litigants?
On Oct. 29, Brian S. Brown, president of the conservative advocacy group National Organization for Marriage (NOMA), tweeted a photo of himself with justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito and boasting about a “great day” at the US Supreme Court. The tweet raised alarm bells for court critics.
NOMA regularly files amicus briefs with the court, as it already has this term in some of the most controversial cases before the justices. Brown’s organization, as a “friend of the court,” submitted a filing opposing a finding that Title VII, an anti-employment-discrimination statute, protects gay and transgender people.
The court is considering the issue in three cases and heard arguments on Oct. 8. Less than three weeks later, while justices were still mulling the matters, two of the bench’s conservatives had a friendly meeting with an activist who has made it abundantly clear how he feels they should rule.
While the justices might not necessarily be swayed by anything Brown said when they all hung out, and they probably didn’t discuss their upcoming decision, the mere fact of the meeting casts doubt on their impartiality. And the appearance of fairness, the sense that litigants have a fair chance in court, is key to public confidence in the legal system. That’s why US Code Section 455 provides that “[a]ny justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
In response to the revelation of the meeting on social media, Fix the Court, a nonpartisan organization advocating for judicial transparency, sent a letter to the chief justice’s counsel asking that the court either withdraw NOMA’s brief or explain why the justices may continue to sit on the cases given the standard in federal law. The organization’s executive director, Gabe Roth, told Quartz that as of Nov. 1 it had not received a response.
More at https://qz.com/1740845/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The last presidential election featured one of the more accurate sets of early polls for this point in the cycle: Hillary Clinton led Donald Trump 46.2 percent to 41.2 percent in an average of all polls conducted in November and December 2015, missing the eventual national popular vote margin by about 3 points. (The actual result was Clinton 48.0 percent, Trump 46.0 percent.)
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
And you're going to lie and say that 538 or anybody said it was a cointoss now?
I also predicted this would happen.
Guess I have to put another win in my column.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/should-we-take-these-early-genera
l-election-polls-seriously-no/
That was the 538 website in November 2015. How is Trump doing in November 2019?
Warren 49.7% to Trump 44%
www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_tr
ump_vs_warren-6251.html
Biden 50.1% to Trump 43.4%
www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_tr
ump_vs_biden-6247.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The late Svetlana Boym, a professor of comparative literature at Harvard, wrote on nostalgia in Atlas of Transformation. She expounded on how nostalgia can swing in both progressive and regressive directions, identifying two types: restorative and reflective.
The former, Boym warns, can breed monsters. It’s mistaking one’s fantasy of a bygone era as reality, resulting in the desire to restore a time and place that never existed. It does not think of itself as nostalgia, Boym writes, but as truth and tradition. This flavor of nostalgia fueled the age of Trump, whose assurances spoke to the insecurities of a sizable demographic of older Americans fearful that a changing world would threaten their well-being. Some fear of change among the aging is understandable; does anyone want to go gently into the good night of their own obsolescence? But Trump’s campaign team harnessed the sinister side of nostalgia, convincing a massive portion of the population to scapegoat various imagined boogeymen for the supposed degradation of the country: immigrants, feminists, intellectuals, scientists.
Reflective nostalgia, however, is far less menacing. It’s a self-aware brand of nostalgia, one that doesn’t always take itself quite seriously. It can be ironic, funny, and irreverent. It knows, Boym says, affective memories cannot and should not prohibit critical thinking. Reflective nostalgia does not oppose progressivism. In fact, it can even support it as it’s an effective tool for assessing the present. The fantasies of the past, Boym tells us, often give us insight into what’s missing in the present and can in turn shape the future.
More at "How to Resist Late-Stage Capitalism — and Other Lessons From Charlotte’s Web"
https://lithub.com/how-to-resist-late-stage-capitalism-and-other-lesso
ns-from-charlottes-web/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Svetlana, huh?
Sounds Russian.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:The last presidential election featured one of the more accurate sets of early polls for this point in the cycle: Hillary Clinton led Donald Trump 46.2 percent to 41.2 percent in an average of all polls conducted in November and December 2015, missing the eventual national popular vote margin by about 3 points. (The actual result was Clinton 48.0 percent, Trump 46.0 percent.)
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
And you're going to lie and say that 538 or anybody said it was a cointoss now?
I also predicted this would happen.
Guess I have to put another win in my column.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/should-we-take-these-early-genera
l-election-polls-seriously-no/
That was the 538 website in November 2015. How is Trump doing in November 2019?
Warren 49.7% to Trump 44%
www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_tr
ump_vs_warren-6251.html
Biden 50.1% to Trump 43.4%
www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_tr
ump_vs_biden-6247.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
That's an article about it, but not a link to an archive that shows it.
I don't put any stock in polls other than watching general trends. They're all lies and manipulated to favor Democrats in their methodology, always. So it's impossible to actually know what Trump's true approval rating is. What you can see is that in spite of all of this impeachment circus and cake, his approval rating is holding steady.
We'll see what happens when Trump is going head to head with a single candidate. The top three candidates for the Democrats are far different platforms to each other and cater to a specific base. The eventual nominee is going to lose a lot of that support.
Only assholes and idiots answer polls anyhow. The proper response when some stranger calls you up out of the blue and asks you who you're going to vote for President is "your mom" and then a prompt hang up.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If Trump loses, you are going to feel crushed. I'm going to feel crushed, too, because there won't be another round of tax cuts for the wealthy. But the previous Trump tax cuts will still be around because Republican Senators will still be able to filibuster any changes. No matter how wonderful an orator is the next Democrat in the White House, it is the Senate that stops those fancy words from becoming real. The GOP can filibuster so long as they control 41 seats. FDR became a great President not because he talked pretty and made big promises, but because the Senate shifted from Republican to Democrat starting in 1930, two years before FDR was elected.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
So it's impossible to actually know what Trump's true approval rating is.
Every two years there were fewer Republican Senators, which made FDR look more and more like a political genius, but it was not him. It was the voters shifting to different Senators, mainly because the Republican Senators made it obvious to voters that the Great Depression was not going to change the GOP's principles. Nowadays, GOP Senators are smarter about keeping their principles a secret.
(Did I mention that I talked to Sen Cornyn and Cruz? What a sneaky pair of dirtbags -- in private. Those two absolutely know how to keep their real principles a secret.)
53 GOP Senators in 1928 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1928_United_States_Senate_elections
50 GOP Senators in 1930 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1930_United_States_Senate_elections
36 GOP Senators in 1932 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_United_States_Senate_elections
25 GOP Senators in 1934 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934_United_States_Senate_elections
But in 1938, GOP Senators starting returning, more and more, year after year, until they were once again the majority in 1946. Democrats had control for only 14 years, 1932 to 1946.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_United_States_Senate_elections
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
If Trump loses, you are going to feel crushed.
Nah. I'll just disappear from paying attention to politics until the next idiot is out like I did with Barry.
I certainly will not behave like you have the last 3 years.
Quote:
(Did I mention that I talked to Sen Cornyn and Cruz? What a sneaky pair of dirtbags -- in private. Those two absolutely know how to keep their real principles a secret.)
Nope. You didn't didn't tell us that lie yet.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I remember joking to someone as we were writing our book, “Oh, could you imagine if they just stopped having press conferences?” It was kind of unthinkable that that would actually happen in the White House, but it happened — along with countless other departures from what we’d consider “normal.”
So what we’ve learned in that last few years is that many things we considered impossible are, in fact, possible. And the norm violations are just getting worse seemingly every day.
But I would say I’m a little optimistic. In the last month, there have been signs that some Republicans are willing to separate themselves from Trump and I think that’s really crucial right now.
There are a couple of ways this thing could go. One is that there’s a Democratic victory so dominant and so overwhelming that it produces a kind of shock and awe model of social change. The Democrats get what they want, implement big changes, and force the GOP to correct course.
The other thing we could hope for is that Republicans finally break from Trump and reorganize themselves in a way that’s compatible with democracy. I’m not saying this is at all likely, but it’s at least possible. I recognize that Trump isn’t an aberration. In many ways, he’s the logical outcome of the Republican Party.
And yet, if we want our two-party system to work, we need both parties committed to the rules of the game. There’s just no other way forward.
It’s hard to see a way out of this trap. Democratic politics is a game that relies on the good faith of the players involved. If one side decides to ignore the rules for the sake of power, the other side has no choice but to capitulate or respond in kind, which leads to a death spiral of illiberal behavior.
I mean, this is basically our current situation, no?
Yeah, and the only way I see out of it is for the Republicans to face a series of devastating defeats and realize that the path they’re on is no longer viable. Now I understand all the pitfalls of that as a solution. First, it assumes there can be a series of devastating defeats. Second, it assumes that if those losses occur, the losers will interpret it correctly and realize what they’re doing isn’t working as opposed to just doubling down.
So all of this might be unrealistic, and I get that. But someone has to show me an alternative path forward, because I just don’t see it given the limitations of our system. So if something like this doesn’t happen moving forward, I’d be deeply worried about what comes next.
More at www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/4/20898605/america-democracy-p
opulism-republicans-daniel-ziblatt
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
New Poll Shows Democratic Presidential Candidates Have Been Living in a Fantasy World
In 2018, Democratic candidates waded into hostile territory and flipped 40 House districts by avoiding controversial positions, and focusing obsessively on Republican weaknesses.
The Democratic presidential field has largely abandoned that model.
Working from the premise that the country largely agrees with them on everything, or that agreeing with the majority of voters on issues is not necessary to win, the campaign has proceeded in blissful unawareness of the extremely high chance that Trump will win again.
More at www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/the-2020-election-is-still-wide
-open/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Exclusive: Ukraine to fire prosecutor who discussed Bidens with Giuliani - source
KIEV (Reuters) - Ukraine plans to fire the prosecutor who led investigations into the firm where Joe Biden's son served on the board, a central figure in the activity at the heart of impeachment proceedings against U.S. President Donald Trump, a source told Reuters.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/exclusive-ukraine-to-fire-prosecu
tor-who-discussed-bidens-with-giuliani-source/ar-AAJPw4K?ocid=spartandhp
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
New Poll Shows Democratic Presidential Candidates Have Been Living in a Fantasy World
In 2018, Democratic candidates waded into hostile territory and flipped 40 House districts by avoiding controversial positions, and focusing obsessively on Republican weaknesses.
The Democratic presidential field has largely abandoned that model.
Working from the premise that the country largely agrees with them on everything, or that agreeing with the majority of voters on issues is not necessary to win, the campaign has proceeded in blissful unawareness of the extremely high chance that Trump will win again.
More at www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/the-2020-election-is-still-wide
-open/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Ya don't say, huh?
Don't believe it every time I've said it, but Mother Jones tells you that it's true so I guess it's true now.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:There is a huge difference between Trump having approximately 50/50 chance of winning, which I always believed, and Trump being approximately 100% certain to win, which seems to be the default belief/position of Trump lovers.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Ya don't say, huh?
Don't believe it every time I've said it, but Mother Jones tells you that it's true so I guess it's true now.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Why does Trump have a 50/50 chance? Because 50% of voters are stupider than average. If you are salesman, as Trump is, you don't need to persuade everybody since defrauding the dumbest 50% will make you fabulously wealthy.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:There is a huge difference between Trump having approximately 50/50 chance of winning, which I always believed, and Trump being approximately 100% certain to win, which seems to be the default belief/position of Trump lovers.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Ya don't say, huh?
Don't believe it every time I've said it, but Mother Jones tells you that it's true so I guess it's true now.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Why does Trump have a 50/50 chance? Because 50% of voters are stupider than average. If you are salesman, as Trump is, you don't need to persuade everybody since defrauding the dumbest 50% will make you fabulously wealthy.
I believe you're paraphrasing PT Barnum Second. There's a sucker born every minute.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I will give you another: Only suckers believe Medicare 4 All could possibly become law.
Originally posted by THG:
I believe you're paraphrasing PT Barnum Second. There's a sucker born every minute.
Elizabeth Warren announced her Medicare for All plan last week but it doesn’t matter. For starters, to put the plan in place she’d need to win the presidency and the Senate, and that’s a tough task. Then we’d need to eliminate the filibuster, which is very, very unlikely since a few Democrats have already said they wouldn’t join in.
But suppose we miraculously do all that. Actual legislation depends mostly on the Senate, not on President Warren or Speaker Pelosi. This means that health care legislation can’t be more progressive than the 50th most liberal senator, which is likely to be someone like Joe Manchin of W Virginia or Doug Jones of Alabama. So even in the best case we won’t get the M4A plan that Warren is campaigning on. Not even close.
What this means is that these M4A plans shouldn’t be treated like real legislation to be scored by the Congressional Budget Office. Rather, they should be treated like Republican tax cut proposals. Nobody bothers to analyze them (except for liberal think tanks, natch) because no one takes them seriously. They are meant merely as markers to show where your heart is. A weak plan shows that you’re a RINO. A big tax cut shows you’re a strong conservative. And a ridiculous plan shows that you’re a lunatic—which might or might not be a good thing depending on the mood of the electorate.
So forget the details. Warren and Sanders are deliberately selling themselves as lunatics. Their plans mean nothing except that they are true blue liberals. Don’t try to read any more than that into them. Biden and Buttigieg and Booker are demonstrating that they’re part of the mainstream Obama wing of the party. And Amy Klobuchar is demonstrating her DINO credentials as a member of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, Minnesota's loose affiliate of the Democratic Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic%E2%80%93Farmer%E2%8
0%93Labor_Party
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Donald Trump lost Kentucky for the Republicans – the 2020 presidential election is now the Democrats' to lose
If past experience is anything to go by, Donald Trump will shortly be tweeting from the comfort of his bathroom to the effect that the soon-to-be-former Governor Matt Bevin of Kentucky is a stone cold loser that Trump has never actually met – and who, even if he had met him, would not have been impressed. This, of course, despite the fact that Trump himself turned up in Kentucky on the eve of a rally for his Republican colleague and declared to the audience that seeing Bevin lose to the Democrats “sends a really bad message”, pleading with his supporters, “you can’t let that happen to me!”
Well, they did.
www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-kentucky-virginia-democrats-win-rep
ublicans-2020-a9187161.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If you think Trump has few real accomplishments, mostly fake or overblown ones, you forgot Judgeship appointments:
As of Nov 6th, President Donald J. Trump has appointed—and gotten confirmed—158 life-tenured federal judges:
President Trump’s nominees alone fill one-quarter of the seats on our nation’s Circuit Courts of Appeals.
His nominees fill two of the nine powerful seats on America’s Supreme Court.
He has seen more Circuit Court judges confirmed by this point in his presidency than any past president in United States history.
The average age of these new circuit judges is less than 50 years old—a full 10 years younger than the average age of former President Obama’s circuit nominees. That fact is important. President Trump understands that appointing good, fair judges is one of the most important legacies a President can leave. And thanks to the extraordinary number of young, talented judges he’s selected, that legacy is likely to last for decades to come.
www.whitehouse.gov/1600daily/
www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trump-appoi
nting-historic-number-federal-judges-uphold-constitution-written/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
lol
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
I will give you another: Only suckers believe Medicare 4 All could possibly become law.
Elizabeth Warren announced her Medicare for All plan last week but it doesn’t matter. For starters, to put the plan in place she’d need to win the presidency and the Senate, and that’s a tough task. Then we’d need to eliminate the filibuster, which is very, very unlikely since a few Democrats have already said they wouldn’t join in.
But suppose we miraculously do all that. Actual legislation depends mostly on the Senate, not on President Warren or Speaker Pelosi. This means that health care legislation can’t be more progressive than the 50th most liberal senator, which is likely to be someone like Joe Manchin of W Virginia or Doug Jones of Alabama. So even in the best case we won’t get the M4A plan that Warren is campaigning on. Not even close.
What this means is that these M4A plans shouldn’t be treated like real legislation to be scored by the Congressional Budget Office. Rather, they should be treated like Republican tax cut proposals. Nobody bothers to analyze them (except for liberal think tanks, natch) because no one takes them seriously. They are meant merely as markers to show where your heart is. A weak plan shows that you’re a RINO. A big tax cut shows you’re a strong conservative. And a ridiculous plan shows that you’re a lunatic—which might or might not be a good thing depending on the mood of the electorate.
So forget the details. Warren and Sanders are deliberately selling themselves as lunatics. Their plans mean nothing except that they are true blue liberals. Don’t try to read any more than that into them. Biden and Buttigieg and Booker are demonstrating that they’re part of the mainstream Obama wing of the party. And Amy Klobuchar is demonstrating her DINO credentials as a member of the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, Minnesota's loose affiliate of the Democratic Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Democratic%E2%80%93Farmer%E2%8
0%93Labor_Party
For once, I agree.
This is exactly why I wasn't too frightened of Trump's domestic proposals ... three branches of government, two legislative houses, all counterbalancing each other as designed by the Framers of the Constitution. Sometimes that leads to gridlock, even when urgent action is needed. But we've been here before and survived as a nation... just consider the War of Independence and how hard it was to raise money to provision the troops!
The idea of Medicare for All has to be won by Senatorial and House candidates, NOT the President of the USA. It needs to be on THEIR platforms and in THEIR campaigns, and it needs to be won state by state, simply by making sense to a lot of people. A President can jawbone the issue but can never push it to the finish line.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Donald Trump lost Kentucky for the Republicans – the 2020 presidential election is now the Democrats' to lose
If past experience is anything to go by, Donald Trump will shortly be tweeting from the comfort of his bathroom to the effect that the soon-to-be-former Governor Matt Bevin of Kentucky is a stone cold loser that Trump has never actually met – and who, even if he had met him, would not have been impressed. This, of course, despite the fact that Trump himself turned up in Kentucky on the eve of a rally for his Republican colleague and declared to the audience that seeing Bevin lose to the Democrats “sends a really bad message”, pleading with his supporters, “you can’t let that happen to me!”
Well, they did.
www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-kentucky-virginia-democrats-win-rep
ublicans-2020-a9187161.html
Yep, all true.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Donald Trump lost Kentucky for the Republicans – the 2020 presidential election is now the Democrats' to lose
If past experience is anything to go by, Donald Trump will shortly be tweeting from the comfort of his bathroom to the effect that the soon-to-be-former Governor Matt Bevin of Kentucky is a stone cold loser that Trump has never actually met – and who, even if he had met him, would not have been impressed. This, of course, despite the fact that Trump himself turned up in Kentucky on the eve of a rally for his Republican colleague and declared to the audience that seeing Bevin lose to the Democrats “sends a really bad message”, pleading with his supporters, “you can’t let that happen to me!”
Well, they did.
www.independent.co.uk/voices/trump-kentucky-virginia-democrats-win-rep
ublicans-2020-a9187161.html
Yep, all true.
T
lol
Like dogs fighting for scraps.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Republicans’ smear campaign against Joe Biden is devastating to his theory of politics. And to Signym's.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
For once, I agree.
This is exactly why I wasn't too frightened of Trump's domestic proposals ... three branches of government, two legislative houses, all counterbalancing each other as designed by the Framers of the Constitution. Sometimes that leads to gridlock, even when urgent action is needed. But we've been here before and survived as a nation... just consider the War of Independence and how hard it was to raise money to provision the troops!
Joe Biden has an idea about how things are going to change in 2021 when he’s sitting in the Oval Office — freed of the spell of Trump, newly "reasonable" GOP Senators will come to the table to make some deals.
According to Biden, the results of this may not be the kind of sweeping progressive change that Sens. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are promising, but Sanders and Warren aren’t actually going to be able to deliver that change. What Biden argues he can offer is meaningful steps in the progressive direction, plus the return to some semblance of normalcy in American politics that so many people crave.
It’s an appealing vision in many ways and one that Biden has articulated repeatedly on the campaign trail — saying an “epiphany” is coming that will unlock the potential to get things done in the Senate.
But it’s also wildly implausible in ways that are best illustrated by the GOP’s treatment of none other than Joe Biden. Nobody in the GOP is standing up for Biden or seeking to clear his good name. And the reasons aren’t mysterious: It’s politics. And in 2021, it will be politics, rather than epiphanies, that carry the day.
The epiphany that will really matter in 2021 is one that Mitch McConnell had back in 2009: Gridlock makes the Democrats look bad and helps the GOP. The particular danger of Biden’s promise of an epiphany leading to an outbreak of bipartisanship is that Republicans have the ability to unilaterally nullify it. Voters may not want to be told in advance that in the post-2020 election era they can look forward to a continuation of partisan brinksmanship and constitutional hardball. But the fact is, that’s what they are going to get.
More at www.vox.com/2019/11/8/20953290/biden-republicans-epiphany-impeachment
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Biden isn't getting elected, so there's really no more point talking about it than there is Warren or Sander's ridiculous fairy tales.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yanno, it's always a question - did Trump win or did Hillary lose?
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=61377&p=63
Trump may well win, but that is not how you, 6ix, personally win or get ahead in the world. That is how Trump gets ahead in the world, as he has been doing the last 40 years, taking advantage of suckers who can't understand how he plays the game.
I've been harping about the democrats for a long time by now.
Maybe, finally, people have wised-up to how DEMOCRATS play the game - and they don't like it.
As for me, if the choice comes down to voting for a chaotic, intemperate, loudmouth who's grabbing money for himself ... or a smooth-talking, baby-killing, war-monger who's selling the people of the country out to international businesses ... gosh ... there's no question as to who I would choose, eh?
And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Vote for the Green Party, 1kiki. That party's Presidential candidate will lose, but at least your precious self-image will remain pure and untainted by Trump and the Democrats.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
As for me, if the choice comes down to voting for a chaotic, intemperate, loudmouth who's grabbing money for himself ... or a smooth-talking, baby-killing, war-monger who's selling the people of the country out to international businesses ... gosh ... there's no question as to who I would choose, eh?
You do realize that Trump has not actually moved factory jobs from China back to the USA. And his tariffs have not balanced the trade flow. Look it up.
www.businessinsider.com/trump-trade-war-deficit-losing-2018-8
You might have forgotten that Trump is letting all the old nuclear weapon treaties expire. As for a new treaty with, say, N Korea or Iran, Trump is failing or flailing. Whichever. He has also built a small nuke, W76-2, especially suitable for assassinating heads of state. Even if he nukes nobody in the next 5 years, that sets up the world for a nuclear war. Could that be bad?
www.thenation.com/article/mini-nukes-nuclear-weapons-trump-war/
Trump is also going to ridiculous lengths to increase the amount of CO2 in America. Burn more coal, lower fuel mileage, more incandescent bulbs, fewer LED bulbs. Could that be bad?
The baby-killing war-mongers are the American people who just love their troops and love to lavish $trillions on weapons, bombs, ammo. The more money spent, the more dead bodies. Trump increased the Pentagon budget. Could that be bad?
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
The baby-killing war-mongers are the American people who just love their troops and love to lavish $trillions on weapons, bombs, ammo. The more money spent, the more dead bodies. Trump increased the Pentagon budget. Could that be bad?
As long as I keep working jobs like I've been working, my only tax dollars going out the door are to the state and the local taxing authorities. That's the way it's been for at least 10 years.
No guilt on my conscience about where my tax dollars are going.
A great majority of it is going to fund schools that my neighbors are putting their kids through.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
You do realize that Trump has not actually moved factory jobs from China back to the USA. not my concern And his tariffs have not balanced the trade flow. Look it up. not my concern www.businessinsider.com/trump-trade-war-deficit-losing-2018-8
Quote:Yeah, Trump just snapped his fingers and these new tactical nukes just came into being overnight. I bet the people of the Manhattan Project would have appreciated Trump's-magical-snapping-fingers.
Originally posted by second:
You might have forgotten that Trump is letting all the old nuclear weapon treaties expire. As for a new treaty with, say, N Korea or Iran, Trump is failing or flailing. Whichever. He has also built a small nuke, W76-2, especially suitable for assassinating heads of state. Even if he nukes nobody in the next 5 years, that sets up the world for a nuclear war. Could that be bad?
www.thenation.com/article/mini-nukes-nuclear-weapons-trump-war/
Do you know who was really responsible for this new arms race? OBAMA.
Obama was BIG on developing new nuclear weapons, and systems.
Quote:And Hillary was the perfect promoter of ramping up a cold war to a hot one.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2015/12/15/obama-backs-bigg
est-nuclear-arms-buildup-since-cold-war/#70ca07d42a0f
Obama Backs Biggest Nuclear Arms Buildup Since Cold War
A new ballistic missile submarine.
A new strategic bomber.
A new intercontinental ballistic missile.
An enhanced command, control & communications network.
New tactical nuclear systems.
A revitalized nuclear weapons industrial base.
Quote:Do I think Trump should be doing something different? Of course I do!
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/the-kremlin-really-believes-that-
hillary-clinton-will-start-a-war-with-russia-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/
The Kremlin Really Believes That Hillary Wants to Start a War With Russia
To Russian ears, Clinton seemed determined in her speech to provide this missing ingredient for bipolar enmity, painting Moscow as the vanguard for racism, intolerance, and misogyny around the globe. ... I have been hard-pressed to offer a more comforting explanation for Clinton’s behavior — a task that has fallen to me as the sole Western researcher at the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Moscow State Institute of International Relations.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/21/us/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-put
in-russia.html
The Hawk on Russia Policy? Hillary Clinton, Not Donald Trump
But democrats have a long history of being WORSE.
So when it comes to this new crop of democratic wanna-be presidents ... we'll see. But I suspect they've been fully marinated in the democratic war-monger sauce.
Quote:And what have democrats done?
Trump is also going to ridiculous lengths to increase the amount of CO2 in America. Burn more coal, lower fuel mileage, more incandescent bulbs, fewer LED bulbs. Could that be bad?
The president who was the biggest help in reducing CO2 emissions was dumbya, by crashing the economy. Democrats have done zip. zilch. zero. nada. diddly-squat. aught.
So my choices are what, again? A do-nothing or a do-nothing?
Quote:That's that fantasy 'other tribe' pastiche you have in your head you keep arguing against. Whatever. I'm not going to waste my time trying to get you to give up your delusions.
The baby-killing war-mongers are the American people who just love their troops and love to lavish $trillions on weapons, bombs, ammo.
Quote:He also increased other spending. Yanno, it was that bipartisan mutual-binge-deal.
The more money spent, the more dead bodies. Trump increased the Pentagon budget. Could that be bad?
Could that be
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This cost you $5,000 per year
American business has gone through an era of considerable consolidation, and it’s mainly due to weak enforcement of antitrust laws. In Europe, which has much stronger antitrust enforcement that we do, Philippon reports that the top firms have increased their market share far less than American firms. As a result, prices charged to consumers have also increased far less than in America. Here is Philippon’s conclusion about how this has affected American workers:
The consolidation of corporate America has become severe enough to have macroeconomic effects. Profits have surged, and wages have stagnated. Investment in new factories and products has also stagnated, because many companies don’t need to innovate to keep profits high. Philippon estimates that the new era of oligopoly costs the typical American household more than $5,000 a year.
Even with weak antitrust enforcement (thanks Robert Bork!), how do companies get away with raising prices and cutting pay? They still have some competition, after all. The answer to that, I think, is the long Republican war against unions:
More at www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/heres-how-corporate-america-too
k-over-america/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
funny quote randomly put here
The European motto is, “Give a man a fish, and he will be fed all day with your surplus fish and consumer goods – but give him a fishing rod and we will lose a customer.”
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Don't forget the VAT taxes making everything expensive as fuck to begin with.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Bush signs $1.3 trillion tax cut bill / $300-$600 rebate checks start going out next month
June 8, 2001
President Bush fulfilled a major promise of his campaign for president yesterday, signing into law the most sweeping tax cut in two decades, which he called "the first major achievement of a new era."
Bush signed the $1.35 trillion tax cut -- which includes soon-to-be-mailed rebate checks of up to $600 -- amid the kind of presidential pomp he usually disdains: a formal ceremony in the East Room, with a Marine band playing "Hail to the Chief."
www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Bush-signs-1-3-trillion-tax-cut-bill-3
00-600-2913184.php
Federal Surplus or Deficit [-] as Percent of Gross Domestic Product
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=pugG
Donald Trump Promised to Eliminate the Deficit in 8 Years. So Far, He Has Increased it by 68%
www.newsweek.com/trump-deficit-debt-cbo-data-obama-1463802
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump has been down this road before with China: Did the US Just Abandon Tibet? A brief history of U.S. Tibet policy — and how Trump just turned everything upside down.
Originally posted by THG:
T
https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/did-the-us-just-abandon-tibet/
Tibet? Or Hong Kong? None of 'em mean a thing to Trump.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump has been down this road before with China: Did the US Just Abandon Tibet? A brief history of U.S. Tibet policy — and how Trump just turned everything upside down.
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
T
https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/did-the-us-just-abandon-tibet/
Tibet? Or Hong Kong? None of 'em mean a thing to Trump.
Bolton is beginning to tease what's going to be in his book. It's about Trump being completely over his head when it comes to foreign policy.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:Quote:Trump has been down this road before with China: Did the US Just Abandon Tibet? A brief history of U.S. Tibet policy — and how Trump just turned everything upside down.
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
T
https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/did-the-us-just-abandon-tibet/
Tibet? Or Hong Kong? None of 'em mean a thing to Trump.
Bolton is beginning to tease what's going to be in his book. It's about Trump being completely over his head when it comes to foreign policy.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
Wondering what's going to be in that book. Could it be what makes you guys all turn into huge Bolton fans like I predicted would happen?
Time will tell...
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Time already told. It's about the facts and only the facts. Bolton is about as Republican as it gets.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Bolton is already talking:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Time will tell...
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Former national security adviser John Bolton derided President Donald Trump’s daughter and son-in-law during a private speech last week and suggested his former boss’ approach to U.S. policy on Turkey is motivated by personal or financial interests, several people who were present for the remarks told NBC News.
According to six people who were there, Bolton also questioned the merits of Trump applying his business acumen to foreign policy, saying such issues can’t be approached like the win-or-lose edict that drives real estate deals: When one deal doesn’t work, you move on to the next.
The description was part of a broader portrait Bolton outlined of a president who lacks an understanding of the interconnected nature of relationships in foreign policy and the need for consistency, these people said.
www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/private-speech-bolton-suggests-s
ome-trump-s-foreign-policy-decisions-n1080651
Bolton used his appearance last Wednesday at Morgan Stanley’s global investment event in Miami to mock Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner and suggest Trump’s approach to Turkey is “motivated by personal or financial interests,” according to a number of people who were present for the remarks. While the details were scant, one assumes that Bolton has a low opinion of Trump’s son-in-law inserting himself in matters of foreign policy despite having literally no relevant experience whatsoever. When it comes to Ivanka, perhaps he shared his take on the first daughter’s endorsement of former national security council adviser turned felon Mike Flynn, or the manner in which she and her husband obtained their top security security clearances. As for Trump, who has property in Turkey, putting his own interests above those of national security, well, it’s not that hard to believe a guy whose only principle in life is “how does this benefit me?” would bring such an outlook to the Oval Office.
www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/11/john-bolton-gives-trump-a-taste-of-the
-impeachment-pain-to-come
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
Time already told. It's about the facts and only the facts. Bolton is about asRepublicanNEO-CON as it gets.
A billion flies eat shit.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Economists’ instinctive view on trade, that it should be good for everyone, is not correct
Economists, on the whole, favor open immigration and free trade policies, which they regard as catalysts for economic growth. But as polling shows, many people in the U.S. and Europe disagree. They are wary of losing jobs and earning power where there is immigration, and they believe free trade pushes industry abroad. So who’s right, the economists, or the people?
Well, according to MIT’s newest Nobel Prize laureates, economists Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee, each side gets one count right and one wrong.
“If you look at the best evidence, it tells us that economists’ view of migration is more correct,” Duflo says. “It is not a big problem to let more migrants in.” Study after study shows that increased immigration does not affect wages, for instance. And the presence of migrants tends to let more women who are longtime residents enter the work force.
Okay, what about trade?
“On trade it is the opposite,” Duflo says. “The evidence shows that people’s instinctive view of trade, that it does hurt them, has a lot that is true about it, and economists’ instinctive view on trade, that it should be good for everyone, is not correct.”
Although free trade boosts overall growth, it also produces concentrated pockets of job losses. And while economic theory has long held that displaced workers will move to new job opportunities, this rarely happens. In countries that started trading with China during the last two decades, for example, the working-age population has not decreased in the areas most hard-hit by imports from China.
What the mistaken ideas about both immigration and trade ignore, Banerjee says, is the “stickiness” of real life. Most people do not want to uproot themselves.
“One thing that ties those two issues together is the idea of stickiness,” Banerjee says. “Ordinary people like to stay in place. Economists think trade should be fine because, yes, it could hurt some people, but people are going to move to other jobs in other places. But people are very reluctant to do that. They don’t want to go to a different sector and a different place and a different life.”
More at http://news.mit.edu/2019/good-economics-hard-times-1112
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Economists who view people as 'rational actors', who ONLY act in the economic sphere, are so quaint.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I am pretty damn sure that lower rationality causes lower economic status. But for sure it is a fact that lower education levels correlate with lower economic status. Not every uneducated person is on the bottom and not every educated person is on the top, but that is the tendency. Interestingly, pollsters who don't correct for low education levels will under-count Trump voters, thus overestimating support for Democrats. An example from Georgia:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:
Economists who view people as 'rational actors', who ONLY act in the economic sphere, are so quaint.
The bad news for optimistic Democrats is that the fine print on the poll contains a sentence that should be a huge red flag to contemporary consumers of political polling: The data are weighted based on race, age and sex to accurately reflect the demographics of the state.
There’s nothing wrong with weighting your sample based on race, age, and sex to match the demographics of the state. That’s standard practice in the industry. The problem is what the poll didn’t weight on — educational attainment. Many state-level polls omitted this factor in 2016, leading them to underestimate Trump’s strength in key swing states. The most responsible pollsters responded to 2016 by making sure to improve their weighting. But many pollsters — especially those doing state-level polling — continue not to weight by education.
This failure to weight not only leads to errors (which could be compensated for by averaging), it leads to systematic bias against Trump and the GOP, meaning everyone who publishes or disseminates unweighted polls ends up contributing to misinformation about the real state of American politics.
More at www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/14/20961794/education-weight-s
tate-polls-trump-2020-election
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're already proving my point about Bolton here.
Quite humorous that you haven't figured that out yet.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How FedEx’s tax bill went from $1.5 Billion to $0
Founder lobbied Trump for corporate rate cut
In the 2017 fiscal year, FedEx owed more than $1.5 billion in taxes. The next year, it owed nothing. What changed was the Trump administration’s tax cut — for which the company had lobbied hard.
The public face of its lobbying effort, which included a tax proposal of its own, was FedEx’s founder and chief executive, Frederick Smith, who repeatedly took to the airwaves to champion the power of tax cuts. “If you make the United States a better place to invest, there is no question in my mind that we would see a renaissance of capital investment,” he said on an August 2017 radio show hosted by Larry Kudlow, who is now chairman of the National Economic Council.
Four months later, President Donald Trump signed into law the $1.5 trillion tax cut that became his signature legislative achievement. FedEx reaped big savings, bringing its effective tax rate to less than zero in fiscal year 2018 from 34 percent in fiscal year 2017, meaning that, overall, the government technically owed it money. But it did not increase investment in new equipment and other assets in the fiscal year that followed as Smith said businesses like his would.
Nearly two years after the tax law passed, the windfall to corporations like FedEx is becoming clear. A New York Times analysis of data compiled by Capital IQ shows no statistically meaningful relationship between the size of the tax cut that companies and industries received and the investments they made. If anything, the companies that received the biggest tax cuts increased their capital investment by less, on average, than companies that got smaller cuts.
More at www.nytimes.com/2019/11/17/business/how-fedex-cut-its-tax-bill-to-0.ht
ml
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:Quote:
Originally posted by THG:
Time already told. It's about the facts and only the facts. Bolton is about asRepublicanNEO-CON as it gets.
billion flies eat shit.
You changed what I said. You've misquoted me. It is something you and sig do all the time. You two also make shit up out of thin air as if you are quoting someone. Then you respond to it. Sick, kiki you're a sick and dishonest troll. You can't expect anyone to respect what you post or believe any of it is true?
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Budgetary Costs of Post-9/11 Wars Through FY2020: $6.4 Trillion
Direct War Death Toll Since 2001: 801,000
The numbers continue to accelerate, not only because many wars continue to be waged, but also because wars don't end when soldiers come home. - www.brown.edu/news/2019-11-13/costsofwar
Costs: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2019/budgetary-costs-post-
911-wars-through-fy2020-64-trillion
Deaths: https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/figures/2019/direct-war-death-toll
-2001-801000
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Iraq was perhaps the biggest mistake ever. Hard to think of something worse at the moment.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Easy to think of something worse: Truman nuking Japanese civilians followed by Republican Senators darkly warning that Stalin was next. Stalin believed them. He responded by building his own A-bombs. Truman responded with his super-bomb, the H-bomb. Stalin responded with his H-bomb. Domestic nuclear testing wreaked havoc: At least 340,000 Americans died from radioactive fallout between 1951 and 1973.
Originally posted by THG:
Iraq was perhaps the biggest mistake ever. Hard to think of something worse at the moment.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
https://bigthink.com/politics-current-affairs/new-estimate-deaths-from
-us-nuclear-tests
Umpteen trillion dollars have been spent on nukes and the fancy delivery systems for nukes. Trillions more will be spent, starting today:
www.defensenews.com/space/2019/01/24/heres-how-many-billions-the-us-wi
ll-spend-on-nuclear-weapons-over-the-next-decade/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Easy to think of something worse: Truman nuking Japanese civilians followed by Republican Senators darkly warning that Stalin was next.
Originally posted by THG:
Iraq was perhaps the biggest mistake ever. Hard to think of something worse at the moment.
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
That's up for debate second. It is estimated it saved half a million American lives. That's because all Japanese were going to fight to the last man. It's also foolish to think Stalin and others weren't going to develop their own bomb regardless.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Nuclear weapons shocked Japan into surrendering at the end of World War II—except they didn’t. Japan surrendered because the Soviet Union entered the war. Japanese leaders said the bomb forced them to surrender because it was less embarrassing to say they had been defeated by a miracle weapon. Americans wanted to believe it, and the myth of nuclear weapons was born.
Originally posted by THG:
That's up for debate second. It is estimated it saved half a million American lives. That's because all Japanese were going to fight to the last man. It's also foolish to think Stalin and others weren't going to develop their own bomb regardless.
Look at the facts. The United States bombed 68 cities in the summer of 1945. If you graph the number of people killed in all 68 of those attacks, you imagine that Hiroshima is off the charts, because that’s the way it’s usually presented. In fact, Hiroshima is second. Tokyo, a conventional attack, is first in the number killed. If you graph the number of square miles destroyed, Hiroshima is sixth. If you graph the percentage of the city destroyed, Hiroshima is 17th.
Clearly, in terms of the end result — I’m not talking about the means, but in terms of the outcome of the attack — Hiroshima was not exceptional. It was not outside the parameters of attacks that had been going on all summer long.
More at www.carnegiecouncil.org/education/008/expertclips/010
Special To The Japan Times
www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/08/06/commentary/japan-surrender-wor
ld-war-ii/
Historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, in his 2005 book “Racing the Enemy,” provides compelling evidence that the Pacific War ended due to the entry of the Soviets, not the atomic bombings. Having tasted defeat at the hands of the Soviets twice in the late 1930s in Manchurian border clashes, the generals knew that the new front meant further resistance was futile.
Sheldon Garon, a professor of history at Princeton University, takes issue with Hasegawa’s contention that the military was insouciant about Japanese suffering and ready to fight to the last civilian. Recently, Garon gave a talk in Tokyo about an ongoing book project focusing on how the war was lost for Germany and Japan.
He argues that the U.S. was surprised by Japan’s sudden surrender, noting that by Aug. 19, 1945, America would have had three more atomic bombs ready and had six more in production — it did not anticipate a swift end.
According to Garon, the Japanese military was deeply concerned by worsening conditions in Japan because they were undermining the war effort. Authorities, for example, planned the evacuation of a few hundred thousand school children to spare them the urban conflagrations, but were not prepared for the mass exodus of adults who bailed because they knew the military could not protect them. Roads out of Tokyo were clogged with these refugees: 8.5 million fled Japanese cities in the final five months of war, paralyzing transport networks.
This rural-escape survival strategy meant demoralized workers were abandoning factories, compounding existing shortages of war-related production.
According to Garon, these acts of sabotage also meant that an orderly society was no longer obeying orders, responding to accumulating signs of impending defeat. Alas, many of these unlucky refugees fled to smaller cities, and thus were subject to more bombings as America moved onto second-tier targets. The U.S. dropped leaflets warning of impending strikes, and then delivered, stoking fear and undermining faith in the government.
Officials were also demoralized by Germany’s surrender, and the horrific fight to the end that Adolf Hitler insisted on, subjecting his people and cities to a relentless pounding.
Garon observes that the Germans fought like samurai, sacrificing all even when they knew it was for a losing cause. While much is made of Japanese authorities training women and children to resist U.S. invaders with bamboo staves, Garon notes that none ever d
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THUGGER:
Time already told. It's about the facts and only the facts. Bolton is about asRepublicanNEO-CON as it gets.
Quote:JEEZE - what gave it away Sherlock? The strike-out of your words? The CAPS of mine? Perhaps the different color of mine?
Originally posted by THUGGER:
You changed what I said. You've misquoted me. It is something you and sig do all the time. You two also make shit up out of thin air as if you are quoting someone. Then you respond to it. Sick, kiki you're a sick and dishonest troll. You can't expect anyone to respect what you post or believe any of it is true?
It's not as if I was hiding what I did and then pretending they were your words, or anything. I was COMMENTING - without the tedium of having to type everything out all over.
What a funny dolt you are!
Flies shit.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:What gives, SECOND? Is your TDS so bad you're re-writing history and blaming Trump for the H-bomb?
Originally posted by SECOND:
Easy to think of something worse: Truman nuking Japanese civilians followed by Republican Senators darkly warning that Stalin was next. Stalin believed them. He responded by building his own A-bombs. Trump responded with his super-bomb, the H-bomb. Stalin responded with his H-bomb. Domestic nuclear testing wreaked havoc: At least 340,000 Americans died from radioactive fallout between 1951 and 1973.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump? Truman? Both have a weird thing about A-bombs and killing women and children:
Originally posted by 1KIKI:Quote:What gives, SECOND? Is your TDS so bad you're re-writing history and blaming Trump for the H-bomb?
Originally posted by SECOND:
Easy to think of something worse: Truman nuking Japanese civilians followed by Republican Senators darkly warning that Stalin was next. Stalin believed them. He responded by building his own A-bombs. Trump responded with his super-bomb, the H-bomb. Stalin responded with his H-bomb. Domestic nuclear testing wreaked havoc: At least 340,000 Americans died from radioactive fallout between 1951 and 1973.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Who's keeping track, eh? It's all one big pile of mashed potatoes in your head!
Originally posted by SLOPPY:
Trump? Truman?
Flies shit.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
How America Ends
Democracy depends on the consent of the losers. For most of the 20th century, parties and candidates in the United States have competed in elections with the understanding that electoral defeats are neither permanent nor intolerable. The losers could accept the result, adjust their ideas and coalitions, and move on to fight in the next election. Ideas and policies would be contested, sometimes viciously, but however heated the rhetoric got, defeat was not generally equated with political annihilation. The stakes could feel high, but rarely existential. In recent years, however, beginning before the election of Donald Trump and accelerating since, that has changed. “Our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage,” Trump told the crowd at his reelection kickoff event in Orlando in June. “They want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country as we know it.” This is the core of the president’s pitch to his supporters: He is all that stands between them and the abyss.
In October, with the specter of impeachment looming, he fumed on Twitter, “What is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!” For good measure, he also quoted a supporter’s dark prediction that impeachment “will cause a Civil War like fracture in this Nation from which our Country will never heal.” Trump’s apocalyptic rhetoric matches the tenor of the times. The body politic is more fractious than at any time in recent memory. Over the past 25 years, both red and blue areas have become more deeply hued, with Democrats clustering in cities and suburbs and Republicans filling in rural areas and exurbs. In Congress, where the two caucuses once overlapped ideologically, the dividing aisle has turned into a chasm.
More at www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2019/11/how-america-ends.html
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Who brought that about Second?
I'll answer that for you. The Left made Trump.
And you've been crying about it every single day for three years since.
Why don't you demand decent candidates and platforms to run against him instead of trying to get a re-do on the election of 2016? If you had a single good candidate up there then Trump would be only a year away from being a memory.
Obama has even come out and chastised the left and their behavior in recent months. The response? "OK Boomer!"
They called him a Republican. Some even called him Alt-Right.
We're looking at the death throes of the Democratic Party. The only question is, what will rise from the ashes?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You misunderstood. Obama was indirectly, surreptitiously criticizing Medicare for All. It won't pass and it will be disliked by almost everybody who already has health insurance through their employer, which is like 200,000,000 voters, more than will actually vote in 2020. Even Elizabeth Warren knows it won't pass into law, even if Bernie Sanders, the grumpy old man, does not.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Who brought that about Second?
I'll answer that for you. The Left made Trump.
And you've been crying about it every single day for three years since.
Why don't you demand decent candidates and platforms to run against him instead of trying to get a re-do on the election of 2016? If you had a single good candidate up there then Trump would be only a year away from being a memory.
Obama has even come out and chastised the left and their behavior in recent months. The response? "OK Boomer!"
They called him a Republican. Some even called him Alt-Right.
We're looking at the death throes of the Democratic Party. The only question is, what will rise from the ashes?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://newrepublic.com/article/155756/elizabeth-warren-retreats-medic
are
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Obama was indirectly, surreptitiously criticizing Medicare for All. It won't pass and it will be disliked by almost everybody who already has health insurance through their employer, which is like 200,000,000 voters, more than will actually vote in 2020. Even Elizabeth Warren knows it won't pass into law, even if Bernie Sanders, the grumpy old man, does not.
https://newrepublic.com/article/155756/elizabeth-warren-retreats-medic
are
Glad to hear she backed off. Her stance on this issue made her unelectable; 100% unelectable. I still think she exposed a flaw in her ability to compromise by insisting on this issue for as long as she did.
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:You misunderstood. Obama was indirectly, surreptitiously criticizing Medicare for All. It won't pass and it will be disliked by almost everybody who already has health insurance through their employer, which is like 200,000,000 voters, more than will actually vote in 2020. Even Elizabeth Warren knows it won't pass into law, even if Bernie Sanders, the grumpy old man, does not.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Who brought that about Second?
I'll answer that for you. The Left made Trump.
And you've been crying about it every single day for three years since.
Why don't you demand decent candidates and platforms to run against him instead of trying to get a re-do on the election of 2016? If you had a single good candidate up there then Trump would be only a year away from being a memory.
Obama has even come out and chastised the left and their behavior in recent months. The response? "OK Boomer!"
They called him a Republican. Some even called him Alt-Right.
We're looking at the death throes of the Democratic Party. The only question is, what will rise from the ashes?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
https://newrepublic.com/article/155756/elizabeth-warren-retreats-medic
are
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly [/quote
I didn't misunderstand anything. I wasn't even referencing what Obama had to say about M4A.
I was talking about how he's said that the Left has gone too far left, particularly with their virtue signalling, cancel culture and extreme "wokeness".
Fitting, that the man most responsible for creating that monster should be the one to help destroy it.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Hmmm... let's see... losers not being able to accept their loss? Losers being driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage? Losers not being able to adjust their ideas?
Democracy depends on the consent of the losers. For most of the 20th century, parties and candidates in the United States have competed in elections with the understanding that electoral defeats are neither permanent nor intolerable. The losers could accept the result, adjust their ideas and coalitions, and move on to fight in the next election. Ideas and policies would be contested, sometimes viciously, but however heated the rhetoric got, defeat was not generally equated with political annihilation. The stakes could feel high, but rarely existential. In recent years, however, beginning before the election of Donald Trump and accelerating since, that has changed. “Our radical Democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice, and rage,” Trump told the crowd at his reelection kickoff event in Orlando in June. “They want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country as we know it.”
Tell me that that DOESN'T describe Democrats. The article seems to be a perfect encapulsation of all that is wrong with the Democratic Party, not what's wrong with Trump.
The DNC really needs to get off its ass and start trying to represent everyone, presenting ideas that will work for the former middle class in ALL states, and NOT alienate a full half of the nation. Tht might be a good start.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
You idiots have been oppressing the entire sexual spectrum as long as you have existed. I can't wait for the day your kind is dead - WISHIMAY
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
They're not going to learn that lesson before they lose in 2020.
I do hope they learn it by 2024 though. Nothing good comes from one single party having too much power for too long.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Republican defeat in Louisiana shows Trump is 'human repellent spray' for suburban voters, and it could spell big trouble for his reelection chances
Gov. John Bel Edwards, a socially conservative Democrat, won his reelection bid Saturday in the deep-red state of Louisiana, beating his Republican challenger Eddie Rispone with 51% of the vote to 49%.
On November 5, the Democrat Andy Beshear unseated the incumbent Republican in Kentucky's gubernatorial race.
The results underscore some trends that might worry Republicans ahead of the 2020 US election.
They've exposed the limits of Trump's personal capacity to help Republican candidates win, as the president campaigned hard for the losing GOP candidate in both cases.
And they show that support from a key demographic of Republican voters — those living in the suburbs of major cities — may be waning.
www.businessinsider.com/louisiana-defeat-shows-suburban-voters-abandon
ing-trump-2019-11
Overall, the results reflect a pattern seen in the 2018 midterms, when Democrats seized back control of the House of Representatives partly by winning suburban areas in states including Pennsylvania and Illinois. Recent further gains for Democrats in Pennsylvania compound the trend.
A shift toward Democrats in the suburbs also defined the early-November state legislature elections in Virginia, in which Democrats claimed control of each of the state's legislative bodies, flipping a series of traditionally Republican seats.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Noam Chomsky Calls Trump and Republican Allies "Criminally Insane"
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/noam-chomsky-calls-tr
ump-and-republican-allies-criminally-insane/
Q: Why did you recently call the Republican Party “the most dangerous organization in world history”?
Noam Chomsky’s answer: Take its leader, who recently applied to the government of Ireland for a permit to build a huge wall to protect his golf course, appealing to the threat of global warming, while at the same time he withdrew from international efforts to address the grim threat and is using every means at his disposal to accelerate it. Or take his colleagues, the participants in the 2016 Republican primaries. Without exception, they either denied that what is happening is happening – though any ignorance is self-induced – or said maybe it is but we shouldn’t do anything about it. The moral depths were reached by the respected “adult in the room,” Ohio governor John Kasich, who agreed that it is happening but added that “we are going to burn [coal] in Ohio and we are not going to apologize for it.” Or take a recent publication of Trump’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a detailed study recommending an end to regulations on emissions. It presented a rational argument: extrapolating current trends, by the end of the century we’ll be over the cliff and automotive emissions don’t contribute very much to the catastrophe – the assumption being that everyone is as criminally insane as we are and won’t try to avoid the crisis. In brief, let’s rob while the planet burns, putting poor Nero in the shadows.
This surely qualifies as a contender for the most evil document in history.
There have been many monsters in the past, but it would be hard to find one who was dedicated to undermining the prospects for organized human society, not in the distant future -- in order to put a few more dollars in overstuffed pockets.
And it doesn’t end there. The same can be said about the major banks that are increasing investments in fossil fuels, knowing very well what they are doing. Or, for that matter, the regular articles in the major media and business press reporting US success in rapidly increasing oil and gas production, with commentary on energy independence, sometimes local environmental effects, but regularly without a phrase on the impact on global warming – a truly existential threat. Same in the election campaign. Not a word about the issue that is merely the most crucial one in human history.
Hardly a day passes without new information about the severity of the threat. As I’m writing, a new study appeared in Nature showing that retention of heat in the oceans has been greatly underestimated, meaning that the total carbon budget is much less than had been assumed in the recent, and sufficiently ominous, IPCC report. The study calculates that maximum emissions would have to be reduced by 25% to avoid warming of 2 degrees (C), well above the danger point. At the same time polls show that -- doubtless influenced by their leaders who they trust more than the evil media -- half of Republicans deny that global warming is even taking place, and of the rest, almost half reject any human responsibility. Words fail.
Q: Wasn’t Richard Nixon worse than Donald Trump?
Noam Chomsky’s answer: Nixon had a mixed record. In some respects, he was the last liberal president: OSHA and EPA for example. On the other hand, he committed terrible crimes. Arguably the worst was the bombing of rural Cambodia, a proposed article of impeachment but voted down though it was incomparably more important than the others. And the article was much too weak, focusing on the secrecy. There has been little attention to the orders that Nixon delivered, relayed to the Pentagon by his faithful servant Henry Kissinger: “A massive bombing campaign in Cambodia. Anything that flies on anything that moves.” It is not easy to find comparable orders for genocide in the archival record. But all of Nixon’s crimes pale in comparison
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Pot Addicts
In terms of long-standing risks, the lack of federal involvement in legalization has meant that marijuana products are not being safety-tested like pharmaceuticals; measured and dosed like food products; subjected to agricultural-safety and pesticide standards like crops; and held to labeling standards like alcohol. (Different states have different rules and testing regimes, complicating things further.)
Health experts also cited an uncomfortable truth about allowing a vice product to be widely available, loosely regulated, and fully commercialized: Heavy users will make up a huge share of sales, with businesses wanting them to buy more and spend more and use more, despite any health consequences.
“The reckless way that we are legalizing marijuana so far is mind-boggling from a public-health perspective,” Kevin Sabet, an Obama administration official and a founder of the nonprofit Smart Approaches to Marijuana, told me. “The issue now is that we have lobbyists, special interests, and people whose motivation is to make money that are writing all of these laws and taking control of the conversation.”
More at https://getpocket.com/explore/item/america-s-invisible-pot-addicts
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah...
Being a pot advocate myself, I have to agree with the claims here.
The stuff they're putting on the shelves in these stores are far more potent than almost all of the weed I ever smoked in my day. Every once in a while I'd be somewhere and somebody got some premium shit that had a name and looked quite colorful and even had some crystallization on it. This stuff would make me, a regular smoker, completely high out of my mind.
And the edibles are another story altogether. This isn't FDA regulated. They run these dispensaries as if they were GNC. And GNC has peddled plenty of shit over the years that it eventually had to take off the shelves because it was deemed unfit for human consumption.
At the end of the day, I'm not going to get into the debate too much other than to say if a state legalizes it, they should also allow you to grow your own in your own backyard right next to the tomatoes, otherwise it's just a sick cash grab.
Quote:
Joe Rogan explains why people that make edibles need to be more consistent with the amount of weed they use and why it would be easier to catch a human than a dolphin.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump Wants Absolved War Criminals to Campaign for Him
If Donald Trump gets his wish, he’ll soon take the three convicted or accused war criminals he spared from consequence on the road as special guests in his re-election campaign, according to two sources who have heard Trump discuss their potential roles for the 2020 effort.
Despite military and international backlash to Trump’s Nov. 15 clemency — fallout from which cost Navy Secretary Richard Spencer his job on Sunday — Trump believes he has rectified major injustices. Two people tell The Daily Beast they’ve heard Trump talk about how he’d like to have the now-cleared Clint Lorance, Matthew Golsteyn, or Edward Gallagher show up at his 2020 rallies, or even have a moment on stage at his renomination convention in Charlotte next year. Right-wing media have portrayed all three as martyrs brought down by “political correctness” within the military.
“He briefly discussed making it a big deal at the convention,” said one of these sources, who requested anonymity to talk about private conversations. “The president made a reference to the 2016 [convention] and where they brought on-stage heroes” like former Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell, who refused to execute detained civilians ahead of a devastating Taliban attack.
Former Army Lt. Lorance was sentenced to 19 years in prison in 2013 for murder after ordering his soldiers in 2010 to fire on three unarmed Afghan men riding a motorcycle, killing two of them. He walked out of military prison at Fort Leavenworth on Nov. 15. Next month, former Green Beret Maj. Golsteyn was supposed to stand trial for the murder of an unarmed Afghan man whom he told the CIA he killed in the belief the man was a Taliban bombmaker. Golsteyn, who allegedly burned the man’s corpse, pleaded not guilty to the murder; the Green Berets stripped Golsteyn of his Special Forces tab. Lorance and Golsteyn were both causes célèbres in certain military circles and among their right-wing supporters, as was Navy SEAL Chief Gallagher.
More at www.thedailybeast.com/trump-tells-allies-he-wants-absolved-war-crimina
ls-to-campaign-for-him
In 1971, Nixon pardoned the My Lai Massacre war criminal (500 dead civilians) for a popularity boost with the voters in 1972. It got him reelected by a landslide. So why not pardon war criminals in 2019 for a popularity boost in the 2020 election? I'll answer my own question from experience: indiscriminate killing is why the USA lost Vietnam, dear Trump voters.
More at www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/05/25/he-was-americas-most-notorio
us-war-criminal-nixon-helped-him-anyway/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
He should just pardon Roger Stone and watch you guys go absolutely nuts.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Trump administration’s two most revealing speeches weren’t given by Trump.
Republicans control the White House, the Senate, and the Supreme Court. They have 27 governorships and governing trifectas in 21 states. But many conservatives — particularly Christian conservatives — believe they’re being routed in the war that matters most: the post-Christian culture war. They see a diverse, secular left winning the future and preparing to eviscerate both Christian practice and traditional mores. And they see themselves as woefully unprepared to respond with the ruthlessness that the moment requires.
Enter Donald Trump. Whatever Trump’s moral failings, he’s a street fighter suited for an era of political combat. Christian conservatives believe — rightly or wrongly — that they’ve been held back by their sense of righteousness, grace, and gentility, with disastrous results. Trump operates without restraint. He is the enemy they believe the secular deserve, and perhaps unfortunately, the champion they need. Understanding this dynamic is crucial to understanding the psychology that attracts establishment Republicans to Trump, and convinces them that his offense is their best defense.
If this sound exaggerated, consider two recent speeches given by Attorney General William Barr. Barr is a particularly important kind of figure in the Trump world. He previously served as attorney general under George H.W. Bush, and had settled into a comfortable twilight as a respected member of the Republican legal establishment. It’s the support of establishment Republicans like Barr that gives Trump his political power and protects him from impeachment. But why would someone like Barr spend the end of his career serving a man like Trump?
Speaking at Notre Dame in October, Barr offered his answer. He argued that the conflict of the 20th century pitted democracy against fascism and communism — a struggle democracy won, and handily. “But in the 21st century, we face an entirely different kind of challenge,” he warned. America was built atop the insight that “free government was only suitable and sustainable for a religious people.” But “over the past 50 years religion has been under increasing attack,” driven from the public square by “the growing ascendancy of secularism and the doctrine of moral relativism.”
This is a war Barr thinks progressives have been winning, and that conservatives fight in the face of long institutional odds.
More speeches at www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/26/20978613/donald-trump-chris
tians-william-barr-impeachment
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It is a war that progressives have been winning, but okay... What's your point?
A LOT of people who voted for Trump don't go to church.
You're pointing out one of the extremely few groups of people who would both fight with others who vote their way and always vote Republican.
Take a look around you, Second. There are literally 100's of those groups that vote Democrat. If the Legacy Media didn't blitz Trump stories 24/7, they'd have already begun eating each other.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Clearly, you didn't understand what Attorney General Barr said in his full speech, which you probably didn't click. To Barr, right now, will always be Flight 93 -- remember, the Flight 93 passengers fought 9/11 terrorists to the death. For Barr, and a majority of the Trump voters I know, Democrats are the terrorists and they need to be opposed with max force, even if the fighting crashes the airplane. Trump, Mister Maximum Force, in other words is their champion. Whatever Trump does is okay with them because he is the only one that can stop those terrorist/Democrats. Before 1861, slave-owners accused abolitionists of being the 9/11 terrorists of the 19th Century who were attempting to destroy the oh-so-precious,-christian-and-genteel Southern society. I'm pretty sure the slave-owners, and the millions who followed the slave-owners into war, were mistaken about everything. But my local Texan/Trump lovers think there was some merit to the Confederacy. There is even a high school and a college in Baytown named after General Robert E. Lee, a saintly hero to the local Trump lovers. Someday there will be a Trump High School in Baytown.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
It is a war that progressives have been winning, but okay... What's your point?
A LOT of people who voted for Trump don't go to church.
You're pointing out one of the extremely few groups of people who would both fight with others who vote their way and always vote Republican.
Take a look around you, Second. There are literally 100's of those groups that vote Democrat. If the Legacy Media didn't blitz Trump stories 24/7, they'd have already begun eating each other.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
T
Deep state describes dedicated, educated professionals.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/public_approval_of_the_
impeachment_and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html
RCP Average Impeachment
11/1 - 11/25
--
48.2
45.7
Yes/Remove +2.5
CNN
11/21 - 11/24
910 RV
50
45
Yes/Remove +5
Quinnipiac
11/21 - 11/25
1355 RV
45
48
No +3
Politico
11/22 - 11/24
1988 RV
50
42
Yes/Remove +8
Economist
11/17 - 11/19
1224 RV
49
42
Yes/Remove +7
NPR/PBS/Marist*
11/11 - 11/15
988 RV
47
47
Tie
Politico
11/15 - 11/17
1994 RV
47
44
Yes/Remove +3
Economist
11/10 - 11/12
1206 RV
49
43
Yes/Remove +6
Politico
11/8 - 11/10
1993 RV
48
42
Yes/Remove +6
Gallup
11/1 - 11/14
1015 A
48
50
No +2
Economist
11/3 - 11/5
1201 RV
50
43
Yes/Remove +7
Politico
11/1 - 11/3
1983 RV
47
42
Yes/Remove +5
Monmouth
10/30 - 11/3
835 RV
45
52
No +7
ABC/WP
10/27 - 10/30
876 RV
51
46
Yes/Remove +5
NBC/WSJ
10/27 - 10/30
720 RV
49
46
Yes/Remove +3
FOX News
10/27 - 10/30
1040 RV
49
45
Yes/Remove +4
Economist
10/27 - 10/29
1274 RV
49
43
Yes/Remove +6
Politico
10/25 - 10/28
1997 RV
48
43
Yes/Remove +5
USA Today
10/23 - 10/26
1000 RV
46
47
No +1
Gallup
10/14 - 10/31
1506 A
51
48
Yes/Remove +3
Selzer
10/17 - 10/23
1003 A
42
44
No +2
Economist
10/20 - 10/22
1204 RV
49
43
Yes/Remove +6
Politico
10/18 - 10/21
1989 RV
49
43
Yes/Remove +6
Quinnipiac
10/17 - 10/21
1587 RV
48
46
Yes/Remove +2
CNN
10/17 - 10/20
892 RV
51
44
Yes/Remove +7
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME