Senate The US Politics discussion

... and whoops, Trump's little temper tantrum cancelling Pelosi's trip at the last minute, citing the shutdown... backfired spectacularly when his kids lost out on their Davos trip because the same cause applied to their trip.

 

EDIT: Never mind.

 

I mean, the Clinton campaign repeatedly pointed out how corrupt Trump was. How did that work out in 2016?

OK, so I had thought my post earlier today was sufficient enough to stand on its own, but I have clearly overestimated the basic intelligence and ready comprehension of some people on these boards, so apparently I need to elaborate.

I wasn't referring to Trump as any sort of master tactician or immortal god, you absolute simpleton. I was referring to his brain-dead base and GOP voters as a whole, almost all of whom are still in full lockstep with him. Hell, add to that most Republican politicians as well. Because of his following, he is incomprehensibly immune to consequences--not from economics, the shutdown, a complete lack of disaster relief for places like Puerto Rico and California, locking up migrant children and separating them from their parents, etc., etc. Something like the Mueller investigation turning up nothing on Trump would be disastrous for Democrats because Trump would never let anyone ever forget it.

I'm not going all appleseed here and saying he's inevitably going to win in 2020 and we're all doomed. What I am saying is that we should be prepared for any and everything, and we should take his threat to our country very seriously and not just assume our asinine electorate is going to come to their senses and vote the right way in 2020. That's what almost all of us thought would happen in 2016, and we were all wrong, so very, very wrong.

 

@Rew
Is it possible that perhaps he won because Hillary was not a good candidate?

 

That's part of it (or more accurately that Hillary wasn't the right candidate for the time). The other part is the American electorate are fickle.

 

Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress about Trump Tower Moscow project:

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...scow-tower-mueller-investigation?ref=hpsplash

It won't make a difference, but this alone should, if there was any justice in the world, get Trump impeached, convicted, removed, indicted, tried, convicted again and imprisoned for the rest of his life.

 

I expect nothing less from these ****ing scumbags. Uneducated white trash, the whole lot of them. And cowards, of course.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...yxh3FYTh_TBdb_ItBEAyZVG-fhYq9LZHO4DI0bxLAlgUU

The House floor erupted Thursday after Congress adjourned for the week when an unidentified Republican congressman yelled a controversial and potentially racially charged remark across the aisle as Democratic Rep. Tony Cárdenas was at the podium.

“Go back to Puerto Rico!” the lawmaker shouted, punctuating a stream of Republican whooping and hollering at the Democratic majority for holding a voice vote — instead of the normal roll call vote — to pass a continuing resolution that would reopen nine Cabinet departments through Feb. 28


Texas Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee and other Democrats in the chamber shot out of their seats demanding to know who shouted the comment.

Cárdenas walked over to the Republican side of the aisle and huddled with some GOP lawmakers, but none stepped forward to admit they had shouted the remark.

 

Yeah, but there’s taking him seriously and then there’s building his mythos that he’s some unbeatable machine. Hell, he’s beating himself right now with this stupid shutdown.

Also: I wasn’t specifically responding to your post or anyone else’s, just the general sentiment here seems to be, “He’s unbeatable! His base is too stupid and large!”

 

No. Actually no. Because, whether people like to admit it or not, Hillary remains one of the most qualified candidates to run. And as pointed out in the 2020 thread, she had a very high approval rating as Secretary of State and had others begging her to run. President Obama felt she was the best chance for being his successor. She also won the popular vote handily. She aced all three debates. And she campaigned with walking pnemonia. If you looked at Polifact's analysis of who told the truth the most while campaigning- Hillary was the most consistently truthful candidate by far. Bernie had far more statements that were rated false.

Ultimately, the perception of being a bad candidate is what hurt her most. And I would challenge anyone else do what she did and not be labeled a bad candidate. Let's take President Obama, give him a trumped up email scandal, Benghazi hearings, allegations of corruption for his family charity, and absurd focus over whether he fainted her not. Let's talk about his stamina and whether he can be presidential. And yes, I am aware that some of these very things did come up for President Obama because of his race.

If the narrative is Bernie would have won- I point you to the 2020 thread again. Bernie received overall positive coverage the entire campaign. Hillary purposefully chose NOT to go negative with Bernie and only hit him on the issues- gun control being the biggest one. But the media didn't question Sanders' fitness for the job once to my recollection. As a result however, they also never really dug deep into Bernie. The closest they got was Jane's university land deal that fell through. And Trump they treated as a fun sideshow. But because it looked like Hillary had a lock on this, they wanted drama and they wanted news and most of all, the ever important ratings. So they reported whatever they could on Hillary, casting her in the most negative, harsh light imaginable so that it looked like Trump would have a shot. What they failed to realize was that they were feeding the trolls. They were feeding directly into Fox News' brainwashing efforts by saturating the airwaves with anti-Hillary messaging. This led us to the "both sides" are "just as bad" bs arguments. This led to the idea that Trump wasn't any worse than Hillary and that they were "the same"

There was a great article around the 2016 election that indicated that voters hate when female candidates are running for office. They have some sort of issue with women trying to get a promotion. However, once they are in the role, they tend to be highly rated. This was evident with Hillary's turn as Secretary of State and can be more recently seen with the attempt to deprive Nancy Pelosi of Speaker of the House. And it can be seen right now with how news media reported the reaction to Elizabeth Warren's DNA test and what Native American tribes really think of her (spoiler: they actually like her. Probably because she doesn't insult their heritage on twitter every week) and with Kamala Harris. And now Kirsten Gillibrand as well.

Now, don't get me wrong- Hillary made a metric ton of mistakes. She assumed she had it in the bag. She hired idiots for her campaign who didn't give her the information she needed to hear. Her campaign manager got his email hacked in one of the most obvious ways possible. Neither she nor her campaign listened about campaigning in Michigan and Wisconsin. Hillary covered ALL of that in book.

But let's be clear: there was a concentrated effort on multiple fronts to stop her presidency. That started with false news stories (pizza sex ring), graduated to sensationalist stories (she's dying!), and it all laid the groundwork for Russia to do it's damage and for the FBI under Comey to land the killing blow with the email investigation.

But at the start of the process, was Hillary a good candidate? Yes. At the end, she was still 100% better than Trump. And far more qualified then him, Johnson or Stein.

And lastly, I remain convinced to this day that there was voter fraud in the South and possibly Midwest because those electronic machines can be cracked like an egg and Russia successfully got into the voter rolls of several states that we know of. We already know for sure there was significant voter suppression.

 

Trump directed Cohen to lie to Congress about Trump Tower Moscow

Republican Congressman shouts as Democratic Congressmen to "go back to Puerto Rico"



... just another Thursday night, it seems

 

Normally, I would agree. But this is a BFD.

The President obstructed justice and Mueller has the receipts.

 

Some dude on Twitter put up the changing stories of Donnie's legal team. Pretty funny

1. No contacts with Russia
2. Some contacts with Russia but only about adoption
3. Lots of contacts but no crimes
4. Crimes, but no collusion
5. Collusion, but Trump didn't know

 

Absolutely not! This is a big misconception that people have about the Polifact result. She didn't say less false statements, but she compensated her false statements, which were more than for Bernie, with more true statements, for the simple reason that they fact checked many more statements for her then for Bernie. So the average results more sincere, which is kind of a weird way to determine how sincere a candidate is.

Look at the results
https://www.politifact.com/search/statement/?q=hillary

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...5/fact-checking-bernie-sanders-2016-campaign/

 

I'll answer point by point to the rest of your post

A qualified candidate is not necessary a good candidate.

This also does not mean she's good in running a campaign.

same as before

I'm with Trump on this, we'll never know what would have happened if he had interest in rallying in California

Yes, but I have the personal belief that debates don't matter that much after all for the final result

this is not an argument in your favor, is it?

They did, right before the daily beast endorsed Hillary, with a sneaky interview. Then they started the narrative that he didn't know what he was doing and they insisted for few weeks on that.
In general, Hillary did get awful coverage by all right wing media, and Bernie didn't. There was an obsession anti-Hillary. That's true. But the supposedly liberal media, like CNN, but also Washington Post and NYT, were quite aggressive against Bernie instead, and not that negative with Hillary.

Here's Amy Goodman discussing Bernie's blackout and the behavior of NYT and WP.



I can't say for sure that Bernie would have won, but the idea I had by watching the primary is that most Hillary's supporters would have voted for Bernie without problems, whereas a non negligible minority of Bernie supporters had no intention of voting for the establishment candidate.

 

It bears repeating that a higher proportion of Sanders voters went to HRC in 2016 than her supporters went to Obama in 2008.

 

Oh, sorry, I didn't know that.

 

The trial of El Chapo has revealed the preferred method for drug smugglers to get contraband across the border is....

... hidden compartments in trucks and fishing boats, and crossing the border at checkpoints. Most of the time they wouldn't be found.

Just another reason why Trump's wall is ****ing useless.

 

@Rew The message from the kind of poster I was hinting at isn't about Trump being corrupt, it's about Trump being gullible. Corruption is compatible with a presentation as a strongman, but not idiocy.

 

Of course.

But, you know, Jonathan Karl's "sources"-- I mean Rudy Giuliani, are sure that Mueller's report will clear Trump completely.

I know Robert Mueller is the superstar here, but there's an echo in the way Trump fired Comey and got Mueller because of that. Nixon fired Archibald Cox (something of a flashy, combative person) and got Leon Jawkorski appointed in his place by Robert Bork. Jaworski was a low-key, conservative personality that took his job with complete seriousness and a minimum of publicity.

Just to be clear, though I think most people here already know this-- Nixon's first article of impeachment was for obstruction of justice, which in turn was due to his directing staff members to lie.

 

classist white holier than thou white liberal snobs oblivious to class privilege, the lot of them? (and too holier than thou and oblivious to see the problems they cause?)

There is seriously no greater aggravation than being condescended to by an upper middle class or above white liberal who thinks they're helping you by treating you as lesser than.

(And I'm saying this as a white person who votes dem and green.)

 

Why is it so hard for Lamestream Fake Newz Librul Media journalists to write 'racist'?

 

Trumo may have actually accomplished something pretty incredible: making Nancy Pelosi popular.