Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

Big day for Stock Market. Smart money, and the World, know that we are heading in the right direction. Jobs coming back FAST. Next year will be our greatest ever!

This year has seen the lowest crime numbers in our Country’s recorded history, and now the Radical Left Democrats want to Defund and Abandon our Police. Sorry, I want LAW & ORDER!
Click to expand...

Yeah, funny how that happens when there's a pandemic and everything is shut down.
 
Segnosaur said:
Maybe he is doing it to annoy trump.

Maybe he is doing it for political purposes.. (perhaps trying to benefit from shifts in society and demographics in order to position himself better in future political campaigns... E.g appeal to minorities in case he runs for president again

Or maybe his beliefs have changed over time. Seeing racism embodied in trump might cause a person to rethink their beliefs... (I.e. "am I like that? Maybe I should change.")
....
Click to expand...

I'm not a Romney fan, but I don't think there's ever been reason to accuse him of racism. He was a more-or-less successful governor of Massachusetts, and he was widely respected for running the Salt Lake City Olympics. His father George, ex-Michigan governor, was about as liberal as a Republican could be in the '60s. The real basis for criticism has been his activities as a venture capitalist.
 
Bob001 said:
I'm not a Romney fan, but I don't think there's ever been reason to accuse him of racism. He was a more-or-less successful governor of Massachusetts, and he was widely respected for running the Salt Lake City Olympics. His father George, ex-Michigan governor, was about as liberal as a Republican could be in the '60s. The real basis for criticism has been his activities as a venture capitalist.
Click to expand...

Mitt Romney’s Racist Appeals: How Race Was Played in the 2012 Presidential Election
Charlton D. McIlwain, Stephen M. Caliendo

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764213506212?journalCode=absb
 
Bob001 said:
I'm not a Romney fan, but I don't think there's ever been reason to accuse him of racism. He was a more-or-less successful governor of Massachusetts, and he was widely respected for running the Salt Lake City Olympics. His father George, ex-Michigan governor, was about as liberal as a Republican could be in the '60s. The real basis for criticism has been his activities as a venture capitalist.
Click to expand...

What Romney did I might characterize more as a vulture capitalist.
 
I'm not a Romney fan, but I don't think there's ever been reason to accuse him of racism. He was a more-or-less successful governor of Massachusetts, and he was widely respected for running the Salt Lake City Olympics. His father George, ex-Michigan governor, was about as liberal as a Republican could be in the '60s. The real basis for criticism has been his activities as a venture capitalist.
Click to expand...
Mitt Romney’s Racist Appeals: How Race Was Played in the 2012 Presidential Election
Charlton D. McIlwain, Stephen M. Caliendo

https://journals.sagepub.com/
Click to expand...
For those of us without an account for that particular journal/web site, would you care to give us a quick summary? (The abstract they gave didn't really give any indication about what it was referring to.)
 
The USA is officially declared in recession. Apparently, we've been in one since February. Of course, this is all fake news created to destroy Trump's regime as a future tweet from POTUS will verify...
 
Trump Tweets

I have retained highly respected pollster, McLaughlin & Associates, to analyze todays CNN Poll (and others), which I felt were FAKE based on the incredible enthusiasm we are receiving. Read analysis for yourself.
Click to expand...
Well, you get what you pay for...


From; https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...ck-on-surveys-showing-biden-with-double-digit
The analysis released on Monday...“...the CNN poll out today is another skewed anti-Trump poll of only 25% Republican,” McLaughlin wrote in the memo. “It’s a poll of 1,259 adults - not even registered voters, let alone likely voters. Also, it was done between June 2nd and 5th, before the great economic news from last Friday.” In fact, the CNN poll’s findings showing Biden with a 14-point lead over Trump appear to be based on responses from 1,125 registered voters.

Congratulations to McLaughlin & Associates, who couldn't even get basic facts (i.e. about a poll covering registered voters) right.


As for the date thing... well, yeah. The poll was quite upfront for the dates it covered. Its impossible to have polling results that change on an hourly or daily basis.


The article also points out that polls from Fox News and the Wall Street Journal (generally seen as either favorable to Trump at best, or at least not liberal) have also produced polls unfavorable to Trump.
 
The US economy entered a recession in February—before the lockdown and stay at home orders. This is Trump’s recession. It only took him three years to destroy Obama’s growth.
 
Oh, dear. Looks like Barr is calling Trump a liar:

Trump:
"I went down during the day and I was there for a tiny, little, short period of time and it was much more for inspection," Trump said. "These problems are during the night, not during the day."
Trump denied that the Secret Service recommended he move to the bunker for safety reasons, but claimed "they said it would be a good time to go down, take a look, because maybe sometime you're going to need it."
Click to expand...

Barr:

"On Monday, we were reacting to three days of extremely violent demonstrations right across from the White House. A lot of injuries to police officers, arson," Barr said. "Things were so bad that the Secret Service recommended the president go down to the bunker. We can't have that in our country. So, the decision was made, we had to move the perimeter one block. That is what we were doing."
Click to expand...
 
The Don said:
Even then, I wouldn't be shocked if a GOP majority senate didn't suddenly decide that a supermajority would be required for appointments (and to change that rule back) if there was a risk of a Democrat President and Senate.
Click to expand...

iirc, the rules of the Senate are adopted on the first day of the new session by majority only vote. So if the Dems do win the Senate that would not be a concern. I'm far more worried about Nov. 4 through Jan20.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Which is why even if it starts to look like DJT will not be our President come next year we have to start asking ourselves if he's really going to "Go away."

Like I said he's already planted the seed of "Deep state, fake votes" pretty deep had with his followers. I can see him doing a passive aggressive version of a "Leader in Exile" routine.
Click to expand...

If it's at all close, then the courts - specifically, the Supremes - will pick the next President. I don't trust them any further than I can throw the building they work in.

I envision a scarier scenario. It looks like there will be a lot of mail-in voting. These can take a long time to count plus there will be demands for recounts. Legal challenges will, I suppose, go the each state's top court. This could lead to the criteria for accepting a vote being widely disparate between red and blue states. And, of course, even those decisions will get appealed at the federal level even is such an appeal is not legal.

In the meantime, the calendar keeps on turning to a new page every day. I can imagine not having a decision by January, thus giving Trump some small basis for rejecting the tentative outcome.

What a freakin' mess. Now imagine that somehow the Supremes put a halt to the whole process (using 2008 as a precedent even though they declared that decision not precedent setting) and declare Trump the winner even though Biden wins the popular vote by 5+ million. That's when the excrement will hit the impeller big time. We'll be looking back to June, 2020 as the good old days.
 
phiwum said:
I have heard a couple of Abolish the Police folks that are close, arguing for social services provided by the government and some form of community policing (without that word, perhaps). That is a very small movement as far as I can tell and I'd reckon that there's more to it than I understand.

I don't know of anyone who thinks there should be no form of crime prevention and arrest. The argument is that in the current situation, police and racism are so inextricably linked that the police must be completely replaced by some other distribution of their duties. Not at all sure if the Minneapolis suggestion counts as police abolition.
Click to expand...

Any solution is going to have to deal with the police personnel problem. You can write rules out the wazoo but a racist cop is a racist with state behind them. I think AT LEAST three things need to change:
  1. Police union power has to be throttled. As it is now, it is difficult to get rid bad guysand gals.
  2. Oversight of the police has to be taken away from the police. That makes so much sense it's a wonder it ever got to be the way it is.
  3. Somehow prosecution of the bad guys has to be taken away from the same DA who has to work with the cope on a daily basis. As it is, the DA's office is VERY reluctant to prosecute police crime.
 
Segnosaur said:
I have wondered about that.



I'm not that familiar enough with Senate procedures (and the wording on the rules is difficult for me to wade through.) Can anyone explain (in simple terms) why the Senate cannot just say on the last day of their term "Ok, Supermajority rules" now? (Not that it would prevent an incoming Democratic senate from re-imposing the nuclear option, except for perhaps political embarrasment.)
Click to expand...
Procedure says rules can be changed by majority vote at the opening session only.

The new tactic is to draw a ruling from the chair. That ruling can be appealed to the whole body, which overturns the chair's decision. Since the assumption is all such encounters with that rule can be expected to get overridden, the rule is changed "by precedent" to avoid the time consuming process of a roll call vote every time.

So, in simple terms: the majority can change the rules whenever they want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom