Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[tim_m]

And that tweet has what to do with the fake tariff threat to create more distractions?

[pilferk]

Yay! Congratulations! It's not everyone who can create a problem, then threaten the other part and claim victory when the other part agrees to do things that have already been agreed on. On top of that, the threat itself would've been like shooting yourself in the foot.

One victory after another. Like when he shut down the government for a record breaking time!

The approval ratings must be in the 90 something percent by now?




/jarmo

Pretty much.

The agreement that supposedly staved off the tarrifs? The exact same one that was made in March. Between Mexicos secretary of the interior and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

No changes. No real differences. Nada.  And that agreement?  Most objective assessments of it are that its not really anything more than Mexico has been doing for the last decade....largely negotiated with the Obama administration.  It just codefies it all, rather than being the sort of "handshake" deal that's been in place for awhile now.  The difference is the troops assigned will be "national guard" troops, rather than Mexican Army troops, and the agreement won't let Mexico diverge from it (not that they have, anyway).  Oh, and there will be about 1000 more of them (5k vs 6k).  Either way, it's a move most experts don't think is going to be all that effective ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-defends-deal-with-mexico-that-critics-say-will-do-little-to-curb-migrant-crisis/2019/06/09/0fd7d12e-8ada-11e9-8f69-a2795fca3343_story.html?utm_term=.c35c9a264d65 )

He didn't go in "demanding everything" and "forcing them to do it because they had no choice".  He basically backed down. Mexico agreed to sign a piece of paper that says they'll continue doing exactly what they've been doing (for the last 3 months, and really for most of the last decade)....and to get the National Guard (which is really a police force) troops to the border a little faster than previously agreed upon (and pulling back Mexican Army troops at almost an identical rate). Instead of targeting August for getting 5k National Guardsman to the Guatemalan border...they've now pledged 6k National Guardsman by the end of July.

And you'll see the Trump supporters (and obligatory trolls) wave the flag and declare victory. 

Seems the Dem leadership was right, and Trump finally caught on (probably when his own party started making noise about rejecting his tariffs): It was a stupid and dangerous game to play, with no real upside.  So Trump basically agreed, to save a TINY bit of face, to let Mexico sign a "deal" they'd already made so he could declare victory.

Typical Trump. Can't ACTUALLY make a deal. So puts his name on an EXISTING deal and claims victory.  I mean, look at the NAFTA replacement? 95% NAFTA, 5% new, and very NARROW, stuff.

So funny.  And so funny to watch his supporters declare victory over and over again, when really...it's more evidence Trump is NOT the guy who they voted for.  Not the deal maker. Not the swamp drainer.

ALSO, that whole tweet storm about Mexico increasing agriculture buys? Looks like it might be bullshit.  It's doesn't appear to be in the actual signed deal.  Basically Mexico used it as a bargaining chip, saying if there were no tariffs, and if the USMCA gets approved, Mexico MIGHT buy more US ag products.  No deal (according to Mexico) was actually made to that effect, though.  And it's not in the joint statement from US/Mexico, either.  The only place any mention of it exists seems to be in Trumps tweets. Not that that would surprise me.  I mean...the Moon is part of Mars, so.....

[pilferk]

And that tweet has what to do with the fake tariff threat to create more distractions?

I mean...what do you expect him to say.

They played Trump like a fiddle, to some extent.  And they know how to keep playing him.  You flatter him, and make it all about his ego.

Every leader in the free world now knows this.  Nobody is really going to say anything else to him, in public, because all you have to do to get what you want out of the guy is flatter him, and butter him up. 

When you just got a great deal for your country, that basically codifies existing terms, of COURSE you compliment the other side.  And then laugh your ass off at them when they're out of earshot.

[tim_m]

I wonder how many Trumpers heads have exploded after what California just passed.

[pilferk]

I wonder how many Trumpers heads have exploded after what California just passed.

Oh, I'm sure a bunch of them.

We'll see if it holds up in court.  I suspect, given the broad powers of state's when it comes to running elections, that it will. 

I know NJ has a similar bill working it's way through the process.  CT did, but I think it sort of died on the vine.

I also think what should make the Trumpers heads explode is the 17 state poll that was run internally by Trumps own pollsters.  Reportedly, it was SO bad, he told his staff to deny they did it, or at least deny the results, or both.

To be clear: I don't think that polling is predictive.  It's way too early.  But the fact he's so disturbed by such early polling....that's telling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/trump-biden-iowa.html

[tim_m]

I wonder how many Trumpers heads have exploded after what California just passed.

Oh, I'm sure a bunch of them.

We'll see if it holds up in court.  I suspect, given the broad powers of state's when it comes to running elections, that it will. 

I know NJ has a similar bill working it's way through the process.  CT did, but I think it sort of died on the vine.

I also think what should make the Trumpers heads explode is the 17 state poll that was run internally by Trumps own pollsters.  Reportedly, it was SO bad, he told his staff to deny they did it, or at least deny the results, or both.

To be clear: I don't think that polling is predictive.  It's way too early.  But the fact he's so disturbed by such early polling....that's telling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/trump-biden-iowa.html

Of course all the Trumpers will do is read the headline that says California insures undocumented immigrants without actually reading the facts of the budget. If they did they'd see it isn't everyone, its only for 18-25 year old who are very low income. They'd also find out it that its part of a broader initiative to insure all Californians. They'd also find out that in has an initiative to help under covered middle class making up to 154k to help them pay for their monthly insurance payments but hey we live in a country where facts no longer actually matter.

[pilferk]

I wonder how many Trumpers heads have exploded after what California just passed.

Oh, I'm sure a bunch of them.

We'll see if it holds up in court.  I suspect, given the broad powers of state's when it comes to running elections, that it will. 

I know NJ has a similar bill working it's way through the process.  CT did, but I think it sort of died on the vine.

I also think what should make the Trumpers heads explode is the 17 state poll that was run internally by Trumps own pollsters.  Reportedly, it was SO bad, he told his staff to deny they did it, or at least deny the results, or both.

To be clear: I don't think that polling is predictive.  It's way too early.  But the fact he's so disturbed by such early polling....that's telling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/trump-biden-iowa.html

Of course all the Trumpers will do is read the headline that says California insures undocumented immigrants without actually reading the facts of the budget. If they did they'd see it isn't everyone, its only for 18-25 year old who are very low income. They'd also find out it that its part of a broader initiative to insure all Californians. They'd also find out that in has an initiative to help under covered middle class making up to 154k to help them pay for their monthly insurance payments but hey we live in a country where facts no longer actually matter.

Ah...we're talking about different legislation!  You're talking about the insurance!

I'm talking about the ballot initiative that passed that says a presidential candidate can't appear on the ballot, in CA, unless they release their taxes.;

Both pieces of legislation sure to make Trumpers heads explode!

[pilferk]

OMG, Biden is so far in Trumps head it's hilarious.

"My poll numbers are great".  LOL!!!!

This guy......if he weren't so sad and pathetic, he'd actually be funny.

"I'd rather run against Biden. He's weak up here."

Oh man, his delusions are on parade!

[tim_m]

OMG, Biden is so far in Trumps head it's hilarious.

"My poll numbers are great".  LOL!!!!

This guy......if he weren't so sad and pathetic, he'd actually be funny.

"I'd rather run against Biden. He's weak up here."

Oh man, his delusions are on parade!

He saw the latest polls today obviously, which show him getting destroyed by Biden, so much so that even if the margin of error with this particular poll is the same as the midterms Biden wins in a landslide.

[PermissionToLand]

I wonder how many Trumpers heads have exploded after what California just passed.

Oh, I'm sure a bunch of them.

We'll see if it holds up in court.  I suspect, given the broad powers of state's when it comes to running elections, that it will. 

I know NJ has a similar bill working it's way through the process.  CT did, but I think it sort of died on the vine.

I also think what should make the Trumpers heads explode is the 17 state poll that was run internally by Trumps own pollsters.  Reportedly, it was SO bad, he told his staff to deny they did it, or at least deny the results, or both.

To be clear: I don't think that polling is predictive.  It's way too early.  But the fact he's so disturbed by such early polling....that's telling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/politics/trump-biden-iowa.html

Of course all the Trumpers will do is read the headline that says California insures undocumented immigrants without actually reading the facts of the budget. If they did they'd see it isn't everyone, its only for 18-25 year old who are very low income. They'd also find out it that its part of a broader initiative to insure all Californians. They'd also find out that in has an initiative to help under covered middle class making up to 154k to help them pay for their monthly insurance payments but hey we live in a country where facts no longer actually matter.

Ah...we're talking about different legislation!  You're talking about the insurance!

I'm talking about the ballot initiative that passed that says a presidential candidate can't appear on the ballot, in CT, unless they release their taxes.;

Both pieces of legislation sure to make Trumpers heads explode!

Seriously? That's fantastic. 

[tim_m]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/victim-compensation-fund-jon-stewart-lashes-out-at-house-hearing-on-911-responders-bill-you-should-be-ashamed-of/

Shame shame on the few democrats who did not attend and double shame for only one republican bothering to show up.

[pilferk]

Seriously? That's fantastic. 

Just a correction. IN CA.  Not CT.  I am too used to typing my home state's abbreviation.

Also, it will be challenged in court.  The Constitution is a little muddy, here.  Article 2 sets for the requirements to take the office of the president.  But it also clearly puts the onus of running an election on the states, and it doesn't specifically say that states can't impose their own ballot requirements (and many do, especially for independent candidates).

There will be some argument about this particular measure, given that muddiness.  BUT, if it loses in court, states are going to have to revisit their other ballot requirements for independents, too.

[pilferk]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/victim-compensation-fund-jon-stewart-lashes-out-at-house-hearing-on-911-responders-bill-you-should-be-ashamed-of/

Shame shame on the few democrats who did not attend and double shame for only one republican bothering to show up.

So...some context:

That hearing was ONLY supposed to be for a subcomittee (about 14 people).  3 didn't show up.  2 Democrats...who sponsored the perpetual extension bill (and, you would assume, are going to vote for it anyway) and 1 Republican (who has said they will vote against the bill no matter what).

In short, I understand and admire Jon's passion, and I agree with almost everything he says that represents principal.  And bully for him, because this will draw attention back to this issue, as it should.

BUT..honestly...there wasn't anything to get all ginned up about here.  I suppose you could say it shows a lack of respect by the 3 people who didn't show, but I'd say they had no questions, weren't the chair of the subcommittee, so didn't really NEED to be there.  They've made up their minds already, and better to get those first responders back home, to continue working and/or treatment, than to waste their time with procedural formalities that would require those "missing" members either ask questions or yield time back to those who have them.

[tim_m]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/victim-compensation-fund-jon-stewart-lashes-out-at-house-hearing-on-911-responders-bill-you-should-be-ashamed-of/

Shame shame on the few democrats who did not attend and double shame for only one republican bothering to show up.

So...some context:

That hearing was ONLY supposed to be for a subcomittee (about 14 people).  3 didn't show up.  2 Democrats...who sponsored the perpetual extension bill (and, you would assume, are going to vote for it anyway) and 1 Republican (who has said they will vote against the bill no matter what).

In short, I understand and admire Jon's passion, and I agree with almost everything he says that represents principal.  And bully for him, because this will draw attention back to this issue, as it should.

BUT..honestly...there wasn't anything to get all ginned up about here.  I suppose you could say it shows a lack of respect by the 3 people who didn't show, but I'd say they had no questions, weren't the chair of the subcommittee, so didn't really NEED to be there.  They've made up their minds already, and better to get those first responders back home, to continue working and/or treatment, than to waste their time with procedural formalities that would require those "missing" members either ask questions or yield time back to those who have them.

The optics of them not showing up just isn't good at all. I would also say shame on ANYONE who votes against this. This should be a unanimous bipartisan bill. Those heroes deserve this and so much more for what they did following the attacks. This is personal to me, i may live in Texas now but i was born in New York and will always consider myself a New Yorker.

[tim_m]

Seriously? That's fantastic. 

Just a correction. IN CA.  Not CT.  I am too used to typing my home state's abbreviation.

Also, it will be challenged in court.  The Constitution is a little muddy, here.  Article 2 sets for the requirements to take the office of the president.  But it also clearly puts the onus of running an election on the states, and it doesn't specifically say that states can't impose their own ballot requirements (and many do, especially for independent candidates).

There will be some argument about this particular measure, given that muddiness.  BUT, if it loses in court, states are going to have to revisit their other ballot requirements for independents, too.

Am i the only one that finds the irony in how much conservatives love states rights until it is something they don't like? I see no reason this can't hold up in court. The constitution clearly gives states the power to run their elections the way they see fit as far as requirements for being on the ballot.

[pilferk]

For those keeping score (or insisting the Dem House is "doing nothing except trying to get a Meuller Redo"):

HR 259 Medicaid Extenders Act of 2019.
HR 271 Condemning the Trump Administration’s Legal Campaign to Take Away Americans’ Health Care.
HR 986 Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions.
HR 987 Lowering Prescription Drug Costs Act.
HR 1 For the People Act of 2019.
HR 5 Equality Act.
HR 7 Paycheck Fairness Act
HR 124 Expressing opposition to banning service in the Armed Forces by openly transgender individuals.
HR 8 Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019.
HR 1112 Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019
HR 9 Climate Action Now Act.
HR 1331 Local Water Protection Act.
S 47 National Resources Management Act.
HR 2578 National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act of 2019
HR 840 — Veterans’ Access to Child Care Act
HJ Res. 37 — Directing the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress
SJ Res. 7 — To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress
HR 31 — Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019
HJ Res. 30 — Disapproving the President’s proposal to take an action relating to the application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation
HR 1585 — Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019
HR 1500 — Consumers First Act
HR 1994 — SECURE Act
HR 1644 — Save the Internet Act of 2019
HR 2157 — Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2019
HR 269 — Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019
HR 251 — Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program Extension Act
S 24 — Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019
HR 430 — TANF Extension Act of 2019
Concurring in the Senate Amendments to HR 251 — Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard Program Extension Act
HR 790 — Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019
HJ Res. 46 — Relating to a national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019
H Res. 183 — Condemning anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values and aspirations that define the people of the United States and condemning anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States, as amended
H Res. 194 — Rule Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1644 and H.R. 2021
HR 2480 — Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
HR 375 — To amend the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 to reaffirm the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian Tribes (also known as the “Carcieri Fix”)

They've actually taken up over 50 bills (or suspension of bills) and passed 49 of them since January.  FYI: That's at about twice the clip of the last 2 republican houses.

And they die on the Senate floor because, the TRUTH of all this is that the REPUBLICANS refuse to get anything done.  Even when it comes to bipartisan bills from the House with majority Dem support.

This administration, and REPUBLICANS, are the ones who refuse to govern. THEY are the ones that can't walk and chew gum at the same time. THEY are the obstructionists (as they have been since the Tea Party rose up).

[tim_m]

For those keeping score (or insisting the Dem House is "doing nothing except trying to get a Meuller Redo"):

HR 259 Medicaid Extenders Act of 2019.
HR 271 Condemning the Trump Administration’s Legal Campaign to Take Away Americans’ Health Care.
HR 986 Protecting Americans with Preexisting Conditions.
HR 987 Lowering Prescription Drug Costs Act.
HR 1 For the People Act of 2019.
HR 5 Equality Act.
HR 7 Paycheck Fairness Act
HR 124 Expressing opposition to banning service in the Armed Forces by openly transgender individuals.
HR 8 Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019.
HR 1112 Enhanced Background Checks Act of 2019
HR 9 Climate Action Now Act.
HR 1331 Local Water Protection Act.
S 47 National Resources Management Act.
HR 2578 National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act of 2019
HR 840 — Veterans’ Access to Child Care Act
HJ Res. 37 — Directing the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress
SJ Res. 7 — To direct the removal of United States Armed Forces from hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been authorized by Congress
HR 31 — Caesar Syria Civilian Protection Act of 2019
HJ Res. 30 — Disapproving the President’s proposal to take an action relating to the application of certain sanctions with respect to the Russian Federation
HR 1585 — Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2019
HR 1500 — Consumers First Act
HR 1994 — SECURE Act
HR 1644 — Save the Internet Act of 2019
HR 2157 — Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2019
HR 269 — Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019
HR 251 — Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program Extension Act
S 24 — Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019
HR 430 — TANF Extension Act of 2019
Concurring in the Senate Amendments to HR 251 — Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard Program Extension Act
HR 790 — Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019
HJ Res. 46 — Relating to a national emergency declared by the President on February 15, 2019
H Res. 183 — Condemning anti-Semitism as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contradictory to the values and aspirations that define the people of the United States and condemning anti-Muslim discrimination and bigotry against minorities as hateful expressions of intolerance that are contrary to the values and aspirations of the United States, as amended
H Res. 194 — Rule Providing for Consideration of H.R. 1644 and H.R. 2021
HR 2480 — Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act
HR 375 — To amend the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 to reaffirm the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to take land into trust for Indian Tribes (also known as the “Carcieri Fix”)

They've actually taken up over 50 bills (or suspension of bills) and passed 49 of them since January.  FYI: That's at about twice the clip of the last 2 republican houses.

And they die on the Senate floor because, the TRUTH of all this is that the REPUBLICANS refuse to get anything done.  Even when it comes to bipartisan bills from the House with majority Dem support.

This administration, and REPUBLICANS, are the ones who refuse to govern. THEY are the ones that can't walk and chew gum at the same time. THEY are the obstructionists (as they have been since the Tea Party rose up).

Silly Pilfrek, don't you know according to Cheetos base that's fake news? Democrats only have supported illegals voting, open borders and infantcide.

[PermissionToLand]

Seriously? That's fantastic. 

Just a correction. IN CA.  Not CT.  I am too used to typing my home state's abbreviation.

Also, it will be challenged in court.  The Constitution is a little muddy, here.  Article 2 sets for the requirements to take the office of the president.  But it also clearly puts the onus of running an election on the states, and it doesn't specifically say that states can't impose their own ballot requirements (and many do, especially for independent candidates).

There will be some argument about this particular measure, given that muddiness.  BUT, if it loses in court, states are going to have to revisit their other ballot requirements for independents, too.

You're a Connecticunt, too? No kidding!

[pilferk]

You're a Connecticunt, too? No kidding!

Yup, Nutmegger born and raised!

[jarmo]

Trump would 'take' foreign information on rival in 2020 election


Donald Trump has said he would accept damaging information on his opponent during the 2020 election campaign, even if it came from a foreign government.

In an interview with broadcaster ABC News, the president denied this would count as meddling in an election.

"They have information - I think I'd take it," he said.

Asked if he thought his son should have called the FBI when he received one such email in 2016, he said: "Give me a break, life doesn't work that way."

However, the president later said he would "maybe" contact the FBI if he were offered information and he "thought there was something wrong".



What did President Trump say?

"You might want to listen, there's nothing wrong with listening," he told the US broadcaster.

"If somebody called from a country... [and said] 'we have information on your opponent' - I think I'd want to hear it."


Mr Trump dismissed concerns that this would amount to electoral interference by a foreign power.

He added: "It's not an interference, they have information, I think I'd take it. If I thought there was something wrong I'd go, maybe, to the FBI - if I thought there was something wrong.

"But when somebody comes up with oppo [opposition] research, right... if you go and talk honestly to congressmen, they all do it, they always have, and that's the way it is. It's called: oppo, research."

---

Full story: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48618273





/jarmo