October 13, 2016

FiveThirtyEight uses Ron Johnson to depict the proposition: "Clinton Is Surging, But Down-Ballot Democrats Are Losing Ground."




Link to article: here. Key passage:
Perhaps most worrisome for Democrats is what’s going on in Wisconsin. Republican Sen. Ron Johnson’s re-election campaign looked all but dead. The powerful Koch brothers pulled money out of the state as Democrat Russ Feingold consistently led in the polls. But two new polls this week showed Johnson trailing by just 2 or 3 percentage points, and a third gave Johnson a lead, despite Clinton’s advantage in the state seeming to grow....
ADDED: It makes perfect sense to me. The more clear it seems that Clinton will win, the more important it becomes to those who worry about her that she should be offset and balanced by a Republican-led Congress. It seems really risky to empower a President Trump with a same-party Congress, but once he's not a threat, the risk-averse among us should gravitate toward a Republican Congress to put a brake on President Clinton.

298 comments:

1 – 200 of 298   Newer›   Newest»
Original Mike said...

Johnson's the reason I made a point of absentee voting. Go, Ron!

Nonapod said...

I assume that conventional wisdom is that during Presidential Election years, the party that wins the presidency also tends to win down-ballot?

At any rate, why would anyone rely on conventional wisdom in the midst of what's undoubtedly been the most unconventional US Presidential Election of our lifetimes? Why is everything still such a "surprise" to people in this season of madness?

eric said...

Trump would have a chance there too if Ryan hadnt turned tail and run.

This is a no win for Ryan. If Trump wins, he didn't help. If Trump loses, it's his fault.

Original Mike said...

"Trump would have a chance there too if Ryan hadnt turned tail and run."

Oh, bullshit.

Nonapod said...

And I also tend to reject the notion that what Paul Ryan says or does will have much of an effect on anything at this point. He makes a great scapegoat I guess, and we'll be searching like crazy for scapegoats in a month.

walter said...

I wish him the best. In his home..drinking coffee and chatting with him after a news show uplink...about as accessible and down to Earth as they come.
I've heard him on Devil's Advocate (progressive radio) as well. When given the opportunity, handles himself well when talking with voters with opposing views.

Brando said...

How do you reconcile that with the aversion to ticket splitting? Do you think a lot of people are voting Clinton and Johnson? Or just voting downballot?

Bob Ellison said...

That's too much game theory, Professor. Most voters don't do gaming.

I've been asking Trump-hating friends, "What will you do if he wins?" Mostly they don't respond. It seems such a question is unanswerable.

We probably need not address the question. He seems to be deep-fried.

Thorby said...

If Hillary wins, she will do so after a campaign that has revealed her to be a confirmed liar who is in cahoots with the global elite, who has contempt for 'everyday Americans' and finds them irredeemable, who uses the media as her water carriers, and who has suborned the Department of State, the Department of Justice, and the FBI. At this point, what legitimacy will she have as the chief executive of the United States whose sworn duty is to protect the constitution and ensure that the laws are faithfully executed? How can any officer of the court or professor of law support someone who is without shame and willing to break the law without remorse?

Brando said...

"Trump would have a chance there too if Ryan hadnt turned tail and run."

So we're back to Ryan being useful and consequential now? I'm just trying to keep up here.

If Trump loses, he lost because he's Trump. Full stop. Let's stop blaming phantom endorsements that would have made the difference.

Achilles said...

Trump is ahead in polls that don't oversample democrats 20 points. His speech today was spot on. We have never seen anything like this media pile on and Clinton is not acting like she is winning. The protests at her rallies are getting to her. The media and Clintons are clearly flailing right now.

The Wikileaks are getting out and Bernie supporters are leaving her in droves. A Washington state democrat elector said he won't vote for Hillary.

The 3rd debate is going to be glorious .

Unknown said...

republican congress will be as compliant with Hillary as barack. media will make sure of it because repubes have turned into slightly more masculine versions of the dems.

the fact that congress will not do its job is a forgone conclusion unless trump wins (which is still highly likely)

sy1492 said...

Internet polls were the most accurate kind of polls in 2012(1.9% error) and Trump is now ahead in 2 internet polls ...Rasmussen and LA Time poll.

Original Mike said...

"The Wikileaks are getting out and Bernie supporters are leaving her in droves."

Are they even being reported on (except on FoxNews)?

walter said...

Katy Tur Retweeted
Holly Bailey ‏@hollybdc 2h2 hours ago

As Trump attacks press today, there is notably more security around media assembled here.

sy1492 said...

And remember, Trump was down 7 points in the Rasmussen poll on Monday. WikiLeaks is having a massive affect in the electorate, even though SOME places are refusing to cover it.

Rae said...

The problem is finding Republicans with a spine.

Chuck said...

eric said...
Trump would have a chance there too if Ryan hadnt turned tail and run.


Complete nonsense. Didn't you get the memo? Trump is now "unshackled." Before, he was just unhinged. Now he is unshackled. Free, to campaign in the way that Mr. Donald J. Trump thinks is best.

If there really is a broad feeling in the electorate against establishment Republicans, it all ought to help Trump. "If"...

Trump now may be losing in Utah. Utah! Where every Republican has won since about 1100 BC. Where Mike Lee wins handily. Is there a "Paul Ryan" factor in Utah?


Iconochasm said...

They're getting talked about and linked to and censored (which is itself talked about and linked to) on reddit. There are a lot of nontraditional channels for Bernie supporters to glean all the juicy leaks regarding how she stole the primary.

Achilles said...

Blogger Brando said...

"So we're back to Ryan being useful and consequential now? I'm just trying to keep up here.

If Trump loses, he lost because he's Trump. Full stop. Let's stop blaming phantom endorsements that would have made the difference."

If the GOPe wanted trump to win they would not backstab him. But Trump is now siding with the country against DC. Trump has finally and correctly pegged Ryan and friends as part of the globalist coalition. Ryan is a known amnesty supporter and did everything he could to avoid budgets on regular order and passed Obamas continuing resolutions on voice votes.

The fun part is going to be watching Paul Ryan try to bury the Clinton investigations and keep all of the corrupt globalists out of jail.

khesanh0802 said...

Eric and Big Mike: I have to agree with Eric. Karl Rove has a piece in the WSJ that explains how Ryan could have handled this better. I think he has done lasting damage to himself by his very poor balancing act during the campaign. He clearly thinks Trump is a loser and he should have just stuck with that and worked for his congressmen. I have not been impressed by his leadership at all. He didn't show much backbone when he was the VP nominee either. I don't see any way that he can upstage Pence who has performed well, showed remarkable courage, done his duty, made it clear when he was upset and set the stage for a good run in 2020.

I have been trying to figure out how we got here . Many claim that it was a "terrific" R field of candidates, yet there wasn't one (well maybe Cruz) who could touch Trump's appeal. Jeb didn't get past NH, Rubio lost his own state, Kasich's only won his home state. Fiorina?. Carson? Common, man! Lack of skill? Lack of courage? Even in hind sight I can't reach a rational conclusion of how we got Trump. A lot of really pissed off people, I guess. I seriously question whether any one of these "terrific" candidates could have beaten Clinton as so many claim. You know, if you can't win in triple A ball it's unlikely you're going to win in the majors.

As for Ron Johnson; how any self-respecting citizen of WI could vote for Russ "Obamacare" Feingold is beyond me.

Robert Catesby said...

RE: "The risk-averse among us should gravitate toward a Republican Congress to put a brake on President [Hillary] Clinton."
How quaint.

History is not kind to this approach, as recent GOP Congresses did little or nothing to slow down the Obama Administration. They were worthless and weak. All power is rapidly condensing into an Imperial Presidency, where the White is free to ignore laws it doesn't like, create money out of then air, rewrite laws by creatively interpreting them, and generally doing anything it likes. As Queen Hillary selects more justices, the New Living Constitution will come to mean anything that liberals want.

Why bother to write new laws when you have the power to interpret them and have all of the enforcement power? A Congress that asserts it's Power of the Purse might do help somewhat, but it won't work if they are cowards, and it won't work if the King or Queen starts spending money created out of thin air.

khesanh0802 said...

BTW I will still vote for Trump come hell or high water. I think the groping business deserves the BS tag, not that it will ever get it.

Chuck said...

From today's lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal:

Donald Trump has declared himself unshackled from the Republican Party and says he will now campaign as he’s wanted to all along. This raises the question of whose never-before-seen campaign he’s been running for 16 months, but so be it. The self-declared strategy has the virtue of putting the onus of victory or defeat squarely where it belongs: Mr. Trump and those who led him to the GOP nomination.

“Disloyal R’s are far more difficult than Crooked Hillary,” Mr. Trump tweeted on Tuesday. “They don’t know how to win—I will teach them.” Well, now is his chance. The election is less than a month away, and Mr. Trump can show the pathetic losers in his adopted party how it’s done.

He’s trailing in the polls, and his campaign is advertising that his comeback strategy is to run almost as an independent to drive turnout among his core supporters. He’s given up trying to expand his appeal to women, minorities and college-educated Republicans. Instead he’ll tear into Mrs. Clinton in an attempt to demoralize her voters and motivate his.

At least this will be a political market test of the Trumpian wing of the GOP. Going back to Mitt Romney’s defeat in 2012, the GOP has divided roughly into two strategic political camps.

One camp wants to reach out to minorities, young people and moderates to expand the GOP electorate. The Republican National Committee urged this strategy in a 2013 report, and candidates like Colorado Sen. Cory Gardner followed it to win in 2014. This makes sense to us on demographic grounds but also because it is what a party should do in a healthy democracy. Governing for only half the country has been President Obama’s great mistake.

The other GOP camp has disdained such outreach in favor of mobilizing the white working-class voters who supposedly stayed home in 2012. The evidence is strong that most of those voters weren’t in swing states and so didn’t affect the election. But Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, the talk-radio gang, Heritage Action and Breitbart.com decided that the path to victory is flogging immigration and trade resentments to mobilize white voters rightly upset with the results of Mr. Obama’s economic policies.

Rob said...

So you're saying voters should grab President Hillary Clinton by the Johnson?

Brando said...

"republican congress will be as compliant with Hillary as barack."

Well, too bad we have to find out. Or maybe not--maybe the Dems will take Congress too, and we can have all the fun we had in '09-'10. But at least Trump will have gotten his revenge.

"the GOPe wanted trump to win they would not backstab him."

So you actually think Ryan COULD backstab Trump? What voter was thinking "I'm going to vote for Trump....oh wait, Ryan says he's not going to campaign for him. Forget that!"?

Trump is the backstabber here. But look at the bright side--if he loses you'll never have to find out how badly he'll betray you in office.

"The fun part is going to be watching Paul Ryan try to bury the Clinton investigations and keep all of the corrupt globalists out of jail."

Yep, after all Paul Ryan has been a longtime friend and supporter of the Clintons, not like Donald Trump.

Chuck said...

Achilles said...
...
...
The fun part is going to be watching Paul Ryan try to bury the Clinton investigations and keep all of the corrupt globalists out of jail.


Exactly when, and how, has Paul Ryan tried to "bury" any Clinton investigations to date?

Bob Ellison said...

What if 538 is wrong? They were famously correct last time around. What if they get it famously wrong? It won't be widely reported. The logical conclusion would be "538 was lucky in 2012."

Polling is fantabulously unreliable these days. The methods, the samples, and the questions are half a century out of date. "Margin of error"? Does anyone watching MSNBC or FNC have a clue what that means? And after the actual election, the pollsters are all it was a weird election.

Gallup, the company that lives on selling polling data, recently gave up on presidential polls.

Kate said...

I lived in Arizona when Evan Mecham was elected governor. I know that people voted for him because they were sure he couldn't win and they'd be the only one who voted for the unconventional candidate.

If Trump appears to have no chance of winning, I predict even MORE people will vote for him.

Hopefully he'll last longer in office that Mecham did.

Hagar said...

The Constitution depends on the President being of good will, or the Congress being willing to chastise him.

The Democrat Party has no Goldwater or Baker.

Gahrie said...

Have you been sleeping the last eight years? The republicans in Congress will roll over for Hillary just like they rolled over for Obama.

Achilles said...

Blogger Original Mike said...
"The Wikileaks are getting out and Bernie supporters are leaving her in droves."

"Are they even being reported on (except on FoxNews)?"

Does that even matter? I don't watch TV more than randomly and I find the information. The major media is vestigial. Any decent human being should celebrate this.

Big Mike said...

@Nonapod, normally a presidential candidate wins with a majority and has "coat tails" that drag down-ballot members of his (or her, this time) party across the finish line. But if Hillary wins, it will be the third (of three) elections where a Clinton wins with a plurality, but not a majority. More to the point, she will be the most hated president-elect since Lincoln -- and she absolutely does not have Lincoln's wisdom or political skills.

walter said...

Limited "braking" power when it comes to appointments and executive orders.
Keep Lynch in DOJ as theratened/promised? Maybe that moderate McKibben somewhere in EPA?

Quaestor said...

The more clear it seems that Clinton will win

Clear as mud.

Fabi said...

WikiLeaks was the top-trending story on Twitter earlier today.

Egg McMuffin is the spoiler in Utah at the moment -- we'll see if that holds up.

320Busdriver said...

I posted this on an earlier thread. Johnson is w/in the Marquette poll moe as of yesterday. Good News!!!

I love that OKeefe duped those attending a fundraiser for R Feingold in Palo Alto CA where Feingold is heard saying Hillary likely uses EO's to ram gun control measures through. Backed up by leaked Fallon email claiming the same.

First off, what is pure as the driven snow Foolsgold doing raising funds from rabid CA liberals?

Second, note how far the hostess thinks this gun control should go. People living on that part of the peninsula really are living in their own bubble.

The last thing WI needs is another 18 years of a do nothing like Feingold. The guy who is proud of being the deciding Obamacare vote.

Quaestor said...

That's too much game theory, Professor. Most voters don't do gaming.

Not only too much, it's junior high school game theory.

Achilles said...

"Yep, after all Paul Ryan has been a longtime friend and supporter of the Clintons, not like Donald Trump. "

Actions and words bitches. Ryan has pushed amnesty hard and has passed every obama budget adding more spending than asked for. Comey is not being impeached. Lynch is not being impeached. No special prosecutors. Number of times Obamacare defunded? 0. Sure boehner was in charge of much of that too and he was forced out because he was a globalist shill too.

Thank goodness Ryan is going to be forced out shortly.

320Busdriver said...

Speaking of polls,the nyt went far afield today to blame the LATimes poll outlier on a single African American 19YO from IL here

MadisonMan said...

I am very fond of voting anti-incumbent, so my vote is against Johnson.

I can't say I'm thrilled that Feingold is the candidate, the former incumbent, if you will. His Candidacy mirrors that of Hillary Clinton's: No one else wanted to run against. The whole party falls in behind in anticipation of a big win. But what kind of new ideas can a retread have?

And the House Member here is worthless too. (sigh).

Washington so needs a good cleansing.

Brando said...

"Polling is fantabulously unreliable these days. The methods, the samples, and the questions are half a century out of date. "Margin of error"? Does anyone watching MSNBC or FNC have a clue what that means? And after the actual election, the pollsters are all it was a weird election."

Except with a few exceptions (Brexit, Michigan Democratic primary) the polls have mostly gotten the elections within the margin of error. Maybe something happened for this general election that got most of the polls off, but so far no one has a convincing theory. It just sounds a lot like 2012 when so many people were sure Romney was really ahead and the polls were oversampling the Dems.

"Actions and words bitches."

Yes, and Trump's actions were to actually financially and publicly support the very person he is running against now. You can't pretend that didn't happen.

The man's a fraud. But if you get your wish, you won't even have to find out whether Ryan and Co. would have stopped Hillary, because Pelosi will rubber stamp everything. Don't even think for a second whether Pelosi would open an impeachment inquiry.

Chuck said...

Achilles said...
...
Thank goodness Ryan is going to be forced out shortly.


What do you mean, "forced out shortly"? When? Tell me.

Are you saying that the Republicans will lose their House majority? You're wrong. It won't happen; it is almost mathematically impossible.

Are you saying that after begging Ryan to take the Speaker's post, the House Republican Caucus will unseat him? After Ryan becomes his party's de facto leader? Because the real likelihood is that Ryan will win, Trump will lose, and Mitch McConnell's leadership will be hemmed in by a very narrow vote number in the Senate.

Be specific, because I want to define your trashtalk now, for future humiliation.

PB said...

As Obama has shown, a Republican Congress is little opposition to a President who has a pen (and the unwavering support of the media and a firm grip on all the levers of power in government).

Brando said...

"Washington so needs a good cleansing."

Yeah but every time it happens we find out the soap is as dirty as the dirt.

grackle said...

I've been asking Trump-hating friends, "What will you do if he wins?" Mostly they don't respond. It seems such a question is unanswerable. We probably need not address the question. He seems to be deep-fried.

I wouldn’t be celebrating Trump’s defeat just yet.

What we are going to see in the next few days is whether the media can dictate who becomes POTUS. The MSM/Democrat/eGOP/Paul Ryan coalition is trying its best to demonize our man, Trump. Will they succeed as they have with so many others? Or will Trump beat all of them?

That question has not been answered and will not be answered until Nov 8.

My money’s on Trump.

From today's lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal: [Blah, blah, blah, more blah, endless fucking blah]

Pardon me all to hell, counselor, but I’m not interested in eGOP anti-Trump bullshit. Also, spare me anything from the National Review, the Weekly Standard, Krauthammer, George Will and Stephen Hayes. Fuck them and their cowardly, craven, hair-splitting, self-defeating, self-justifying, pseudo-intellectual fart-fights.

Brando said...

"Are you saying that the Republicans will lose their House majority? You're wrong. It won't happen; it is almost mathematically impossible. "

Emphasis on "almost". The one saving grace for the GOP is that the Dems have a lot of piss poor recruits--they didn't plan on this being such a good year for them.

Some Republicans may want Ryan out as Speaker (or Minority Leader, god forbid) but I think the only reason he could leave that job is voluntarily. No one else really wants it.

TosaGuy said...

Ron Johnson has been gaining support since the Senate left session not long ago and he has returned to the state to campaign.

Feingold has been running around the state for 18 months.

Previous WI presidential elections were much more contested. This one not so much. Will the Dems be able to drag everyone to the polls who don't normally vote in off-year elections because the general voter doesn't see the urgency? Even GOPers who hate Trump and won't vote for him don't want Russ Feingold.

Brando said...

"Pardon me all to hell, counselor, but I’m not interested in eGOP anti-Trump bullshit. Also, spare me anything from the National Review, the Weekly Standard, Krauthammer, George Will and Stephen Hayes. Fuck them and their cowardly, craven, hair-splitting, self-defeating, self-justifying, pseudo-intellectual fart-fights."

Yeah let's listen to a thoughtful, principled man like Sean Hannity. If he could get his nose out of Trump's butt long enough to deliver incoherent rantings into the ether.

Chuck said...

Fabi said...
WikiLeaks was the top-trending story on Twitter earlier today.

Egg McMuffin is the spoiler in Utah at the moment -- we'll see if that holds up.


Hey, Fabi! There you are! I've been looking for you. Did you see your friend "Bad Lieutenant" accused my of welshing on a bet to you? I am presuming that he screwed up and that you never wrote any such thing. Have I got that right? Let's hope that Bad Lieutenant shows up to apologize to both of us.

Here is his post:
Bad Lieutenant said...
Blogger Chuck said...

What the fuck are you even talking about? Be specific. I haven't welshed on any bet.
10/12/16, 3:17 PM

Fabi said he already won a bottle off you. I asked you what it was, what was the bet, and did you pay. No answer, and you answered other points in the post, so I know you read it. You usually don't answer a question when the answer is prejudicial to yourself, so I figured that was what it was, something shameful. Generally speaking you're all hopped up on betting people, so I figure it's a weakness of yours.

So? What about that claim of Fabi's? Perhaps he is lying?

Chuck, as a rule, you'll find you do better to engage with me directly and answer my questions.

Also, above somewhere, you offered people beatdowns. My offer, which I trust you don't need me to repeat, remains open. Funny, for all your getting on Trump for his words, you don't seem to know how to talk like a man.

10/12/16, 4:47 PM

Chuck said...

You stick with Trump, grackle. To the end. The dead end. And when that's all over, in about three weeks, find your own new party.

TosaGuy said...

"I am very fond of voting anti-incumbent, so my vote is against Johnson."

I do think that Johnson has been quite the workhorse in the Senate for a first termer -- in a good-for-Wisconsin issues/constituent services sort of way. He doesn't seem to be co-opted by the DC political machine yet so I am included to vote for him rather than the Feingold, who has having a heroin addict-type withdrawal from losing his key to the Senate dining room.

But after two senate terms I would be quite happy to entertain your argument.

Fabi said...

He must have misread it, Chuck. We only have one open bet (15% black turnout) and no one owes on that one yet.

Original Mike said...

@MadisonMan - One term makes Johnson less of an incumbent than Feingold. Consider the McCain/Feingold incumbent protection law before you vote.

320Busdriver said...

But what kind of new ideas can a retread have?

Feingold didn't have any new or good ideas in 18 years. Why would you vote to put him back where he is certain to damage you?

Achilles said...

Blogger Brando said

"Yeah let's listen to a thoughtful, principled man like Sean Hannity. If he could get his nose out of Trump's butt long enough to deliver incoherent rantings into the ether."

There is almost no diversity of thought in the media. Fox News is the only network with even a few dissenting voices. Everything else is owned and operated for and by the globalists.

And you are most angry about a lonely dissent. You probably want to shut drudge down too. You are sad.

Either way now that trump is speaking the truth about the globalists the revolution has started. We will never serve a government headed by Hillary Clinton.

TosaGuy said...

Has the Gary Johnson in vote been considered in the Johnson race yet?

A Gary Johnson Voter high on weed enters the voting booth and votes to Feel the Johnson. Pauses, gets hungry, eats some doritos from his pocket. Wonders why he is there. Realizes he is there to vote for Johnson.....scans down the ballot and finds Ron Johnson's name and checks the box.

Nigel Tufnel said...

Is voting Johnson & Johnson considered a split ticket?

The strange thing about the Johnsons . . . http://theabsolutemag.com/1262/videos/short-film-the-strange-thing-about-the-johnsons-nsfw/

Chuck said...

Fabi said...
He must have misread it, Chuck. We only have one open bet (15% black turnout) and no one owes on that one yet.


Exactly right. And I said so from the outset. I couldn't imagine your getting it wrong. And I shall pay, if I lose. It is incomprehensible to me; the notion of losing that bet. But I confess that as Trump's reputation as a misogynist and abuser has grown, I thought that he might pick up votes among blacks.

Brando said...

"There is almost no diversity of thought in the media. Fox News is the only network with even a few dissenting voices. Everything else is owned and operated for and by the globalists."

I've no quarrel with Fox News, just Hannity. And my problem isn't that he's a Trump supporter--many Trump supporting writers who I disagree with I can respect. But Hannity is a pathetic unprincipled shill who should embarrass you to even have on your side.

"And you are most angry about a lonely dissent. You probably want to shut drudge down too. You are sad."

Oh, I'm sad all right--sad that our country is stuck choosing between two crooked incompetents, either of whom is likely to make a mess of things. But the country will survive them, so I'm not that sad. As for Drudge, I don't read it and have no opinion on it. But "shutting down" disagreeable media sources is more your hero Trump's thing, not mine.

"Either way now that trump is speaking the truth about the globalists the revolution has started. We will never serve a government headed by Hillary Clinton."

If Trump ever speaks the truth it will be by accident. I don't know what you mean by "never serve" Hillary's government--were you angling for a White House job?

Brando said...

Chuck and Fabi--what's the 15% black vote action? One of you thinks Trump will do better than 15% and the other thinks he'll not get that much?

Also, how will the loser pay up? Donate to the winner's favorite charity?

TosaGuy said...

Is voting Johnson & Johnson considered a split ticket?

My guess is that Gary's vote is split amongst the regular libertarians, anti-Trump GOP and Berners who want nothing to do with HRC but think Jill Stein is a moron. I know several who are normally inclined to vote GOP but Felt the Bern, they will not vote for Russ Feingold.

No true Libertarian will vote for Russ Feingold and neither will the anti-Trump GOP.

Combine that with lack of any enthusiasm for Mrs. Clinton and that is why Ron Johnson has closed the gap.

Meade said...

Original Mike said...
"@MadisonMan - One term makes Johnson less of an incumbent than Feingold. Consider the McCain/Feingold incumbent protection law before you vote."

I'll second Original Mike on that.

Chuck said...

Brando said...
Chuck and Fabi--what's the 15% black vote action? One of you thinks Trump will do better than 15% and the other thinks he'll not get that much?

Also, how will the loser pay up? Donate to the winner's favorite charity?


The bet is for a bottle of something nice. I think it will be easy to settle up; loser phones in his cc# and order to the fine liquor store of the winner's choice. And in a pinch, it could be the terrific store "Barriques" near the Meadhouse and Laurence can pick it up.

The terms of the bet are that Fabi thinks Trump will get better than 15% of the African-American vote. And I don't.

Meade said...

Writing in Evan McMullin is also an option. He's surging in Utah.

TosaGuy said...

Madman,

If he wins, Feingold's senate pension will be based on 24 (or more) years of hanging out in DC, rather than the current 18. He currently draws $50K a year from those 18 years.

Fabi said...

That's correct -- and it's not hard to settle internet bets. I've collected on a few!

Meade said...

@Chuck, Fabi, Brando, et al: the only legal betting in Wisconsin I know of is through Ho-Chunk Gaming. Better do your wagering there as I don't think Mrs. Meade would appreciate her blog being used for any purpose short of legal. Thanks.

Chuck said...

btw, the percentage of Black votes won by Republicans in this century's presidential contests:
Romney '12 - 5%
McCain '08 - 1%
Bush '04 - 7%
Bush '00 - 3%

All numbers per Gallup:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/139880/Election-Polls-Presidential-Vote-Groups.aspx

I suppose Fabi and I ought to agree on a source for the number to settle the bet. I propose Gallup.

grackle said...

Yeah let's listen to a thoughtful, principled man like Sean Hannity. If he could get his nose out of Trump's butt long enough to deliver incoherent rantings into the ether.

Yeah, readers, the eGOP hates Hannity. Why? Because he refuses to participate in the Trump witch hunt. He likes Trump and dislikes Hillary and makes no secret of it. He’s off the plantation and it pisses them off. Troublemakers MUST be punished, banished and demonized.

I just viewed my first Milo Yiannopoulos video yesterday. Why did I wait so long? I love this guy. I may turn gay and see if he’ll marry me or failing that, I could adopt him and leave him all my money.

As a bonus, while listening to him, he clued me in to where I am, politically. I’m Alt-Right.

This Milo is the answer to the Chucks/Ryans/WSJs of the world. Below is just a small taste of what this delightful man has to offer. Do yourself a treat, readers, if you haven’t already.

http://tinyurl.com/hgq2r5u

Brando said...

Neat idea--I have a bet going with a friend where the winner gets taken out for steak. I won in 2012 so we're going double or nothing.

Chuck said...

Okay Fabi; nothing more about this 'til November. I never would have raised it but for the Worst Lieutenant's libel of me, about "welshing."

Brando said...

"Yeah, readers, the eGOP hates Hannity. Why? Because he refuses to participate in the Trump witch hunt. He likes Trump and dislikes Hillary and makes no secret of it. He’s off the plantation and it pisses them off. Troublemakers MUST be punished, banished and demonized."

Whatever you have to tell yourself, Alice. Though "hate" is too strong a word--I save it for murderers and dictators, not media blowhards. And my problem with Hannity pre-dates his Trump shilling. It has more to do with his lack of principles, shameless suckupery, and incoherence. It's like punditry for those who don't like too much logic in their arguments. But if you have to believe it's because I'm part of some establishment and want to protect Hillary, then enjoy your time in Wonderland.

Barry Dauphin said...

Scott Adams Litella: Never mind.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I think Chuck is going to be surprised that if Trump loses his supporters don't all come back groveling and tucking their forelock.

No matter what happens its been shown that the GOPe considers its base to be the CoC and the big banks. The reason people join a coalition is that it provides them some benefits. In the current situation leaving the coalition and finding another that does provide some benefit would seem to be the Trump supporters only rational option.

Nor do I consider it a forgone conclusion that Trump will lose.

Eighty-four percent (84%) now say they are certain how they will vote in this year’s presidential election, and among these voters, Trump posts a 49% to 46% lead over Clinton. Among voters who say they still could change their minds between now and Election Day, it’s Clinton 40%, Trump 37%, Johnson 19% and Stein four percent (4%).

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct13


buwaya said...

Congress does not matter.
Its all for show, a facade.

Angelo Codevilla
After the Republic

http://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpage/after-the-republic/

grackle said...

It seems really risky to empower a President Trump with a same-party Congress, but once he's not a threat, the risk-averse among us should gravitate toward a Republican Congress to put a brake on President Clinton.

Ms. Althouse … I respectfully submit that the Republican Congress can’t find their asses with either hand, much less “put a brake on President Clinton.” Check back later with this after they repeal Obamacare – which will be never if Trump loses.

Fabi said...

I apologize, Meade. I'll get Chuck an email after the election and we'll hush.

Original Mike said...

"Check back later with this after they repeal Obamacare"

I thought they put a repeal bill on Obama's desk. I could be wrong.

hombre said...

Brandon: "...our country is stuck choosing between two crooked incompetents, either of whom is likely to make a mess of things. But the country will survive them...."

Look more closely at the last eight years, particularly at the immigration, refugee and debt policies of the Obama Administration. Add to that the corrupting of federal agencies, the thousands of appointments, particularly judicial appointments, and hires overseen by the President.

The country may survive Hillary, but it will be an unsustainably indebted, terrorist infested, disarmed, one party nation with single-payer healthcare, government-funded abortion on demand and a totally corrupt political class.

With Trump, who knows? And that's the point.

Chuck said...

Ron Winkleheimer:

I expect a couple of things.

1. In 2018, with impeachment clouds gather over the Hillary White House, you'll vote for Republicans in Congress to (hopefully) make that happen.

2. In 2020, with Sen. Tom Cotton running against Sen. Elizabeth Warren, you'll vote for Cotton.

Matt said...

I'm not sure voters are consciously thinking about trying to make sure that their congressman is a Republican in the event that Clinton will win. Voters will primarily be there for either Trump or Clinton.

Bob Ellison said...

Chuck, Hillary has impeachment vaccine like Obama's: she'll be the first female. Can't impeach that.

hombre said...

Brando: I know it's Brando. My predictive text doesn't. Sorry.

eric said...

Blogger Chuck said...
eric said...
Trump would have a chance there too if Ryan hadnt turned tail and run.


Complete nonsense. Didn't you get the memo? Trump is now "unshackled." Before, he was just unhinged. Now he is unshackled. Free, to campaign in the way that Mr. Donald J. Trump thinks is best.

If there really is a broad feeling in the electorate against establishment Republicans, it all ought to help Trump. "If"...

Trump now may be losing in Utah. Utah! Where every Republican has won since about 1100 BC. Where Mike Lee wins handily. Is there a "Paul Ryan" factor in Utah?


The hurt Ryan put on Trump in Wisconsin isn't his withdrawal of endorsement. It's his canceling the event. It demoralizes the base and keeps people at home on voting day.

As you say though, this might end up having the opposite effect. Trump will now be seen as the outsider.

As to Utah, Trump is going to win Utah. If by some long shot chance he doesn't, I think it will be indisputable that #Nevertrump Romney, McMuffin, and other Republicans there actively campaigning against him will be the cause. Not because Utah preferred the Democrat.

But, you seem pretty confident Trump is going to lose Utah, Chuck. How about we place a bet on it? If Trump wins Utah, you don't post on Althouse for a month. If Trump loses, I'll stay away for a month.

buwaya said...

"I expect a couple of things.'

You should expect nothing of the sort. Or rather, you are whistling past the graveyard.

Angelo Codevilla
After the Republic

http://www.claremont.org/crb/basicpage/after-the-republic/

Sums it all up in an excellent piece. Aligns entirely with my entirely independently derived judgement, believe it or not. Great minds think alike.

Chuck said...

Matt said...
I'm not sure voters are consciously thinking about trying to make sure that their congressman is a Republican in the event that Clinton will win. Voters will primarily be there for either Trump or Clinton.


I think that the surprise of this election year will be how well down-ballot Republicans do.

I expect a big turnout among Trump supporters; not enough for Trump to win, but very big. And those folks will not vote for Democrats for Congress.

I also expect an average turnout among Republican women, college-educated Republicans and others, who dislike Trump personally but who will vote for Republicans in Congress.

Achilles said...

"Whatever you have to tell yourself, Alice. Though "hate" is too strong a word--I save it for murderers and dictators, not media blowhards. And my problem with Hannity pre-dates his Trump shilling. It has more to do with his lack of principles, shameless suckupery, and incoherence. It's like punditry for those who don't like too much logic in their arguments. But if you have to believe it's because I'm part of some establishment and want to protect Hillary, then enjoy your time in Wonderland."

This is our problem with you. You don't seem to have any problem with CNNABCNBCCBSNYTUSATODAYMSNBC trashing us. You don't seem to mind obama and the GOPe sending the IRS after the TEA party. There is all sorts of flagellation from you people about trump but Bill can rape women, obama can flash boners at tittering female media bimbos telling people to get down in front, and Hillary can literally sell the government to foreign oligarchs, and you just want the GOP to nominate a nicer guy to lose.

We are tired of being the nice losers and losing because people like you bitch and moan when things get tough.

Curious George said...

"Meade said...
@Chuck, Fabi, Brando, et al: the only legal betting in Wisconsin I know of is through Ho-Chunk Gaming. Better do your wagering there as I don't think Mrs. Meade would appreciate her blog being used for any purpose short of legal. Thanks."

More than that Meade. Potawatamiw here in Milwaukee is the biggest, but there is also gaming in Green Bay and Lac du Flambeau.

Chuck said...

eric said...
...
But, you seem pretty confident Trump is going to lose Utah, Chuck. How about we place a bet on it? If Trump wins Utah, you don't post on Althouse for a month. If Trump loses, I'll stay away for a month.


Nope! I didn't -- and won't -- predict that Trump will lose Utah. I observed that Utah was in play, which is freaking amazing. And a mark of Trump's national weakness. Add Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and North Carolina... and the Trump map looks amazingly shitty. Trump could win Ohio and still lose by 80 electoral votes.

BN said...

"Fuck them and their cowardly, craven, hair-splitting, self-defeating, self-justifying, pseudo-intellectual fart-fights."

Winning them over by insulting them. Dale Carnegie would be so proud.

And the coming purge of the GOP "elite" (where's my Ryan cash?) will put Stalin to shame.

You guys are awesome. Keep up the good work! This election's in the bag with you guys on the internet.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

@Chuck

No, I won't.

If the Republicans and Democrats are both serving shit sandwiches, then my rational response is to find another caterer.

Both major parties are refusing to address the concerns of large portions of the electorate. The rational reaction to that is not to continue to support a party that refuses to address your concerns so that it can defeat another party that also refuses to address your concerns.

The rational thing to do in that case is to seek allies in both parties so that you have a coalition that can swing elections and therefore have another power to force concessions.

What do I care if Hillary appoints a bunch of hard-left justices to the SC? Or that she uses the IRS to harass political enemies, or if the FBI is politicized? As far as I can see, the current SC produces plenty of far-left decisions. And I think the GOPe was perfectly fine with the IRS harassing the Tea Party, when they weren't working to fleece its members.

I think I need to start talking to those steel workers and people in the UAW and in coal country who used to all vote Democrat. Since the plutocrats seem to be determined to have things their way, perhaps its time for some good old-fashioned rabble rousing.

Ken B said...

The only position i have advocated this election is: divided government. Glad to see this result.

tim in vermont said...

I might move to Texas to vote against Cruz in his next Senate race. I hate him that much. Just sayin'

Achilles said...

The down ballot elections are pointless. Period. The congress has done some half hearted investigations but the justice department is controlled by the executive. The media serves the globalists because it is owned by the globalists. Look at every single major media outlet and who owns it.

The presidential election is the only thing that matters. If Hillary wins the rule of law is dead and so is the republic. The republicans will find a way to lose no matter how many there are in congress. The Wikileaks's make this clear.

tim in vermont said...

This time I am voting that next election, the Libertarian, and maybe the Green Party get a spot in the debates. Other than that, my vote is a worthless piece of shit this time around. I won't waste it by voting for one of these two.

Fabi said...

I must have missed the time that Romney carried Colorado and Nevada.

rehajm said...

Check back later with this after they repeal Obamacare – which will be never if Trump loses.

The political battle over Obamacare is over. Obamacare will collapse in an economic heap no later than 2018. The political battle will be over what replaces it.

Achilles said...

Blogger BN said...
"Fuck them and their cowardly, craven, hair-splitting, self-defeating, self-justifying, pseudo-intellectual fart-fights."

"Winning them over by insulting them. Dale Carnegie would be so proud.

And the coming purge of the GOP "elite" (where's my Ryan cash?) will put Stalin to shame."

We don't want to win them over. We are trying to reach out to actual voters that are being screwed by the uniparty. We would be better off without them. We want all of the blue collar workers who used to vote democrat. We want minority's who are being taken advantage of by democrats to join us. Addition by subtraction.

Original Mike said...

"The political battle over Obamacare is over. Obamacare will collapse in an economic heap no later than 2018. The political battle will be over what replaces it."

Which is one big reason Congress matters.

BN said...

"We would be better off without them."

Then stop whining about them.

"Addition by subtraction."

Delusion by wishful thinking.

Achilles said...

Blogger Original Mike said...
"The political battle over Obamacare is over. Obamacare will collapse in an economic heap no later than 2018. The political battle will be over what replaces it."

"Which is one big reason Congress matters."

Joke. If Hillary wins we will be talking about single payer. The GOPe leadership will find 10 republicans who will team up with democrats just like the gang of 8.

The GOPe will cave. Their donors call the shots. Bank on it.

n.n said...

Clinton's is Pro-Choice. She subscribes to the doctrine of guilty until proven innocent. She is a scientific mystic who believes in the fantasy of spontaneous conception, and is an advocate of capital punishment of over one million wholly innocent human lives annually in America alone. She is a class diversitist who judges people by the "color of their skin", not the content of their character. She supports trickle-up poverty through redistributive change and perpetual smoothing functions. She supports selective (i.e. unprincipled) exclusion or constructed congruence ("=") of politically unprofitable orientations and behaviors. The social justice adventurists of leftists historically and today is responsible for the greatest loss of life inside and outside the abortion chambers. She indulges in progressive wars, impulsive regime changes, and immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises, mass exodus). She sacrifices women who impede her political progress.

Ann Althouse said...

"'That's too much game theory, Professor. Most voters don't do gaming.' Not only too much, it's junior high school game theory.',

Huh?? The simpler the idea is, the more likely voters will do it.

I'm trying to explain actual polls.

Original Mike said...

"Joke. If Hillary wins we will be talking about single payer. The GOPe leadership will find 10 republicans who will team up with democrats just like the gang of 8. "

I know you're despondent (so am I), but could you at least try to tether yourself to reality? Obamacare got no Republican votes. Dems had to pull a legislative trick to pass it.

Achilles said...

Blogger BN said...

"Then stop whining about them."

I am Not whining. I am calling them dishonest sniveling cowards who are bought and paid for by the globalists.

"Addition by subtraction."

"Delusion by wishful thinking."

Bye. No more neocons. No more globalists. We will have borders and we will have a party that doesn't look down on the voters.

Unknown said...

Chuck and his GOPe friends don't want my vote. They want to import a Mexican to replace my vote. Just like Hillary.

Can anyone name a policy that Hillary has that the GOPe disagrees with? Anything? They both hate the Tea Party and the Republican base with the white hot fury of a burning sun. Hillary hates middle America, and so does Ryan, Boehner, Chuck here, etc.

--Vance

BN said...

It's always been a R-party goal to get the "working class that used to vote Democrat" to vote Republican. The so-called "Reagan Democrats". But there is a reason why they have "Democrats" in their name, and it starts with "Union". Them not voting for Republicans is why we got Obama. Twice. So don't whine about lack of party unity for your guy, but not for the others.

MadisonMan said...

The GOPe will cave. Their donors call the shots. Bank on it.

Agreed.

I'm not as pessimistic as others are about the future of the Republic. Hope for the best.

buwaya said...

Arm yourselves with knowledge -

" ...these individuals are not what this election is about. "

"...17 hopefuls promised much, without dealing with the primordial fact that, in today’s America, those in power basically do what they please. "

"...presidents have ruled not by enforcing laws but increasingly through agencies that write their own rules, interpret them, and punish unaccountably—the administrative state.'

"...today’s American regime is now what Max Weber had called the Tsarist regime on the eve of the Revolution: “fake constitutionalism.”

"Our imperial regime, already in force, works on a simple principle: the president and the cronies who populate these channels may do whatever they like so long as the bureaucracy obeys and one third plus one of the Senate protects him from impeachment.'

"because the ruling class blurs the distinction between public and private business, connection to that class has become the principal way of getting rich in America. "

"people and practices that had been at society’s margins have been brought to its center, while people and ideas that had been central have been marginalized."

"That logic’s essence ... is this: America’s constitutional republic had given the American people too much latitude to be who they are, that is: religiously and socially reactionary, ignorant, even pathological, barriers to Progress."

"How far will our rulers go? Because their network is mutually supporting, they will go as far as they want. "

"Because it is difficult to imagine a Trump presidency even thinking about something so monumental as replacing an entire ruling elite, much less leading his constituency to accomplishing it, electing Trump is unlikely to result in a forceful turn away from the country’s current direction. Continuing pretty much on the current trajectory under the same class will further fuel revolutionary sentiments in the land all by itself. Inevitable disappointment with Trump is sure to add to them.

We have stepped over the threshold of a revolution. It is difficult to imagine how we might step back, and futile to speculate where it will end. Our ruling class’s malfeasance, combined with insult, brought it about. Donald Trump did not cause it and is by no means its ultimate manifestation. Regardless of who wins in 2016, this revolution’s sentiments will grow in volume and intensity, and are sure to empower politicians likely to make Americans nostalgic for Donald Trump’s moderation."

- Angelo Codevilla

BN said...

"a party that doesn't look down on [OUR] voters"

Fixed it for you.

Except for the Delusion. You just double-downed on that.

Thorley Winston said...

I’m not sure what the “GOPe” have to do with the IRS scandal since the IRS has been controlled by the Obama administration for the last seven years and change but as for the rest – since having a candidate who believes in and can deftly articulate conservative policies and principles is too much to hope for with Trump, it would have been nice to at least have a candidate who could go after Obama and the Clintons for their misdeeds without having to explain that his recorded admissions that he liked to abuse women were just “locker room talk.”

That being said, Hillary Clinton really is so awful that even with the recent recordings (and probably the next batch which we know will be coming) I will still probably vote for Trump or leave the presidential race blank while voting for every Republican down the ticket. If Trump loses (and it’s likely he will), it won’t be because he was betrayed or abandoned by the “establishment” – it will be because he is a terrible candidate who lacks discipline and thought that all he needed was free media coverage to get elected president. I’d still prefer him to Hillary Clinton (just like I’d prefer a glass of spoiled milk to a glass of arsenic) but his campaign is losing because of him.

Speaker Paul Ryan and the others who came out against Trump (or said that they will no longer support or defend him) are doing the correct thing in trying to minimize the collateral damage and I applaud them for doing that.

hombre said...

Original Mike 2016: "I know you're despondent (so am I), but could you at least try to tether yourself to reality? Obamacare got no Republican votes."


New voter 2020: "Republican? What's a Republican?"

Achilles said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"'That's too much game theory, Professor. Most voters don't do gaming.' Not only too much, it's junior high school game theory.',

"Huh?? The simpler the idea is, the more likely voters will do it.

I'm trying to explain actual polls."

The polls for the most part are taken and reported by people who are clearly part of the Clintons campaign. The Wikileaks's show just how in bed they are together.

This explanation is far more explanatory than yours.

Matthew Sablan said...

A Republican Congress will check Clinton even less effectively than they checked President Obama.

She'll get even more pens and phones, I bet.

tim in vermont said...

I always like to say "It's turtles all the way down." Sometimes I like to say that most people can only see a couple or three of the turtles. This is only a second turtle idea. Hillary is gonna win, let's not give her the power she wants because the country hates her as much as they hate Trump. Possibly more.

tim in vermont said...

Bullshit, Obama has been checked, just not 100% shut down.

Clayton Hennesey said...

If Hillary wins instead of Trump, how will the mechanics of Washington be different from the last eight years? Paul Ryan will make more Democrats like Republicans?

Clayton Hennesey said...

That wasn't a rhetorical question. Game it out for us step by step.

BN said...

"Paul Ryan will make more Democrats like Republicans?"

Step 1: Hillary will.

Achilles said...

"Speaker Paul Ryan and the others who came out against Trump (or said that they will no longer support or defend him) are doing the correct thing in trying to minimize the collateral damage and I applaud them for doing that. "

Every single poll shows supermajorities of republicans think they should defend and back the nominee. This is because republican voters want to win and we want things to change.

The GOPe is meant to lose. They are moby's trying to lose. Name the last actually conservative accomplishment of the Republican Party. The list is just as long as the list of hillarys accomplishments.

eric said...

Blogger Chuck said...
eric said...
...
But, you seem pretty confident Trump is going to lose Utah, Chuck. How about we place a bet on it? If Trump wins Utah, you don't post on Althouse for a month. If Trump loses, I'll stay away for a month.


Nope! I didn't -- and won't -- predict that Trump will lose Utah. I observed that Utah was in play, which is freaking amazing. And a mark of Trump's national weakness. Add Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and North Carolina... and the Trump map looks amazingly shitty. Trump could win Ohio and still lose by 80 electoral votes.


This ignores quite a bit.

1) The only reason Utah is in play is because of a spoiler group known as #Nevertrump.

2) Trump could win Nevada and Colorado, two states that Romney lost. Isn't this counting against your argument?

Fact is, we really won't be able to compare until after the election. It's entirely possible Trump won't just lose, but he will lose resoundingly.

But, I don't think anyone has a good idea. The polls are mostly crap. They are only good for telling if things are moving one way or another. When a +5 Hillary poll goes to +10, that gives is an idea Trump had a bad week. Otherwise, I think the polls at this point are more propaganda than truth. And several wikileaks documents showing collusion between pollsters, the Hillary campaign, and media seem to support this.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Brando,

Some Republicans may want Ryan out as Speaker (or Minority Leader, god forbid) but I think the only reason he could leave that job is voluntarily. No one else really wants it.

10/13/16, 2:48 PM


Maybe a nice juicy sex scandal for Mr Crossfit would do the trick. I'd give five bucks for some bimbo to come out first week of November and tell some news about him. Or catch him stealing, that's always possible; this is the US Congress, after all.


Fabi, thanks for the clarification, I guess you were talking about that bottle as if you had already won it. Rest assured, I hope you do.

Chuck, it's funny how mad you get when people draw obvious inferences from your words, or your silence. You could have just answered me in the first place. Some people just gotta be abused, I guess.


All,

Keep hope alive! Trump isn't done yet. If you vote for him, he can win. More to the point,

Hillary can LOOOOOOOOOSE!

She hasn't got this thing wrapped up by half. Tim, and other high-nosed people, you're not voting because you like Trump. You're voting, I hope and pray, to break the power of the Clinton Gang-there's no other word for it-and escape the chains of the media-entertainment complex.

There's so much at stake here. The damage that a President Trump can do is limited. The damage to be done by another President Clinton, and her clique of canaille, is not. Lie later if your social circle demands it, but vote for Trump!

HT said...

"It makes perfect sense to me. The more clear it seems that Clinton will win, the more important it becomes to those who worry about her that she should be offset and balanced by a Republican-led Congress."

Isn't this always the case lately?

Guildofcannonballs said...

People worried about Crooked Hill in the White House don't trust the GOP to do anything to stop anything she voices she may attempt. Sure sure they will pull out the script, put on the costume, and make a show of it, but it doesn't mean dick.

I am voting for Trump but not Glenn in CO.

Also, before anyone gets cocky about Pres. Hill, I'll have you know I donated to Trump a couple of weeks ago.

Shit hit the fan, as it did after my only previous political donations ($10 per) to Guiliani, Cain, and Cruz repercussed.

Now, however, I will donate a second time, something I didn't do for the other candidates.

This will reverse the shit, and it will go back to Hill where it came from and belongs.

HT said...

"And several wikileaks documents showing collusion between pollsters, the Hillary campaign, and media seem to support this."

Who does this serve? If in the end, Trump wins, the pollsters will have lost face and people will be even more skeptical. Is it really in their interest to collude?

Guildofcannonballs said...

"At this point, what legitimacy will she have as the chief executive of the United States whose sworn duty is to protect the constitution and ensure that the laws are faithfully executed? How can any officer of the court or professor of law support someone who is without shame and willing to break the law without remorse?"

She has 50 legitimately dead bodies to scare the shit out of anyone who attempts to think to do other than cheer lead her every whim.

Thorley Winston said...

Every single poll shows supermajorities of republicans think they should defend and back the nominee. This is because republican voters want to win and we want things to change.

I just spent an evening at a meeting of local Republican activists who were putting together a sample ballot as part of the GOTV effort. There was a debate the month before when the ballot was initially approved as to whether to include Donald Trump which passed by one vote.

At the most recent meeting, one of the people who voted in favor of including Donald Trump asked the body to reconsider its earlier decision and the near unanimous decision (one holdout) was to scrap the sample ballot and to give the money to the two legislative candidates who both said that if Trump was included, they did not want their names on the ballot.

The people at the meeting and the two legislative candidates are the people who organize volunteers, man the phones, walk the neighborhoods and parades, pound in the yard signs and do all of the block and tackle work that actually get candidates elected. The people who say that we need to “defend and back” Donald Trump, not so much.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Give me a fucking break. No one actually worried about restraining or constraining the Federal government would vote to put Clinton in the White House.
Oh, don't worry, the watchdog Media will keep her in check and hold her accountable!
Ridiculous.

Fabi said...

It's quite alright, Bad Lieutenant -- with the hundreds of comments per day, I wonder how we remember half the comments we make.

320Busdriver said...

Grandmagrifter Judicial Watch questions just dropped. Stay tuned

Clayton Hennesey said...

At this point, what legitimacy will she have as the chief executive of the United States whose sworn duty is to protect the constitution and ensure that the laws are faithfully executed? How can any officer of the court or professor of law support someone who is without shame and willing to break the law without remorse?

I think you will find more than one local authority citing the Constitution over Hillary. Remember, it doesn't take many grains of sand in a bureaucracy as complex and turgid as our current administrative state to bring things to a halt.

Our federal police are not on Hillary's side.

Chuck said...

Bad Lieutenant:

I missed the part where you said, "I'm sorry, Chuck. I was wrong. I never should have written that you welshed on a bet."

hombre said...

HT wrote: "Who does this serve? If in the end, Trump wins, the pollsters will have lost face and people will be even more skeptical. Is it really in their interest to collude?"

Seriously? Trillions are at stake. If Hillary the Grifter wins, America is the mark. Cheaters never believe they will be caught and Hillary's corrupting of the FBI showed nothing happens when you do get caught, if you are a Clintonista.

buwaya said...

" the pollsters will have lost face"
"people will be even more skeptical"

They will be well compensated for their trouble.
hombre is right.
The stakes are beyond ordinary human conception.
This is the most extensive, highest value system of corruption in human history.

The only bit where hombre is off is that this is already the status quo. You all are the mark, and they are collecting. This is all about preserving the system.

Big Mike said...

I'm not sure where the talk of Democrats taking the House comes from. Looking at RealClearPolitics and Ballotpedia tells me that even if there's a wave election in favor of the Democrats -- and this doesn't feel like that sort of year -- the Republicans will still hold the House. That's what's so surprising about Ryan's apparent lack of spunk. The Republicans are tied for a historic high water mark in the number of Representatives with an (R) after their name. They'd have to lose every race where they're behind or even or ahead but only by single digits, and even then they'd almost certainly still to come to 218, which is a majority (of one). I mean the Republicans have almost never had such an edge in the House and people who pay attention really do feel that it's being squandered.

It looks like the Republicans may hold the Senate as well. The Democrats are going to pick up Illinois and Indiana looks pretty likely to go to Bayh, but it's not beyond belief that they'll hold all the rest of their current seats and pick up Nevada, leaving them with a 53 - 47 edge in the Senate.

As to Feingold, I noticed that he chose to wait six years for the stench of his vote for Obamacare to wear off. Tough luck, Russ -- as your GOP colleagues predicted, Obamacare is falling apart right in front of everyone's eyes.

buwaya said...

"people who pay attention really do feel that it's being squandered."

Well, if it was ever going to be of any use at all, its already been squandered because its of no use now. Barring some true weirdness in the election that throws it into Congress.

Big Mike said...

Looking at RealClearPolitics and Ballotpedia tells me that even if there's a wave election in favor of the Democrats -- and this doesn't feel like that sort of year -- the Republicans will still hold the House.

Let me expand on that. If anything it feels to me that the Republican wave elections of 2010 and 2014 have not finished washing over things. I think the Republicans will lose a few, but could win a few open seats like Arizona 1st and Florida 2nd, which are currently held by Democrats, leaving Ryan with a comfortable margin. Whether he will do anything with it or not is a question.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Wel, it's predictable. She will probably win by a large margin based on the fact that he's an admitted groper and she is not. But to pick up downticket races requires the party leader to be charismatic, which she isn't. These are still the two most hated candidates running in the history of polling, no matter what he did or what she didn't do.

sunsong said...

listen to Michelle Obama on Trump talking about assaulting women!

Rhythm and Balls said...

The country may survive Hillary, but it will be an unsustainably indebted, terrorist infested, disarmed, one party nation with single-payer healthcare, government-funded abortion on demand and a totally corrupt political class.

With Trump, who knows? And that's the point.


That's right, hombre! You tell 'em!

Win one for the groper! You da MAN!

buwaya said...

Win one for your utility bills.
Weird that that one isn't played much. Its one of those really real things, and certain as the sunrise.

Sarah Palin could have campaigned more on the price of gas, and, well, it turns out drill baby drill worked real good.

Michael said...

I rode a lot of airplanes during the 1980s nearly always in first class. First class seats, unlike those in the back, do not have arms that can be moved. To grope someone in a first class seat next to you would be, what's the word?, impossible. That particular woman has fabricated her story. She has concocted a lie to get her 15 minutes.



Michael said...

It would be a good idea for all those whose faith in polls is unshakable to recall the Brexit vote. I don't notice Trump's rallies being empty these last few days.

Hagar said...

I do not know about armrests; some people say that some passenger aircraft had adjustable ones, but what about the stewardesses? All liners certainly had them and they would have been obliged to respond if this woman had raised her voice.
So I do not know about this one.

Achilles said...

@R&B

Don't you think if Hillary loses, Trump cleans out the DOJ and sends a special prosecutor after the DNC machine, that you might have a chance to take over the Democrat party and make it actually serve the democrat voters?

Michael Fitzgerald said...

khesanh0802 said... Many claim that it was a "terrific" R field of candidates, yet there wasn't one (well maybe Cruz) who could touch Trump's appeal. Jeb didn't get past NH, Rubio lost his own state, Kasich's only won his home state. Fiorina?. Carson?... I seriously question whether any one of these "terrific" candidates could have beaten Clinton as so many claim.
10/13/16, 2:11 PM

Hear, hear! It isn't just that fundamentally each of those candidates had shortcomings that would cost them in the general. There wasn't a single candidate with the "star power" to compete with Hillary2016! on the national stage. There wasn't a single one who could have withstood the media assault, save Walker, who didn't want to go through it again on a national scale against the Clintons. Cruz is hated by the GOP and they tried hard to bury him under gossip and slanders in the primarys until he was the only one between Trump and the nomination. Cruz could not have prevailed by winning the support of LIV's. He's homely, his voice is annoying and mockable, he does not have charm or charisma. The only reason Trump is where he is in the race is because he has been a celebrity for nearly 40 years and everyone knows he is charming, cheesy, and slightly sleazy. LIV's are not surprised or shocked at Donald J. Trump, millionaire, talking about pussy or ogling beauty pageant contestants. If only the RNC would put a full-court press on the Clinton campaign, the White House, the FBI and the DOJ regarding their crimes and conspiracies, then you might see a change in the weather.

buwaya said...

Oh the daily examples of madness. One after another. This is the modern system, not just sabotaging everything we do in the private sphere, but sabotaging their own, by some demoniac reflex.

Needless to say, more of the system (Democrats), more of this -

http://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2016/09/21/department-of-justice-wages-war-on-free-education/#7f4cf90e331c
===================================================================================
"UC-Berkeley offers free online courses on several platforms, including iTunes U, YouTube, and edX. It offers massive open online courses (MOOCs) in subjects such as introductory statistics and financial planning."

"Last month, Rebecca Bond of the Department’s Civil Rights Division sent a letter to UC-Berkeley fretting that the free courses were not sufficiently accessible to people with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaints include a lack of captions on some videos for deaf listeners and “insufficient color contrast” in some video lectures which is “difficult for an individual with low vision to discern.”

"The letter demanded that UC-Berkeley retool its online content so that “individuals with vision, hearing, and manual disabilities can acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same services as individuals without disabilities with substantially equivalent ease of use.”

" the letter instructed the school to “pay compensatory damages to aggrieved individuals for injuries caused by UC-Berkeley’s failure to comply with [the ADA]. The letter did not touch upon how, precisely, one can receive a refund for a free service."

"Last week, Berkeley Vice Chancellor for Undergraduate Education Cathy Koshland released a statement on the Department’s letter. She wrote that UC-Berkeley has never received clear regulatory guidance on how to comply with the ADA."

"Her statement implied that the Department’s actions will probably force the school to simply stop offering its content online for free."

====================================================================================

Now, as it happens this sort of service really is a useful, worthwhile and cost-effective government service. One of the very few things that show promise of being a better way of doing things with which some government entities, or government financed entities, at least, are really achieving something. I know for a fact that these things work, in teaching mathematics to diligent students. Even public school teachers use this and especially Khan academy quite a lot (I wonder when DOJ will try shut down Khan or MIT; they must be on the little list).

Anyway, this is not the exceptional case but the normal, everyday, SOP process of this government. The monumental scale of idiocy with which it operates is truly beyond human conception, barring insanity. One is always tempted to fend off the absurd notion (the truth of course) with some rationalization, some explanation - its a mistake, it can be cleared up, its a one off, we can make a deal - but of course, unless there is a great deal of money in it and one knows who to talk to, it is the standard. Much of that corporatist corruption is simply protection money to fend off the mindless amoeba.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Yeah, I guess so Achilles. Clinton's as big a danger to the Democrats as she is to America. Bigger, even. If you think I root for her to win in anything, you're wrong. A loss for her in anything is the DNC's gain. (Although it seems they're just as irredeemable as she and Bill. I hold no hope for them to reform and am placing my efforts with third parties and/or any progressives within the Democrats whom Bernie might have helped. But their fates have sunk fast).

This is bigger than politics. Being a called-out groper with actual, alleged victims - after going on the warpath against the accusation - is an insurmountable obstacle. Rightly so. A crime, so no credibility to his claim that he'd jail Hillary. It now goes to character and criminality versus politics. I should know - I defended him more than anybody on these pages, Democrat, Republican or Pirate Party. No one went as full-bore against indictment in the political imagination and public sphere on idle talk alone more than I did.

But alas, it appears this was not mere exaggeration, or wild licentiousness in a Playboy Mansion atmospherics. This was the real deal, as far as the public has any reason to guess, and he's gone. America's just not going to elect a groper. Or a flasher. Or a kiddie porn fan. Or any of that stuff. Here's where me and the die-hard political observers who can make use of my libertine anti-prudery part ways. If it was non-consensual, then his whole argument against Bill's victimizing of Wiley, Broadrick etc and Hillary's further victimization of them is off the table. Gone. Bye bye.

Sorry. See me in some rally in a year with Jill Stein or some other non-groper taking on the establishment. Read the totally insufferable (but very effective) Glenn Greenwald. Or send donations to the excommunicated hero Julian Assange. Watch his very articulate interviews.

But in the meantime, Trump is not your man. Sorry to say. Hey, I had to witness the kneecapping of Bernie - and there we have all the evidence under the sun that it was actually malicious, coordinated, and still without any whiff of scandal or lawbreaking on his part. These things happen. Live for today, and fight another day. Find a way to keep the pressure up. But Trump can't be the one to do it any more.

Big Mike said...

@R&B, Hillary may will by a comfortable margin, but she will not win a majority.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Well, whatever Big Mike. Either way, she will win.

I'm prepared for her to lose. Or I was. But I hold no illusions that it's any likelier than a chicken devouring a live alligator.

buwaya said...

Oh, to make it clear, it is the DOJ trying to shut down UCBerkeleys online courses.
This is not a new case - this is a general push on all online close-captioned providers going back to last year. It seems they ARE suing MIT, but not yet Khan.

khesanh0802 said...

We've known this all along but Kim Strassel has a good piece in the WSJ about the press burying Clnton's sleaze. Here.

walter said...


Blogger Hagar said...

I do not know about armrests; some people say that some passenger aircraft had adjustable ones, but what about the stewardesses? All liners certainly had them and they would have been obliged to respond if this woman had raised her voice.
So I do not know about this one.
---
Seems like an unlikely setting to assault someone..bunch of eyes and ears to make your trip very uncomfortable and ending in cuffs.
But by all means..let's focus on armrest design.

dreams said...

I don't believe the polls. They were wrong about Brexit and our polls are wrong too but that doesn't mean the crooked Dems won't steal the election. I think the Crooked Dems are working very hard to steal it. And the corrupt liberal media are gaming the polls.

Michael said...

walter

The armrests are just a "tell" a way of outing an obvious lie.

Perhaps more importantly I doubt that Donald Trump flew a single time on a commercial airliner during the 80s. He has had private planes for decades.

rehajm said...

Don't count on the polls for president not picking the winner because Brexit polls were wrong.

khesanh0802 said...

Now that Trump has been cut loose from the congressional races God only knows what we are going to see from him. I know that Clinton is beyond embarrassment and shame, but if she wins I hope the Wikileaks will haunt her every moment. I am convinced there is more to come. Trump needs to keep on flaming her until November 8.

And all you #neverTrumpers, no matter who you decide to vote for - or against - the piece on Johnson shows how critical your down-ballot vote is.

Michael said...

buwaya

They will go after Khan on the premise that he is manufacturing elitists.

n.n said...

Pro-Choice politics... presumed guilty by JournoLists of the Fourth Estate and others in the Church. Off with his head. Late and unsubstantiated claims notwithstanding. The liberal culture exacerbated by the twilight quasi-religion, has really degraded women, men, babies, and reason, too.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Don't count on the polls for president not picking the winner because Brexit polls were wrong."

BTW, is it true that, since the Brexit vote, the pound has dropped to a 168 year low? I read that somewhere but I'm too lazy to check. And, if not 168 years, how low is it.

And, is, literally, destroying the value of your country relative to other countries a good thing, according to DJTers?

Michael K said...

"The people at the meeting and the two legislative candidates are the people who organize volunteers, man the phones, walk the neighborhoods and parades, pound in the yard signs and do all of the block and tackle work that actually get candidates elected."

Why do people get involved in politics, mostly ? I have held a coupe of offices in local government. I got tired of late meetings with blathering idiots. Most of these people I have met are interested in running for higher office or accumulating some sort of power. Look at HOA boards.

I deal with a passive aggressive woman at a job I do part time. She has to be the epitome of the VA bureaucrat.

A lot of local volunteers, not all by all means especially with the Tea Party movement but local committees have tended to be filled with people interested in private agendas. They don't like Trump because he is so different.

To paraphrase Ray in Ghostbusters, Trump expects results.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

So that we don't waste time, I do get that lower currency values can help w/ exports. But, you need to be fully self contained re natural resources because if you need to import any materials for production, you're screwed. And, keep in mind that this currency change is the quickest measure of any potential downside to Brexit. It's the canary. There are also all sorts of capital type stuff and finance stuff that will take longer to unfold/implement as businesses implement changes after they calculate that the soon to be realized British isolation is a problem.

Big Mike said...

@rehajm, when all the polls point in one direction then they must mean something.

@PB&J, the British voters were warned. They felt that there were more important issues than how the pound stacks up against the dollar.

rehajm said...

And, is, literally, destroying the value of your country relative to other countries a good thing, according to DJTers?

I don't know what a DJTer is but I don't recall an equivalency between currency devaluation and 'destroying the value of your country'. A weakened currency makes doing business in your country more attractive. Exports are more attractive, tourism is more attractive, sovereign debt values are reduced, etc. Some sovereigns have been known to encourage a weaker currency.

sunsong said...

"...Not this time. On Sunday, Beth Moore, a popular speaker and Bible study author whose books have been New York Times best-sellers, spoke out about Trump and against these male evangelical leaders, tweeting, “Try to absorb how acceptable the disesteem and objectifying of women has been when some Christian leaders don’t think it’s that big a deal.” Moore, who is very popular in conservative Christian circles, usually refrains from getting involved in politics. But her take reflected an argument breaking out with renewed force among evangelical women—especially younger ones—about whether it’s really possible to support a man who writes off bragging about sexual assault as “locker room talk,” as he did in Sunday night’s debate..."

link

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Ha,

I got there before you rehajm, look up thread.

rehajm said...

@rehajm, when all the polls point in one direction then they must mean something.

Are you referringto the Brexit polls? If they were all pointing on one direction what did it mean?

rehajm said...

There are also all sorts of capital type stuff and finance stuff that will take longer to unfold/implement as businesses implement changes after they calculate that the soon to be realized British isolation is a problem.

Britain will not be 'isolated'.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

By definition it will be a lot more isolated. Bexit did pass, in case you hadn't heard.

n.n said...

They don't like Trump is an understatement. They are are acutely phobic of him. He threatens the status quo, including liberal culture (e.g. intern with "benefits", reproductive prostitution), class diversity (e.g. institutional racism), abortion rites (i.e. the "final solution"), progressive wars including trials by sodomy and abortion, immigration reform (e.g. refugee crises, mass exodus), trickle-up poverty (e.g. redistributive change, progressive debt), scientific mysticism (i.e. liberal departures from the limited scientific domain and conflation of logical domains), female chauvinism (anti-woman, man, and baby, too), Obamacare or health penalty tax, etc., and especially the State-established Pro-Choice Church that has rationalized, indoctrinated, and directed it all. The establishment is mortally threatened by prospects of functional change and positive progress.

Achilles said...

"And, is, literally, destroying the value of your country relative to other countries a good thing, according to DJTers?"

Seriously? Is this the best you have?

The fed has printed a trillion dollars a year during Obamas presidency. That is 6-8% of our GDP depending on the year. Where did all of that money go? The government borrowed 9 trillion dollars in less than 8 years. That is 7-9% of our GDP. Where is that money? We had less than 2% growth. Where did all of that money go?

It went to the only group that did well during Obamas presidency: The .1%. The super wealthy. The globalists.

I would rather we didn't have all that debt and extra printed money. It just made wealthy people wealthier.


rehajm said...

By definition it will be a lot more isolated.

So you're backing off your statement and going with 'more isolated'?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

rehajm,

If you think that point is a winner for you. Ok.

rehajm said...

It's revealing that all the bedwetting over Britain's demise comes exclusively from the left.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

BTW, the last 10, or so, minutes of Louder w/ Crowder has been killin' it, imho.

rehajm said...

If you think that point is a winner for you. Ok

Avoiding 'winning' or 'losing' you haven't really explained how Britain will be 'isolated' or 'more isolated'. Ever heard of a trade agreement? And much of the whole point of leaving the EU in the first place had much to do with the cost and difficulties of compliance with stifling bureaucratic regulation. Economic freedom isn't exactly lacking in benefits...

Hagar said...

I think let us wait a couple of days anyway, and see if Trump has any better comeback than "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
This sudden pile-on is a little much, and none of these women filed complaints at the time, which, according to Megyn Kelly's standard for Bubba's women, immediately disqualifies their charges. Now the women that were outed and brought forward in Bubba's cases were corroborated by statements by their friends who saw and spoke with them at the time. Let us at least see if the NYT legal staff can do the same for Trump's women before we jump onto the pile-on.

If it turns out that their claims are greatly exaggerated, or just exaggerated, I do not know but that R&B might be overly excited about this. It is a Lady Gaga/Beyonce/Miley Cyrus world we live in, and I still do not see many people who actually are much excited about Bubba's escapades anymore - certainly not his more recent ones.

Achilles said...

Blogger PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"By definition it will be a lot more isolated. Bexit did pass, in case you hadn't heard."

Isolated from worthless EU bureaucracy. Isolated from forced Muslim immigration.

I would choose isolated.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Actually, my listening is delay, real time the killin' it was maybe 30 or so minutes ago.

Harold said...

People who are friends or followers of a congresscritter on facebook are likely supporters of said congresscritter. Well, my local Republican congresscritter, who I'm facebook friends with, put up an "I can't endorse Trump post." with all the whiny reasons. Over 5-1 last I checked his friends and followers and by a 5-1 margin former supporters were telling him they were voting for his primary opponent next election, and many in his swing district were going to leave his part of the ballot blank.

When I said last I checked, that was a few days ago. I can no longer check. He deleted the post. Anyone got any theories as to why?

Joe said...

Chuck,

Utah voted for LBJ in 1964.

This year, Utah WAS NOT in play until recently. Trump's support has increased, not decreased, in the past several weeks while Johnson's has eroded.

(A big problem in local Utah politics is that the democrats tend to put up complete loons. I wished Jim Matheson had run for Senator or Governor; maybe next time.)

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

rehajm,

Fine, you think that pro-Brexit was a brilliant decision. I have exactly zero interest in jabbering re why I'm not as certain as you are.

So, congratulations Mr. pro-Brexit genius.

Achilles said...

"I have exactly zero interest in jabbering re why I'm not as certain as you are."

You don't have the ability to discuss anything seriously. You don't have any idea where all the money obama printed and borrowed went. You don't have any idea what borders are for. You avoid any serious discussion of pretty much anything.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Louder w/ Crowder still hasn't had a dull moment. Can it continue?

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Achilles,

It goes w/o saying that I'm a retard relative to your Einstein status.

EMD said...

I have a ton of big D friends on Facebook. They crowed about the tax thing and posted like crazy about the Access Hollywood tape. Haven't heard much from them on these latest allegations, which I find strange.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"Haven't heard much from them on these latest allegations, which I find strange."

I'm surprised they aren't pushing the FLOTUS video from today. For libs the thing was perfect start to finish. Even a lot of full-on cons would be swooning for at least an eighth of it (especially if the words came from a con-cracker, [to override confirmation bias].)

Original Mike said...

"Blogger dreams said..."I don't believe the polls. They were wrong about Brexit and our polls are wrong too but that doesn't mean the crooked Dems won't steal the election. I think the Crooked Dems are working very hard to steal it. And the corrupt liberal media are gaming the polls."

Yeah. The candidate didn't stink. They stole it. Let's go with that.

Big Mike said...

@rehajm, good question. The conventional answer -- and possibly the right one -- is that polls don't do a good job of measuring enthusiasm. To be sure, there are people who are enthusiastic about Hillary Clinton, however I think that there are more people who are enthusiastic about Donald Trump and there are a lot of people who are unbelievably enthusiastic about voting against Hillary. That includes gun owners, people like me who are deeply offended about that family's casual attitude towards the law, and people who want work, can't get work, and think a woman who brags about killing coal mining jobs in Appalachia isn't their idea of an ideal job-creating president.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

I'd like to buy a white tie. I want to run an experiment to see if folks will get that I'm latching on the Bone train. If there's not recognition expressed, I'll jump the experiment by adding a red sweater.

At that point only dopes won't get it.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Not that there's anything wrong w/ being a dope.

EMD said...

"At that point only dopes won't get it."

You need the stache to clinch it.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

True that.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Bullshit, Obama has been checked, just not 100% shut down."

-- And it is my belief that Clinton will be checked even less.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

Matt S.

Have you considered a new photo where you're sitting on that rock while wearing a red sweater and a white tie?

Add to that not being a dude who is a dick and it seems like most of America will look to you as a breath of fresh air and hope juxtaposed to our current election cycle.

Michael said...

I can't be the only one who made a decent amount on Brexit in a very short time. The handwringing and whinging was a signal to buy into the financial sector which collapsed and then, voila!, rebounded. I was in and out in no time.

As to the current value of the GBP it is in the range of 1.22 to 1 a really excellent opportunity to buy high end English shirts at a great price: assuming you can find one that sells in GBP and doesnt stick to the ridiculous US price as does Turnbull.

The boys in the City were panicked at first but that has calmed down. The island will survive. Thrive I predict

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"The island will survive. Thrive I predict"

Put your money where your mouth is. Buy property there.

If you don't do that. STFU.

walter said...

Blogger EMD said...
Haven't heard much from them on these latest allegations, which I find strange.
--Same here..though a few folks posted about Trump calling for people to vote on the 28th. One thought that indicated early dementia. These were all young Madison area women. I guess Hil's many memory gaps don't register the same.

PBandJ_Ombudsman said...

"These were all young Madison area women"

Are they pieces of ass?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 298   Newer› Newest»