"But what I cannot and will not accept is the way this man goes after entire groups of Americans. His comments about the way he feels entitled to grope women are deeply disturbing — but he says it's just 'locker room talk.' When pressed on Sunday night, he doubled down on his excuses and refused to admit he'd done anything wrong."
Says Hillary Clinton in email I received this morning. She's hitting me up for a contribution. (I never contribute to any candidate.) She says "He's shown us again and again how deeply unfit he is to be president. I'm absolutely unwilling to take even the smallest chance that he might win — are you?" That's a good pitch.
Anyway, I disagree with the statement that Trump, at Sunday's debate, "refused to admit he'd done anything wrong." I don't even accept that he said "it's just 'locker room talk.'" He said it "was locker room talk," but not that it was just locker room talk. He also said that he was "not proud of it" and that he "very embarrassed by it" and "I hate it." He also apologized — to his family and to the American people. And he segued to saying ISIS is way worse and, later in the debate, what Bill Clinton did to women was "far worse." To say something else is worse is inherently to say that something is bad. To apologize is to say that what you did was wrong. And to say you are "not proud" of something is to say it was wrong. So even though he began by calling his remark "locker room talk," he didn't stop there.
I know that many of his defenders do stop there. That hurts him. Helps him with hardcore fans, but they're not enough to win, and they drag him down. I think he fought hard for his cause on Sunday night, and he did about as well as he could, but he doesn't have supporters of a kind that could detoxify him. Without middle-of-the-roaders capable of conceiving of embracing him, he's getting smeared up stinkily by those who love him best.
He imagined himself as the star who "can do anything": "They let you do it.... Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything." Now, he's even more famous, and he's toxic — so repellent that Hillary can raise money off the fear of "even the smallest chance that he might win."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
413 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 413 Newer› Newest»AprilApple: "If Trump wants to turn it around, he's welcome to do so. I'll be the first to congratulate him. We are running out of time"
A couple observations:
1) "I'll be first to congratulate him." Congratulations and support only matter during the battle.
2) "We are running out of time." What do you mean by "we"?
Laura has nothing new to contribute.
"The day after a strong debate performance by your party’s nominee, you decided not to celebrate it, but to dismiss and distract from it. You called your friends in the press and told them about “the coming GOP stampede” away from Trump. If you succeed in helping Democrats elect Hillary Clinton, you — not he — will be held responsible for losing the Supreme Court and busting up the Republican Party."
Yeah- that's fresh.
The blame for Trump's loss lands on Trump. and ONLY TRUMP.
AprilApple: "Laura Ingrham thought Trump did well in the second debate?
uh -that's some major koolaid drinking right there."
If you really put your mind to it you might be able to blast every single Trump supporter in the US before dawn all the while studiously ignoring Hillary.
Almost as if you were a "lifelong republican" or something.
AprilApple: "Laura has nothing new to contribute."
Well, if 'newness' is the criteria for offering contributions, you might as well stop right now yourself.
We = the American people who are depending on Trump not to fuck up - so WE are not forced to live with that horrid shrew - ruining our lives while she stuffs her pockets.
WE.
"Stabbed in the back" = what Trump is doing to us.
AprilApple: "We = the American people who are depending on Trump not to fuck up - so WE are not forced to live with that horrid shrew - ruining our lives while she stuffs her pockets."
Oh, that's powerful alright.
While spewing that you might try to work in some sustained criticism of Hillary. That is, if you can spare the pixels and in your downtime from attacking republicans who are actually fighting the battle against Hillary and the left.
Drago,
When things cost less, it takes less dough to buy them.
AprilApple: "Stabbed in the back" = what Trump is doing to us."
Yes, "stabbed in the back"
You poor thing you. Trump wins nomination, AprilApple hardest hit!!
Only Hillary can save you now....
PBandJ_Ombudsman: "Drago, When things cost less, it takes less dough to buy them."
Things don't cost less, they cost more, slowly, for now, until they explode on top of extraordinarily increased debt.
You can go back to your remedial studies class now.
@Drago said...
gadfly: "In Austin, Texas, the Travis County GOP Chaimnan hoisted a sign tha that said "Trump is a Child Rapist" and issued the following press release:"
If the dems are pulling that one out it can only mean one thing: there must be some very big news involving Bill with Epstein that the dems must project onto Trump.
This is one of the oldest leftist/clintonian tactics which was in perpetual effect during the 90's.
Ah, Drago, a GOP County Chairman is never a Democrat and never ever leftist. Your response is typical of a Trump Troll. Whatever Trump says is considered to be factual and sometimes visionary but whatever is said about Trump that is negative is always a lie. So consider this Trump quote.
Trump on Jeffrey Epstein: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Then there is the famous quote from Maya Angelou to help you through this conundrum: “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
@AA
McCain was ahead in the polls until the economy tanked and McCain declared he had no idea how to correct the situation. That was when the polls started going down. Then the losers he had assembled to run his campaign began working against his own VP pick. Another Republican circular firing squad. Note that since the campaign Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt have made their careers as tv talking heads. They are only hired because they identify as Republicans while happily trashing any Republican running for office. Republicans attacking their own is the pattern - not unique to this election. As a voter I am tired of it. At least Democrats want to win, Republicans seem to prefer losing.
gadfly: "Your response is typical of a Trump Troll"
Except I was/am a Cruz supporter. But you gotta go with what fits your narrative one supposes.
gadfly: "Ah, Drago, a GOP County Chairman is never a Democrat and never ever leftist."
As someone who worked in Austin on the republican side I can assure you that assertion is quite false, and hilariously so.
If you really put your mind to it you might be able to blast every single Trump supporter in the US before dawn all the while studiously ignoring Hillary.
It's interesting to see the Trump haters feeding on this stuff,
Note that since the campaign Nicole Wallace and Steve Schmidt have made their careers as tv talking heads.
They aren't the only ones feeding off GOP losses. Maybe trying not to lose would help.
At least Democrats want to win, Republicans seem to prefer losing.
I agree.
Drago,
It did not go unnoticed that you could not deny that things costing less means that they cost less.
And of course, Michael Bloomberg could never be a democrat or a leftist! Look, he ran as a republican!!
The science is settled!!
The best part: "Travis County GOP Chairman". Think of Travis County as the upper west side of Manhattan.
CC -
McCain was perhaps slightly ahead or tied with Obama. True. I have to hand it to McCain for doing as well as he did, considering the insurmountable circumstances.
Young smooth black dude trumps - anyone.
If Steve Schmidt is the guy I think you are talking about, I agree - he's a douche bag.
Dems are loyal. R's are not loyal. True.
This is a unique election. Trump has higher negatives than Clinton and that's been the case since day one. I have my own theories about the guy - I don't think he really wants to win, which is why he won't make a real effort. But I could be wrong. He could just suck.
PBandJ_Ombudsman: "Drago, It did not go unnoticed that you could not deny that things costing less means that they cost less."
It does not go unnoticed that you cannot grasp that things do not "cost less" but at this point in time only cost a bit more as the true weight of the debt takes greater hold of our economic futures and will have to be dealt with at some point.
But go ahead and keep pretending things "cost less". You could combine that one with believing Venezuela is another Peoples Paradise success story!
Take life by the *meow*.
God, people really are talking about the Republicans losing the House now. I need to get a drink and go sit by the lake.
Yes, they are, but it seems nonsensical to me. Are people deciding that since they don't like Trump, they won't vote for any Republican down ticket even a Congressman they've supported in the past? Are people deciding they now like Hillary so much they want to give her carte blanche by delivering a Democratic Congress? Have Republicans decided to stay home in droves while Democrats have become so excited about Hillary they'll turn out in numbers comparable to 2008? Are disaffected Republicans so pissed at the GOP, they're willing to sell out the country just to get back at them?
I have little doubt Clinton will win this election. But coattails? Not buying that.
AprilApple: "CC - McCain was perhaps slightly ahead or tied with Obama. True. I have to hand it to McCain for doing as well as he did, considering the insurmountable circumstances"
He lost in a wonderful gentlemanly fashion. Of course, that was after spending an entire political career attacking conservatives and being feted by the Chris Mathews of the world.
Oh how we long for the days of the Gentleman Republican Loser who can make us feel good about the policies the left rams down our throats!
Ms. Althouse says: "I know that many of his defenders do stop there. That hurts him. Helps him with hardcore fans, but they're not enough to win, and they drag him down. ...he doesn't have supporters of a kind that could detoxify him. Without middle-of-the-roaders capable of conceiving of embracing him, he's getting smeared up stinkily by those who love him best.
What she is really saying:
...many of his defenders [say around half?; no, make that 25%] ...drag him down...he doesn't have supporters of a kind that could detoxify him...he's getting smeared up stinkily [ these word selections speak for themselves] by those who love him best.[ yes, we know, the deplorable, irredeemables.]
I would say that this post by Ms. Althouse demonstrates that the folks maintaining the mailing list of potential donors to Hillary are doing a good job.
Insofar as it being possible for anyone to be able to do what Ms. Alhouse terms "detoxify" Trump to her liking? She has ridiculed her profession by finding Trump guilty of sexual assault based on his statement. You are not going to overcome that kind of prejudice. I quote her own post (quoting Trump's statement): "They let you do it...." The very definition of consensual sex between adults.
Just to make certain of my thoughts, I looked for the most biased, feminist source I could find (other than perhaps Ms. Alhouse) and found:
http://everydayfeminism.com/2012/11/consensual-sex-and-rape/
********8
The author says: "The bottom line between consensual sex and rape is this – both parties should actively want to have sex and express their willingness to participate to each other... How to know it’s consensual:
Look for visual clues – Does the other person seem excited or happy? Are they smiling? Or do they seem scared or unsure?
Check body language – Is the other person seem to be in a positive mood or have high-energy? Or do they seem tense and uncomfortable?
********
Now imagine Trump just after uttering his statement being together with a female of the type he is describing. Imagining a realistic female: Is she excited or happy? Does she seem to be in a positive mood or to have high energy? How about tense and uncomfortable - does that fit?
I submit that, using the most biased definition I could find, I find Trump Not Guilty. Well..I guess that's just me.
Yes, I know that one can project one's bias on Trump and envision him taking advantage of insecure, frightened, outwardly confident, but inwardly timid, poor, desperate girls who really, really need their job, etc., etc. etc.
Take a man like Bill Clinton and you get perhaps a different conclusion, but that's based on some pretty damning evidence. What, again, is the similar evidence against Trump?
But I have to agree with Ms. Alhouse: "... he doesn't have supporters of a kind that could detoxify him." Can you imagine what kind of Trump supporter it would take and what they would have to write to "detoxify" Trump in her mind?
Reagan was behind carter in every poll in October.
The 2 people who produced the WSJ/NBC poll are directly employed by Hillary Clinton.
Democrats get more political donations than republicans. Period.
The press is unabashedly biased.
Sometimes the deck is stacked against you. But nobody likes that jackass who sits in the back and drags everyone down. We have a name for them: Blue Falcons. Look it up.
Geeez. I don't want to lose. that's why Trump was my 16th choice.
Drago,
Record low inflation does result in things costing less than they would w/o record low inflation. That's what record low inflation means. Your trying to deny math doesn't make math not true.
Achilles- you really are misinformed - or perhaps a giant dolt.
Reagan was ahead in all the polls starting in July and August.
Look it UP.
"God, people really are talking about the Republicans losing the House now. I need to get a drink and go sit by the lake."
SukieTawdry: "Yes, they are, but it seems nonsensical to me"
Because it is nonsensical. Completely.
However, the lefty Journolist-politico-entertainment industry types have determined that now might be a good time for a full on offensive to drive Republican morale into the tank in order to secure the election.
Poor Original Mike was overcome by such talk and is now sulking in the corner.
How deluded do you have to be to think that Trump is not making a real effort! Have you seen his campaign schedule?
PBandJ_Ombudsman: "Drago, Record low inflation does result in things costing less than they would w/o record low inflation."
PB&J, "Record low inflation" still means "inflation", which is things costing more than they used to.
Plus, the "record low inflation" is joined with record debt which will have to be paid off at some point by somebody. And that somebody is never "the government". It's you.
I'm sorry if these concepts are beyond your comprehension.
AprilApple: "Achilles- you really are misinformed - or perhaps a giant dolt. Reagan was ahead in all the polls starting in July and August. Look it UP."
And the point is what again?
GAdfly
Trump on Jeffrey Epstein: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”
Then there is the famous quote from Maya Angelou to help you through this conundrum: “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”
wow. This is why people want to exit.
Jeff Epstein is the pervert island guy, right?
Fabi: "How deluded do you have to be to think that Trump is not making a real effort! Have you seen his campaign schedule?"
Shhhhh.
Please stop interrupting AprilApple as she fights Hillary by attacking radio talk show hosts who support Trump.
#logic
Blogger AprilApple said...
"Stabbed in the back" = what Trump is doing to us."
Seriously if there is anything difficult and there are other people who may have to count on you warn them before you start that you are a weak link and you will turn into a little bitchy whiner at the first opportunity. I hated having losers like you on my team in the army.
Drago,
The whole point was about inflation being record low during the BHO administration. Did you even read what I wrote?
As to your speculation re the future: all sorts of folks have all sorts of speculation. For example, I can speculate that our total debt is still manageable, if it didn't keep growing as our economy grows, which is why it's a good thing to see that HRC was interested in Simpson-Bowles and she pays for her new spending plans w/ taxes, and it's a bad thing that DJT wants to add more than $5 billion above the baseline debt growth and he suggested reneging on US debt obligations.
It's almost as if gadfly and AprilApple are coordinating their messages with each other.
It's almost as if it's the same person posting on multiple accounts.
Nah.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-clinton-digital-trolling-20160506-snap-htmlstory.html
Oh how we long for the days of the Gentleman Republican Loser who can make us feel good about the policies the left rams down our throats!
10/11/16, 6:34 PM
Well not quite Drago.
The next act in the oft repeated drama is getting post-election emails from the likes of Paul Ryan and NR telling us "WE HAVE TO STOP THE LEFTIST DEMOCRAT AGENDA!!" Send money now!
What I said:
Blogger Achilles said...
"Reagan was behind carter in every poll in October."
vs:
Blogger AprilApple said...
"Achilles- you really are misinformed - or perhaps a giant dolt.
Reagan was ahead in all the polls starting in July and August.
Look it UP."
Nobody likes a little loser. Especially ones that don't try to read.
It's like shoving toothpaste back into the tube with the virtue signaling #NeverTrumpers, Drago! I like how the light reflects from their halos.
PBandJ_Ombudsman: "Drago, The whole point was about inflation being record low during the BHO administration. Did you even read what I wrote?"
You said record low inflation means things cost less which is hilariously false.
Later you amended your obviously moronic statement to include "than they would w/o record low inflation."
You then spend a bit of time altering the trajectory of the debt conversation from the reality of debt having to be paid back at some point to whether or not it is, in someone's opinion, "manageable".
But hey, as long as Hillary was able to collect $2B in her pay for play schemes, it's all good.
Fabi: "It's like shoving toothpaste back into the tube with the virtue signaling #NeverTrumpers, Drago! I like how the light reflects from their halos."
It's really just about the camera angles, similar to all those mag covers of obambi.
exiledonmainstreet: "Well not quite Drago.
The next act in the oft repeated drama is getting post-election emails from the likes of Paul Ryan and NR telling us "WE HAVE TO STOP THE LEFTIST DEMOCRAT AGENDA!!" Send money now"
Quite so.
And even that becomes "failure theater", as Ace of Spades so eloquently puts it.
Blogger PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
"Drago,
The whole point was about inflation being record low during the BHO administration. Did you even read what I wrote?"
Because they took energy and food out. You are spouting a manipulated and useless statistic unless you are going for propaganda.
Obama has printed or borrowed 12-15% of our GDP.
We have less than 2% growth during his terms.
You are laughably stupid.
Drago - please. The coordinated message that Trump sucks does not need coordinating.
It just be.
btw- I'm voting for him. I refuse to worship him and I refuse to pretend everything is roses.
I am sure that the next time around the Washington Generals will beat the Harlem Globetrotters.
There's only one insidious guy who is spreading lies about Trump!
I have many names, and Soros pays me well. I haven't actually received the check yet - but I've been assured it's in the mail!
It's me! It's me!
AprilApple: "There's only one insidious guy who is spreading lies about Trump!
I have many names, and Soros pays me well. I haven't actually received the check yet - but I've been assured it's in the mail!
It's me! It's me!"
LOL
No it's not you. But you might consider spending at least 25% of your valuable "fearful of what Hillary will do!" time actually attacking....Hillary.
According to Wikipedia
October/ November polls in 1980 were
Reagan/Carter 40/44 39/45 47/44
The final result 51 -41.
So a mid October poll had Reagan losing by 6 points and he won by 10.
AprilApple: "Drago - please. The coordinated message that Trump sucks does not need coordinating."
LOL
Well there sure is a lot of coordination going on for no coordination being needed!
http://drudgereport.com/
AprilApple: "btw- I'm voting for him. I refuse to worship him and I refuse to pretend everything is roses."
Oh, because that is the choice:
1) Vote for Trump and complain every step of the way about Trump and his supporters
or
2) Worship him and pretend everything is roses
Gee, if only there was middle ground in there somewhere. But there must not be because AprilApple is not one who likes Trump and we have been assured that the "I don't like Trump" folks are the ones with their heads on straight and have to be right.
So who believes the polls are really that off - 16 point change in 2/3 weeks. Or is the polling BS and used to try and influence rather than reflect election.
Drago,
Anyone can read my actual comments rather than your non-quote version.
Speaking of quotes here are your words that stuck you in the hole you find yourself: "how this lower inflation fueled by deficit spending and continuous priming of the pump has made "less GDP go further"."
So here's the problem, the one time you meant to quote me, you screwed up, here's what I actually wrote:
"It does make less GDP growth go further, that's math."
It seems like somewhere along the way you realized that you screwed up, and now you figure that you'll keep hitting the straw man button on your keyboard instead of admitting your error.
I've spent a ton of time over the years attacking the she-Chavez.
She's pure evil.
ARM,
But thats the problem - OECD countries have a high and low tier as far as labor participation rate (or total population employment rate, just to clear away questions of varying definitions of unemployment). There is quite a difference between the high and low tier. This is why I pulled data for France.
The US used to be above the highest, and has now fallen, it seems permanently, into the middle. And we await the next downturn to see where this goes next.
As for % employed in the public sector, you are picking and choosing. Vs the US at 14.6, lets take the big ones, Germany at 15.4 and Japan at 7.9 - I think I'm using the same Wiki with ILO data. And, for what its worth, I don't see that this matters very much. These high public employment countries are those with national health services or other large sectors nationalized. Countries with lower employment ratios as the US also have, many of them, higher public employment proportions, like France, Spain, and Italy. As they also have extensive maternity benefits and etc.
And note, pre-2000 they DIDN'T have the employment ratio of the US; Pre-2008 they had the SAME employment ratio as the US. Whatever counter-factors you want to cite also apply in previous periods, these are not new.
The difference in total employment rates is post-2008. The US fell into a lower category.
It would help if you checked your own argument against the available data, and figured out for yourself if your hypothesis fits.
Cacimbo Cacimbo: "So who believes the polls are really that off - 16 point change in 2/3 weeks. Or is the polling BS and used to try and influence rather than reflect election."
The polls are way off but Clinton, as the dem, has structural advantages (that only someone rational and nice like JEB! could have overcome!!...sorry, channeling AprilApple) which puts her in the lead.
Obama won reelection comfortably and unless the republican can draw out voters who haven't voted much in past election (and there are a lot of them) the republican will lose.
This is why any talk about any other Republican being in a better position vs Clinton is nonsense. Any R would be destroyed in the press and none of them had/have the wherewithal to draw in new voters.
In this sense, crazy as it seems, only Trump could possible pull it off. But then again, it's pretty clear that we are reaching Latin American levels of political corruption so even if Hillary is in trouble it will be extraordinarily difficult to beat her given the "magical vote machines" that will turn out the vote (alive or otherwise) in Cuyahoga County (OH), Philadelphia, Charlotte, West Palm, etc.
PBandJ_Ombudsman: "Drago, Anyone can read my actual comments rather than your non-quote version."
I don't blame you for playing that game.
I used your quotes. By posting that you are hoping no one will have read upstream.
Classic troll tactic.
But hey, $19.6 Trillion in debt.
What's the big deal?
It's "manageable".
The real crime is Hillary was only able to garner $2B in payoffs for US policies and gov't decisions.
She deserves at least $5B more and the Presidency would be just the way to do it. Lot's of Rodhams need a payday.
We can't let Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castros families be the only ones to cash in!
So a mid October poll had Reagan losing by 6 points and he won by 10.
This.
Trump may win or Trump may lose, but we won't be able to predict it from current polls, particularly given the Shy Trump Voter Effect and particularly given the Betrayed Bernie Voter Effect. Plus, the more the Democrats and media succeed at spinning to facts on the ground negatively against Trump, the more they simply fool their own voters and make them more complacent and comfortable that Hillary can win without them.
OTOH, the voters who forcibly threw over all of Trump's primary competitors are neither likely to become complacent nor easily demoralized, and they already know what they're going to do if Trump loses, the most benign being stomping out the last vestiges of Ryanism.
I have no idea how this will turn out, but I do know that even the most impersonal of polling data is spongy and contains at least a double margin of error. Plus, I feel extremely confident that news organizations that feel comfortable lying outright about what Trump says and does do so precisely because they don't feel confident at all with what they think they know about Trump's true chances of winning.
So my best guess at this point is to take the RCP polls and averages and change the margin of error to 10%. If Trump gets outside that, he probably will lose. Short of that, no one really has an informed clue.
She's pure evil.
10/11/16, 7:08 PM
Yes, she is April. But on an earlier thread about the debate, you said "America will debate her."
How, exactly, does "America" debate her? America can't stand on a stage and face her - only a human can do that. And the very flawed and unfortunately not very eloquent human on stage the other night was the one who won the nomination. I voted for Cruz, not Trump. My vote was overruled and I accepted it. The GOP establishment did not and is now treacherously working to ensure his defeat. They like the system just the way it is.
We can't reanimate Reagan and send him out there. And to demand that he resign is to circumvent the wishes and votes of millions of people who wanted him to be the nominee. I doubt we are going to win with Trump. I know we will not win without him.
If we had the opportunity to debate her, we would demolish her. I read the most excellent rebuttals and take downs of her, and I think - wow why Isn't Trump saying this stuff? He could demolish her.
That;s all. I'm not being literal here. Look at the first town hall with Matt Lauer. When actual ordinary Americans asked her questions - they were tough.
Trump is not strong in a debate Setting. If he cannot call the GOP names, he is totally lost.
gotta go
James O'Keefe just put out a new video. A NYC election commissioner admits to election fraud in minority neighborhoods:
http://hotair.com/archives/2016/10/11/wow-nyc-election-official-claims-voter-fraud-minority-neighborhoods-new-james-okeefe-video/
You know, the election fraud we are constantly being told is imaginary and an excuse to keep poor minorities, people who never have to produce ID to get beer or cigs or medical care, from exercising their Constitutional rights.
And this is in a deep blue city in a blue state. Just imagine what is going on right now in battleground states.
But by all means, let's continue to talk about how Trump said pussy.
Clayton: "I have no idea how this will turn out, but I do know that even the most impersonal of polling data is spongy and contains at least a double margin of error. Plus, I feel extremely confident that news organizations that feel comfortable lying outright about what Trump says and does do so precisely because they don't feel confident at all with what they think they know about Trump's true chances of winning."
exiledonmainstreet: "I voted for Cruz, not Trump. My vote was overruled and I accepted it. The GOP establishment did not and is now treacherously working to ensure his defeat. They like the system just the way it is.
We can't reanimate Reagan and send him out there. And to demand that he resign is to circumvent the wishes and votes of millions of people who wanted him to be the nominee. I doubt we are going to win with Trump. I know we will not win without him."
These two sum it up nicely.
Drago,
The opposite is true. The trick is only to force a review of the record all the way through the thread looking for the point where I pulled your misquote.
And, according to math, it is 100% true that up to a certain amount of debt, and w/ a growing economy, it is ok to maintain a particular level of debt. I know it's better to have it reduced, especially because it makes it easier to deal w/ potential emergencies in the near term before the ratio to GDP starts to get noticeably better. But, math is math.
To remind you what of I wrote so you don't need to fake-paraphrase:
"For example, I can speculate that our total debt is still manageable, if it didn't keep growing as our economy grows"
"But hey, $19.6 Trillion in debt. "
This is a pointless number. The economy is never going to be the same. That debt will never be paid back.
There are going to be massive dislocations in the very near future. During the next presidents 2 terms 10 million truck drivers will be out of a job. Fast Food will automate. Starbucks will have the choice to not have employees.
The only question will be how we meet this reality. Will we let the market direct itself or will we have the same aristocracy that made the VA a living hell in charge?
Drago,
BTW, did you say that you do support DJT's plan that increases the baseline debt increases by $5 trillion?
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/22/trump-plans-would-increase-debt-26-times-more-than-hillary-clinton-crfb-study-says.html
PB&J,
Real per capita GDP is the measure of choice.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG?end=2015&locations=US&start=1961
Note the US record of recession and recovery, and the US performance since 2008.
And to say you are "not proud" of something is to say it was wrong.
Not true.
It's only true if you require societal approval for your cues on morality and have no independent sense of ethics and integrity. But social morals can go horribly wrong. See Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia for details, among many, many, many, many others.
And as for embarrassment, maybe if you had girlfriends you could let us know the things you tell each other in the bathroom that women commonly retreat to in order to talk about things that they don't want their male company of the evening to hear. Katrina Pierson's said some pretty unapologetically ridiculous things - almost as unapologetically ridiculous as Trump has said. And yet, it didn't seem that even Megyn Kelly could disagree with her on that.
buwaya,
I was referencing capita GDP yesterday, linking to that exact data source.
So, I do get it.
And, as I noted in this thread, it is worth noting that having record low inflation does mean that it's easier for folks to live w/ lower increases in GDP. That's math.
buwaya said...
OECD countries have a high and low tier as far as labor participation rate. There is quite a difference between the high and low tier.
No. There are no 'tiers'. It is a continuous data set.
The US used to be above the highest, and has now fallen, it seems permanently, into the middle.
In part because the US doesn't use government jobs as 'workfare', as a general principle.
As for % employed in the public sector, you are picking and choosing.
You are picking and choosing. In fact most of the countries above the US in terms of labor participation rate also have much higher rates of government employment, even one of your two cherry picked examples does and the other is not a western economy or anything anyone would want to emulate. What has been unusual since the Great Recession has been the fact that government employment in the US has fallen.
Countries with lower employment ratios as the US also have, many of them, higher public employment proportions, like France, Spain, and Italy. As they also have extensive maternity benefits and etc.
Obviously there are multiple factors but you can't simply ignore a major factor that contributes to the relatively modest changes in this ratio.
Pre-2008 they had the SAME employment ratio as the US. Whatever counter-factors you want to cite also apply in previous periods, these are not new.
No, the decline in government employment in the US is relatively unique, both historically in the US and almost unheard of in other countries.
It would help if you checked your own argument against the available data, and figured out for yourself if your hypothesis fits.
You don't really have a hypothesis, just 'feelings'. No, the world is not falling apart. No, the US is not falling apart. No, armageddon is not upon us. Feelings such as these could have been partially justified was back in 2007-8. The US is doing remarkably better now.
Based on personal negatives, no major-party candidate in the history of presidential polling is more disliked than Hillary Clinton. Excluding Trump, that is.
Remember the work of the political science professor Althouse highlighted months ago? The gentleman ran a presidential forecast model that said that since political parties almost always lose after a two-term president and given Trump's early primary victories, if Trump got the nomination, he was 97% certain to be the president. At the time I wrote about the flaws of that analysis, but you cannot deny that Trump has had great advantages.
The economy is mediocre, right-track numbers are flirting with historical lows, parties rarely retain the presidency after a two-term president, Republicans have been making gains in the House, Senate and at the state level, and to top it all off Hillary is a uniquely disliked and unrelateable political figure. This is the historic opportunity that will have been squandered by the Trump revolutionaries.
They will blame the media. Never mind that Trump was sold by the same group as a media maestro. They will blame the GOPe. Never mind that the GOPe is supposed to be a bunch of easily whipped pushovers. It's always someone else's fault. That could be the personal credo of the Trump true-believer. It's someone else's fault.
Found the old link to the study I referred to:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2016/02/the-bottom-line-is-that-primary-model.html
True, low inflation is good.
Low inflation is also what you get in depressions, which are not good.
There was even lower inflation in 1929-1940.
I read the most excellent rebuttals and take downs of her, and I think - wow why Isn't Trump saying this stuff? He could demolish her.
Because she is effectively channeling things that America has let gone unquestioned for a long time. Trump is just starting to put together all of the little mistakes and revelations that she gives away, and it's a daunting job. The Clintons are obsessed with political supremacy, and they are, as Bob Kerry said of Bill, "unusually good liars." He is slick. She is married to slick. They've had more practice marrying slick and aggrandizement with smiles and the ideology of how what's good for them is good for you than anyone in politics, ever. Bill's dad was a traveling salesman who died before he was born, and Bill's been selling himself to the world ever since.
So seeing through their cracks and shining a spotlight, or foglight on their corruption and evil is a full time job. Americans want to believe whoever sells the most sunny optimism up their ass that they can find. Changing that mindset is tough. Even in the 90s I knew there was something a bit "off" with Bill, didn't vote for him in 92, but just couldn't get down with the Republican agenda from that point on. And obviously didn't think the Starr investigation was worth it or worth ending a presidency over. After all, that's basically how they're trying to hang Trump now. But it came, and went, and then he got disbarred, fined massively, into exile as we questioned his ill preparation of the country for 9/11 and ultimately the 2008 crash. Suddenly doubts about the Clintons began to grow.
Hillary's BS factor is quite a bit easier to see through than Bill's. After all, she naturally lacks ANY political skill (as she admitted) and probably learned it all from him. So if it weren't for a national army of angry old post-menopausal women avenging the bad memories of nasty male bosses harassing them in the 1960s, chances are that she'd be toast, also. But she can't. That's a strong demographic.
But for the rest of us.. those her aren't all that invested in the lies she tells herself and everyone else, we find it.. what's the word? Oh right. Deplorable. Pathetic. There are big problems to solve and indulging the entitlement of a woman who's in it for nothing but the glory of the title is just bad news. The only thing is to keep going after ALL their scandals... not just the easy or partisan ones. Start with Clinton Cash and go from there. FFS, she asked to DRONE a journalist. Why isn't this getting more coverage? All we can rely on these days to keep the government honest is Wiki-Leaks and she's amusing her stupid self with the thought of assassinating him. Is that not worth as much attention as her opponent saying stupid and boorish things in semi-private that he probably never even did - and almost certainly not in the criminal way that all these righteous prudes claim that he must have done?
But it doesn't end. That's another distracting tail for the American dog to chase. Sex, scandal and a poorly worded exaggeration that could be construed as criminal if it had actually taken place in the tawdry way that unimaginative and undersexed Americans presume. Oh well. Game over.
On to hoping that she fucks up massively in less than two years and incites some intensely scrutinized hearings that could lead to impeachment. But otherwise, c'est la vie. Hearings just for hearings sake are easy for her to dodge. Without a body or two that can be traced back to her, she's become Teflon. And even under those circumstances I'm sure the press and her party will shoo it away and ignore it.
So on to Plan B. Empower progressives and/or other integrity-valuing potential allies, continue an all-out cyber-assault on the media - exposing them for the useless arm of the state that they are, and target every sell-out establishment Democrat and Republican that you can find for a primary challenge. Throw them out. Compile a theme. And a meme. The anti-government movement needs to strengthen, but make it specific. Don't ever stop the pressure on the Clintons for the things they've been getting away with, and empower challengers to them like never before. Don't. Stop. Until. They. And. Everyone. They. Know. Is. Forever. Disgraced.
buwaya said...
Note the US record of recession and recovery, and the US performance since 2008.
This is a comparison between the US and other high income states. The performance is similar but the US is better. No sign of the apocalypse. In every set of economic data if you pick and choose you can find some negatives but overall the US has outperformed its rich competitors. That is just a fact.
"she asked to DRONE a journalist. Why isn't this getting more coverage?"
Not a journolist...
"In part because the US doesn't use government jobs as 'workfare', as a general principle."
Neither do these other places, as a general principle. They put people on the dole. If they do public works they contract for them as in the US. In Germany private companies build autobahns.
Its not a continuous data set. Pull major nations and compare. There are two bands.
I cherry picked the two largest economies in the OECD other than the US. One Germany stands for all the small countries put together.
"Obviously there are multiple factors but you can't simply ignore a major factor that contributes to the relatively modest changes in this ratio."
We have no idea if what you cited is a "major factor", this is speculation. You claim it is because some countries I cite have them. I claim it is because some other countries that work against your explanation have them too, and that this . I deny this has any independent effect.
Its not a modest change. It is effectively the same as having a real unemployment rate of 10% instead of 5%. If under ideal circumstances, full employment, 72-74% of the population are employed, with a 5% reported unemployment rate (as most of the better-off Euros and Anglo countries stand today, and as the US stood in 2000), then we see that the "real" labor force that wants work is on the order of 75-78% then the US at 69% is far, far short of full employment.
That's persistent unemployment of 10% or more for nearly a decade. And no relief in sight.
You all are hosed. Corruption, bureaucratic sclerosis and economic decline, into the indefinite future.
buwaya said...
Neither do these other places, as a general principle.
You are kidding, right?
buwaya said...
We have no idea if what you cited is a "major factor", this is speculation.
When the government controls such a large fraction of the workforce as many of these countries do, obviously they can influence employment rates, unless you believe that governments respond purely to market forces.
"she asked to DRONE a journalist. Why isn't this getting more coverage?"
Not a journolist...
Well, then. stupid Trump, after all. If he had not said one stupid thing 11 years ago then the pressure from Wiki-Leaks and the rest would have had a shot at penetrating through the noise, as before. This goddamn tape was a godsend for the godawful Clinton criminals and their cronies. The NYT actually had a story today on how molested children felt "triggered" by Trump. Unbelievable. That's America for you. Sex, sex, sex, and more sex. No one's undersexed enough to believe that his ridiculous statement might have had a non-criminal application - if it had ever actually been applied, which is horribly doubtful. But no matter. Molested kids now feel triggered, or so sez the Manhattan Pravda. What is one to do? I guess it never ends, now that the children have been marched into the limelight that this non-story never deserved. But Trump is not a Democrat so the media and pols won't circle the wagons around him at least once or twice for something that no evidence showed to be non-consensual. But hey - a crusade must be waged, Clinton got her shot, and glory doesn't come knocking twice. Now they're saying he's of a piece with Weiner. Hell, maybe even like Mark Foley and Hastert, too. It's not just like shooting people on Fifth Avenue. This involved SEX, can't you see? And that's unforgivable.
Feelings such as these could have been partially justified was back in 2007-8. The US is doing remarkably better now.
Says the man with the government job,
Writ Small
You got it.
"This is the historic opportunity that will have been squandered by the Trump revolutionaries.
They will blame the media. Never mind that Trump was sold by the same group as a media maestro. They will blame the GOPe. Never mind that the GOPe is supposed to be a bunch of easily whipped pushovers. It's always someone else's fault. That could be the personal credo of the Trump true-believer. It's someone else's fault."
bumper sticker count.
Add one more for: "Giant Meteor"
Not kidding.
You think they start hiring people into lifetime government jobs in a period of government budget disasters?
There have been government employment cutbacks in France and the UK at least, since 2008.
R & B - on fire.
8:21.
Well, sorry to say, Ladies and Gentlemen. But it's unsalvageable.
What the execrable Gloria Allred couldn't do, the staff and crew of his own Apprentice show apparently already have. It looks like that tape was the straw that broke the camel's back, and the mutiny - not just politically but by those in his own "showcase of success" clique - has begun.
Bye-bye, Don.
R&B,
You make a great case for the perfect storm he can be.
The reason he got so far is that he is often a bull in China shop...the antidote to PC. Same trait in the current environment and with in the tank journos can make it his undoing.
Right after all those poor kids feel triggered by Trump, they are gonna turn on the TV watch and back to back episodes of Sex and the City and then "Girls" with naked lena Dunham - she fingers a poodle.
R & B - it's unfair but this man had the baggage and some of us rang the warning bell in the very beginning. The DNC press knew what they were doing when they promoted Trump.
I'm not saying Trump is all bad (not at all - I'm voting for him!) - some of his promises about stopping illegal immigration are/were music to my ears. But I knew he'd be a disaster. We already face an unfair biased hypocritical crap BS press.
Trump - too much baggage, not enough speaking skills.
The DNC press loved Trump because he insulted the GOP candidates. Good times. Now - not so much.
8:43- R & B. It's not too late for him to drop out. It's crazy - but so what? Drop out gracefully. If he really cared about keeping the Clintons out - he would do it.
The electors in each state make the votes. So what if the ballots cannot be changed. Let's screw with Clinton's/hack press heads.
Well, if it's any consolation, his mouth is still going - ripping McCain and Paul Ryan a few new ones just today.
So even if he goes down, you can bet that he'll be a more effective Monday-morning kvetcher than any losing Republican candidate to date. People will soon forget why he lost. But they'll still be just as intrigued in 2017, 2018 and beyond at what is the most effective, insulting way to describe the disasters that the Clintons are and will probably be. Remember, they need complacency, thrive off it. And he is a non-stop, never-ending machine of insecure compulsions to call out such horrid quasi-criminals.
The die may be cast for him but it is also cast for them, don't forget. They will have almost as much baggage going into January 20th as Bill did the last time around. Much more, actually. Thank Trump and Bernie for that. And even Obama, if anyone remembers his 2008 campaign. The tapes are still out there, too.
Here's what to do. (Can't believe I'm doing this). But I can't wait until 2020. I don't mind giving advice for mid-term Republican congresspeople. Heck, I suppose even lefty challenger to corporate DNC criminals could try this too.
But run Obama's 2008 ads against Clinton. "She'll say anything, and do nothing." Good line. Obama's campaign was full of them. But definitely take that page from Trump's book. Don't be afraid to use what her non-Republican opponents have said about her. It's as true as anything anyone's ever said of her, and cuts much closer to the bone.
R & B - I know you are not a GOP guy. You're on the left. I consider you a rare lefty with morals and scruples. Anyway - the GOP do not know what to do with Trump. They are damned if they support him/damned if they don't. Whose fault is that?
Trump. (and the hack press)
The GOP do not want Hillary. They are in self-preservation mode.
Meeshell was saying she can't run her own home, can't run country.
Well, if it's any consolation, his mouth is still going - ripping McCain and Paul Ryan a few new ones just today.
Consolation?
Waste of time! Trump needs to rip on Hillary non-stop.
When Priebus conducts this years autopsy I'll bet he finds the rotting head of Hannity in Trumps colon.
The Clintons play for keeps. We're gonna need a bigger jar of vaseline folks.
Good advise - R& B. In other words, wise up and grow a spine. The GOP need to lose their fear, but they also need someone young and articulate.
I don't fault Paul Ryan for doing what he's doing, but I'm not so sure it's a waste of time for Trump to insult Ryan also. (He insults anyone; and it only takes him 0.7 nanoseconds to do. Insult is the mode his brain is in. Constantly. As much effort as eating a grape).
So my thinking is that as long as he needs to tack toward the center and pick up votes beyond his base, going after establishment Republicans doesn't hurt him. I could be wrong, but you'd better believe that the cross-over potential for Trump and the basis for his campaign is much greater than for the House speaker.
Teh Clintons are going to take the constitution and light it on fire.
Her obsession with "Citizens United" - and all the lies about it including "dark money"... It's not dark money - the dang thing was the supreme court holding up FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Hillary is going to make sure your freedom /OUR freedom to criticize her is curtailed. for starters. She will take every part of government and smear her corrupt slime on it and it will never be the same.
When Priebus conducts this years autopsy I'll bet he finds the rotting head of Hannity in Trumps colon.
No doubt.
Katy Tur Retweeted
Howard Fineman @howardfineman 8h8 hours ago Washington, DC
Women of all political stripes have told me that #Trump's scowling, hovering presence near #Hillary Sunday scared them. Men didn't notice.
0 replies 1,337 retweets 2,389 likes
Blogger AprilApple said...
"When Priebus conducts this years autopsy I'll bet he finds the rotting head of Hannity in Trumps colon.
"No doubt."
When they do an autopsy on Hillary how many heads from the MSM will they find?
You don't care because winning doesn't matter to you. You just want to bitch and moan.
After they were scared by Trump, they turned on "girls" and watched Lena hump a lobster.
Hil says I’m the Last Thing Standing Between You and the Apocalypse
Winning does not matter to Trump Cultists.
When they autopsy Hillary, they will find a black hole. She is the apocalypse.
There will be no autopsy on Hillary!
The bamster will turn over his private server that resides in the WH basement to Hillary. She will wipe it with a cloth or something. Rinse repeat.
The so-called 'Establishment Republicans' are really Neocons. I have no use for Neocons, who have more in common with Hillary than with real Conservatives. To me, Ron Paul is a real Conservative and so, possibly, is his son, Rand.
Trump has declared war on the GOP - the party platform he runs on - and we are supposed to be excited. He doesn't want to fight Hillary anymore. Nope. The GOP is real enemy #1 and they are going down.
That's simply fantastic news. If you are Hillary and the DNC press.
Blogger Rhythm and Balls said...
"Well, if it's any consolation, his mouth is still going - ripping McCain and Paul Ryan a few new ones just today. "
You say this like it is a bad thing. You know better than that.
The republicans in DC are just as responsible for where we are as the democrats are. Between Bushes and Clintons you can cover a lot of ground detailing our debt and the cronytastic regulations and tax code. Just because Goldman Sachs gives most of their money to dems doesn't mean they leave republicans out totally.
But trump is here to kick over the rice bowl. Of course the GOPe is trying to defeat their own nominee.
grackle contributed: This guy’s YouTube videos is really the place to go for the facts about any of the Trump controversies.
Thanks so much for that! He kinda shoots down Althouse's crazy assault theory.
Another Republican solidly behind Trump is my Congressman, Darrell Issa.
Darrell Issa will survive the upcoming "House cleaning" unscathed.
AprilApple said...Trump has declared war on the GOP - the party platform he runs on - and we are supposed to be excited. He doesn't want to fight Hillary anymore.
The GOPe never listened to nor took seriously any of the reasons behind the 2010 and 2014 mid-terms. This is a sort of karmic payback.
Blogger AprilApple said...
"Winning does not matter to Trump Cultists."
But we define winning differently.
You will take whatever crony loving big spender the GOPe will foist on you. Amnesty and new entitlements are ok for you as long as a republican does it. Rubio would have sold us out in the first 100 days. Jeb even sooner.
We actually want things to change. If we don't win the election because people want to give up at least we tried to stop them peacefully. If Hillary is elected buckle up. Look for article 5 conventions and wide spread jury nullification.
AprilApple reminds...Her obsession with "Citizens United" - and all the lies about it including "dark money"... It's not dark money - the dang thing was the supreme court holding up FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
You need to add that the case was about ANTI-CLINTON freedom of speech. Power Line archives have the facts: link.
Christ-
April trolling herself, or the blog?
I guess if you bitch about everyone, someone will validate your feelings. Ugh.
We got it Achilles - You want the following:
Dictator: Hillary
House majority leader: Nancy Pelosi
Senate majority leader: Chuck Schumer
The entire GOPe- in trash. Revenge!
Chickl - a great link. Thanks.
Writ Small wrote the following:
"This is the historic opportunity that will have been squandered by the Trump revolutionaries.
They will blame the media. Never mind that Trump was sold by the same group as a media maestro. They will blame the GOPe. Never mind that the GOPe is supposed to be a bunch of easily whipped pushovers. It's always someone else's fault. That could be the personal credo of the Trump true-believer. It's someone else's fault."
@April
You are agreeing with Writ Small.
If you had any self awareness at all you would realize how far you have fallen. This thread provides you with an opportunity for catharsis. I don't think you are this stupid.
Trump is a realist. Republicans are Democrats, and Democrats are leftist revolutionaries.
I'll stand with Trump all day long.
From the PowerLine link above (emphasis added):
Hillary Clinton will pledge on Saturday to introduce an amendment to the Constitution to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizen United decision within the first 30 days of her administration, an aide said Saturday.
So, if Hillary wins the White House and both Houses, there goes the judiciary branch as well. After she appoints a few Justices (all chosen using her Citizen United litmus test which she reminded us of on Sunday), all three branches are under Hillary's control. What a coup!
How can supposedly learned scholars like Althouse make up allegations of phony Trump crimes to defeat him? It's preposterous! If you need support for why what Trump said isn't/wasn't assault (as Althouse atill maintains), see grackle's link above.
It's becoming very clear who the real fascists are. Which side will you be on, fellow commenters?
April's fantasy of Trump quitting is ludicrous. She only wishes it because she wants to look prescient.
"Add one more for: "Giant Meteor""
I saw one of those a few days ago. It was on a QX80 Infinity sport utility that was in front of me in the Taco Time drive through.
Are you back in the NW, and is that your ride?
@April: The plain fact is that no one can step in for Trump at this stage and defeat Hillary. No one. All of your criticisms of Trump are valid but overblown. I don't understand why you persist.
People forget, Citizens United was all about Hillary quashing a film critical of her.
She was successful. At the end of the day, it was about the Koch Bros. buying elections.
How did that happen? The Media.
Wait until this witch gets a hold of the entire Federal Government.
If you think rules and laws don't really apply now, just wait.
"It's becoming very clear who the real fascists are. Which side will you be on, fellow commenters?"
I recommend watching Fight Club.
ARM said..."This is a comparison between the US and other high income states. The performance is similar but the US is better. No sign of the apocalypse. In every set of economic data if you pick and choose you can find some negatives but overall the US has outperformed its rich competitors. That is just a fact."
Yeah, we're ALL going down.
"Darrell Issa will survive the upcoming "House cleaning" unscathed."
Well, if it burns to the ground he will have coincidently removed the important documents right before the inferno and insurance check.
BTW, here's a thought experiment: what if HRC massively boosted fire insurance coverage weeks before her plant was burned to the ground by an arsonist. Oh, and she coincidently removed a computer w/ import data right before the fire.
Nothing to see here?
How about this for another thought experiment: imagine HRC has the rap sheet shown at the following
linkhttp://mediamatters.org/research/2011/01/11/report-media-ignore-rep-issas-alleged-criminal/174997
No problema?
@Jelly: Are you calling Issa a Kardashian?
Grackle's link to Molyneaux's discussion
Not that it makes a difference at this point...
bad paste, should be:
http://mediamatters.org/research/2011/01/11/report-media-ignore-rep-issas-alleged-criminal/174997
chick,
I'm just asking if you'd care if the rap sheet and arson issues that surround him were instead associated w/ HRC.
@Jelly: Thank goodness for the word "alleged"!
Anywho, did you know that the Germans use the subjunctive mood when reporting criminal case where we use the words "alleged." They are even so careful as to use the subjunctive when paraphrasing speech.
Have folks seen the video w/ Scott Adams and Molyneaux?
IMHO, Adams schools him.
I never give it thought, jelly.
Hillary's alleged crimes affect the nation as a whole; Issa's alleged crimes affect...the nation as a whole?
Seriously, Jelly, I'm surprised you're not joining Althouse's chant of Trump being a molester instead of smaller fish like Issa.
PBandJ_Ombudsman said...Have folks seen the video w/ Scott Adams and Molyneaux?
I saw a list of others he's appeared with and thought it was worth a look. Do you have a link?
Pb&J:
What you are describing is about 10000x more plausibly innocent than Hillary's cattle futures. And that's just one out of, dear God, how many scandals now?
And she has gotten away with them all because of another scandal: Filegate. Where she got the FBI files on absolutely everyone who could ever pose a threat to her.
If Hillary spent an entire 24 hours doing nothing except committing insurance fraud, it'd be the most honest day of her life.
chick,
I've already stated that I disapprove of DJT's pussy grabbing claim. So, there's no reason for surprise.
I don't doubt that whatever bad stuff may have gone down in Issa's past, he's a different person now. But, your comment that I responded to was clearly a setup for what I wrote, even if you didn't intend it to be so.
PBandJ_Ombudsman said...
Have folks seen the video w/ Scott Adams and Molyneaux?
-
You can always post a link....
And hey...why not make it an active link for convenience.
And have you watched the link Grackle shared?
I don't think this is the entire thing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3BBQv4fIPA
I'm fairly sure the thing I heard was well over an hour.
Gedankenexperiment: After Hillary wins the Presidency and both Houses, what kind of milquetoast Republican are the Chucks going to put up to defeat her down the road? What kind of Republican pussy can standup to a media silenced by her Citizen United coup down the road? We've all seen how utterly ruthless she is. Now is the time to defeat her -- before it's too late -- in the strongest possible way.
I can't believe this thread is about anything other than the raging hypocrisy of Hillary's first line, whining about Trump going after whole groups of people right after her 'basket of deplorables'.
Mike Pence is the compromise counterweight who was supposed to mollify the GOPe Chuckfolk. A win for Trump is a win for Pence. And don't forget that Pence is an example of the sort of cabinet and advisor that Trump will surround himself with. The wretched Tim Kaine is the sort of lackey who will surround Hillary.
Here is the long version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsH17taSBzo
I used to remember the href code. And, if I thought about it, I could probably piece it together again. But, w/o an active link y'all can very easily see if I'm linking to something like the evil MediaMatters since the url is front and center.
here ya go jelly..make you work for it though: http://www.easyhyperlinks.com
"Poor Original Mike was overcome by such talk and is now sulking in the corner."
Actually, I had a very nice night. Fire on the lakeshore.
That's active links for dummies.
Just what I need.
@Jelly: I watched 15 minutes of the video -- it's too much of a time commitment to determine whether Adams "schooled" Molyneux. Besides, I'm not a Scott Adams fan -- I was never a Dilbert fan. I went to his blog maybe once. Practically everything I know about Scott Adams I learned via Althouse. Shrug.
I spend a lot of time traveling, so I can waste time listening to things. Otherwise, that sort of thing makes no sense.
Shorter version: Stefan has opinions that he thinks are brilliant, and he is animated and confident in jabbering about his opinions. In a few situations Scott explicitly pokes holes in Stefan's POV. In addition to explicit confrontations, there was at least one point where Scott describes how Stefan's views are not rational, but Scott doesn't take the final step of saying "Stefan you are doing what I just said was not rational." So, Stefan merrily carries on. Plus, to me Stefan seems like a not very successful or smart person who thinks they're more important/wise than they really are.
For the record, I think Scott's blog is much more off the mark than not on the mark. I'll check the above the fold text, but that's plenty.
For more bang for the time-involved-buck, Adams and Jones moves along (Jones being a nut helps):
http://www.infowars.com/dilbert-creator-still-predicts-landslide-trump-win/
Speaking of Jones, I think I may have seen MockT. I saw a vehicle w/ an InfoWars bumper sticker about a month ago.
… In a few situations Scott explicitly pokes holes in Stefan's POV. In addition to explicit confrontations, there was at least one point where Scott describes how Stefan's views are not rational, but Scott doesn't take the final step of saying "Stefan you are doing what I just said was not rational." So, Stefan merrily carries on. Plus, to me Stefan seems like a not very successful or smart person who thinks they're more important/wise than they really are.
What is offered above is so vague as to be meaningless. What “views” were irrational? And readers, how about that ad hominem as a parting shot at the end?
I don’t agree with every single point Molyneux makes and I wouldn’t expect Adams to, either. But Molyneux offers excellent analysis overall and I’ve never been able to find him in error on the facts surrounding the anti-Trump hysteria.
So I find the Stefan Molyneux videos to be very thorough. He does excellent research and offers excellent analysis. It’s nice to be able to learn what the facts are without having to filter out all the propaganda through conventional sources.
I use URLs instead of links because for some reason I have never been able to make the HTML work for embedded links. I have no trouble with other HTML constructions.
To sort of compensate I post URLs from a website, TinyURL.com, that converts any lengthy URL into 26 characters or less.
If the eGOP manages to get Hillary elected they are going to blame it all on Trump. The MSM, naturally, will chime right in. History is written by the victors.
These Brazile/Palmieri WikiLeaked emails makes me suspicious that Hillary was given the moderator’s questions beforehand in these debates with Trump. Can it be doubted that they’ll do anything to keep Trump out of the Whitehouse?
http://tinyurl.com/zybhqlt
jelly,
That was a very weak, unspecific summary.
Then..
"Plus, to me Stefan seems like a not very successful or smart person who thinks they're more important/wise than they really are."
wtf
I asked you before whether you watched Grackle's link. Did you?
Stefan jabbered about how he was a big Radian, but now he's so successful that he loves doing charity by jabbering about not smacking your kids and he (as a Rand dude) couldn't have imagined that he'd be so generous = lame blowhard, imho.
Plus Scott made points about the connection (& not connection) between happiness and rationality that go right over Stefan's head. Maybe Stefan could have disputed what Scott said, but he couldn't even grasp what was said, he rambles on instead about dead people that he thinks make him rational. The more he blathers the more he proves Scott's point about feeling and satisfaction-chasing and the more Stefan seemed like a dope, imho.
Anywho, if you need to kill time, listen for yourself.
I never knew about that video. But, I will listen to it.
Walter said to PBandJ I asked you before whether you watched Grackle's link. Did you?
PbandJ’s reply:
Stefan jabbered about how he was a big Radian, but now he's so successful that he loves doing charity by jabbering about not smacking your kids and he (as a Rand dude) couldn't have imagined that he'd be so generous = lame blowhard, imho.
Plus Scott made points about the connection (& not connection) between happiness and rationality that go right over Stefan's head. Maybe Stefan could have disputed what Scott said, but he couldn't even grasp what was said, he rambles on instead about dead people that he thinks make him rational. The more he blathers the more he proves Scott's point about feeling and satisfaction-chasing and the more Stefan seemed like a dope, imho.
Readers, the commentor missed my point.
I do not view Molyneux videos to find out about “happiness and rationality,” or to be appraised of his opinions on “dead people.”
I go to Molyneux because he has an encyclopedic knowledge of the facts on the bogus Trump controversies which he presents in an entertaining and cogent manner and because his analysis of those facts are excellent.
The URL again:
http://tinyurl.com/gks7t6h
"If Hillary spent an entire 24 hours doing nothing except committing insurance fraud, it'd be the most honest day of her life."
Thread winner right there. And I am so going to use it.
At least Democrats want to win, Republicans seem to prefer losing.
That's my impression. They'd rather "fight the good fight" and lose instead of win with a less than ideal candidate.
Is Trump a great candidate? Hell no. He's just the best of the ones running right now.
He lost in a wonderful gentlemanly fashion. Of course, that was after spending an entire political career attacking conservatives and being feted by the Chris Mathews of the world.
Oh how we long for the days of the Gentleman Republican Loser who can make us feel good about the policies the left rams down our throats!
Indeed. And McCain was STILL a "racist" whose supporters were, CLEARLY, total bigots. The press DESPISED Gingrich because he basically tossed Rep. Michel out of the way who seemed to really enjoy being the Minority Leader for life. The press is not going to praise anybody who challenges Dem hegemony.
Record low inflation does result in things costing less than they would w/o record low inflation. That's what record low inflation means. Your trying to deny math doesn't make math not true.
Funny, my groceries cost dramatically more now than they did 8 years ago. At least double. All this in a period of "low inflation". Yet, in periods of apparently higher inflation, my grocery budget didn't expand nearly as quickly.
The next act in the oft repeated drama is getting post-election emails from the likes of Paul Ryan and NR telling us "WE HAVE TO STOP THE LEFTIST DEMOCRAT AGENDA!!" Send money now!
I look forward to telling NR to go fuck themselves in 2020 when they recommend some loser to be President.
"she asked to DRONE a journalist. Why isn't this getting more coverage?"
Not a journolist...
Wikileaks is more of a journalist outfit than the NYT. Let's be honest here.
Her obsession with "Citizens United" - and all the lies about it including "dark money"... It's not dark money - the dang thing was the supreme court holding up FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Hillary is going to make sure your freedom /OUR freedom to criticize her is curtailed. for starters. She will take every part of government and smear her corrupt slime on it and it will never be the same.
Republicans can stop her, easily, by simply refusing to approve any SCOTUS nominee who doesn't have a lengthy track record of supporting Constitutional rights. If they are sketchy, refuse to vote for them. Period.
But they won't. They never do. That is why dolts like Sotomayor and Kagan got voted for in much larger numbers than Republican justices tend to.
The GOPe never listened to nor took seriously any of the reasons behind the 2010 and 2014 mid-terms. This is a sort of karmic payback.
2014 effectively killed the policy. Promising to stop Obama's immigration policy if elected and then folding without any effort is not going to gain you voters. Basically passing Obama's Iran deal for him over vast disdain for it with voters is not going to win voters.
When people keep asking "Why Trump?", I'll remind them to look at what the "good" Republicans have done for the last few years.
Fuck off ed.
April's fantasy of Trump quitting is ludicrous. She only wishes it because she wants to look prescient.
NO. Silly. I'd like to not lose to Hillary. It's really that easy and simple.
Trump supporters don't seem to mind losing to Hillary. At least your purity of GOP hatred remains solidly intact.
Trump's loss will be Trump's fault.
Undisciplined buffoons should know.
Chickl The GOPe never listened to nor took seriously any of the reasons behind the 2010 and 2014 mid-terms. This is a sort of karmic payback.
Your karmic payback will be Hillary - nancy and Chuck.
Forget your precious hated GOPe - America doesn't give a shit about your karmic payback fantasies.
The Morning Joes are a bit nervous this AM. It turns out that Trump got a bump in the polls after the debate. Unexpectedly. And Trump is polling as more popular than the saintly Ryan in the GOP! There’s also worry that the Bernie kids will not vote for Hillary for various reasons. The Bernie kids, sez Morning Joe, don’t even know who Al Gore is … sharp intake of breath … and have no idea that voting for Gary Johnson could hand the election to Trump.
Mika’s eyes look … different. Tired, maybe? Scarborough is hedging his bets, pointing out that Trump is within easy striking distance. There was discussion of the electoral prospects of the GOP if/when Trump loses. Here’s what I believe would happen:
Hillary’s open borders and executive orders, the salting of the circuit courts with lefties, the packing of the SCOTUS with them also, resulting in 20 to 30 million illegal immigrants given amnesty, citizenship and the vote, will eliminate any GOP Presidential victory for generations. The GOP will have to be content with Governors and below, if they have enough constituencies left after pissing off millions of Trump voters in every red state.
The American economy will continue to decline, being closely tied by Hillary’s economic advisors to the weak-ass global economy – which will keep tanking. Fracking will be outlawed. The military will continue its decline. The Clintons will get richer.
Terror attacks will ratchet up in the homeland. Hillary will try to dismiss them with anti-gun rhetoric. She will ponder mightily just what their motivation might be. She’ll hint that it is because Americans are racist. She’ll walk that back by claiming she only meant “some” Americans.
A weak nation invites aggression and military brinkmanship from opponents, as is already happening. It will be stepped up when the incompetent Hillary takes office. We could be dragged into unnecessary wars by her diplomatic weaknesses and our military deficiencies.
Second amendment? Forget it. The baby-parts market will flourish.
We will have no-go zones in Muslim enclaves after the Clinton Muslim refugee resettlement program gets going good in her second term.
I notice that Scott Adams, despite the debate that Trump was supposed to have lost, despite Trump talking about grabbing pussies, staunchly and with nary a hedge, sticks to his prediction of a Trump landslide.
Grackle
Hillary’s open borders and executive orders, the salting of the circuit courts with lefties, the packing of the SCOTUS with them also, resulting in 20 to 30 million illegal immigrants given amnesty, citizenship and the vote, will eliminate any GOP Presidential victory for generations. The GOP will have to be content with Governors and below, if they have enough constituencies left after pissing off millions of Trump voters in every red state.
You had me until you made it about precious and holy Trump voters. Get over yourselves. You selected a loser. Trump used to play golf with Bill and donate money to their corrupt foundation. Trump sang Hillary's praises just a few short years ago. Trump was furious at Obama for not selecting her as his VP.
Wow you have a high and mighty opinion of yourselves.
yes yes - we know Hillary will be that bad. It will be over for the GOP. It could have been avoided.
Trump supporters love the idea of it being over for the GOP - so celebrate! You helped make it happen.
The benefit of a lose-lose situation like this election is for anyone who actually cares about this country is that when we inevitably lose, we won't be disappointed.
It is entertaining watching the same Trumpists who so boldly predicted that their hero would "change the game" are now trying to tell themselves he's really ahead, the polls are wrong, and if he loses it was rigged anyway, and maybe the point wasn't to win but to punish Republicans, and the people who don't lap up Trump's nonsense are backstabbers who really want Hillary to win, and Trump never needed the GOP establishment but when the establishment doesn't help him then they are responsible for his defeat.
It's a glorious mish-mash of self-contradicting crap, which is pretty much the theme of the entire Trump movement. It's sad to see this happen to our side, but I suppose the rot was always there. Maybe it takes a good debacle to rebuild.
"Trump used to play golf with Bill and donate money to their corrupt foundation. Trump sang Hillary's praises just a few short years ago. Trump was furious at Obama for not selecting her as his VP."
Yes, but it's those of us who warned them about Trump that are really supporting Hillary, not the guy who is throwing the election for her.
AprilApple, I wouldn't waste much time trying to understand the Trumpists. They have to tell themselves a lot of things to sleep well at night, and accepting the fact that they enabled what we're going to face for at least the next four years wouldn't sit well with them. Hence their hysterical posts on this subject.
Brando -
Yes, but it's those of us who warned them about Trump that are really supporting Hillary, not the guy who is throwing the election for her.
Their collapse into delusion frosts me.
They are so in love with their glorious fraudulent hero, they cannot see the forest thru the trees. Those who don't bear witness the cult, are considered treacherous treasonous heretics. Jim Jones would be proud.
Sorry to interrupt the April and Brando show but....
A weak nation invites aggression and military brinkmanship from opponents, as is already happening.
You do not walk through a bad neighborhood wearing a gold necklace.
I don't know how the election will turn out but Ryan and the GOPe seem to be doing what they can to throw it to Hillary.
"Republicans can stop her, easily, by simply refusing to approve any SCOTUS nominee who doesn't have a lengthy track record of supporting Constitutional rights. If they are sketchy, refuse to vote for them. Period. "
Not after they lose the Senate, they can't.
"I don't know how the election will turn out but Ryan and the GOPe seem to be doing what they can to throw it to Hillary."
Paul Ryan and Co. are doing what they've always done--tried to preserve their hold on the House and Senate, which is their job. If Trump is making it too toxic in the vulnerable districts, they will distance from him. And frankly the idea of President Trump making "deals" with a Democratic Congress should be enough reason to support this.
Besides, do you really think losing Ryan's "support" (whatever that really is anyway) hurts Trump? That there are voters now who are thinking "I was all ready to vote Trump, but now Ryan cancelled events with him...maybe I shouldn't now"?
In the midst of his tweetstorm, Trump actually hit on the right answer--he doesn't really need Ryan and the others. In fact, it may even help him to "lose" their support (look at what Trump fans think of those people in the first place).
If you really want to see who "threw" it to Hillary (if she does win--she is capable of blowing her lead), just look at the decisions made by Trump throughout this campaign. No one owns this more than him.
Original Mike said...
Yeah, we're ALL going down.
GDP will grow more slowly in aging societies. The solution is a massive influx of younger immigrants and who wants that?
"Not after they lose the Senate, they can't."
And that's the rub. Holding the Senate is crucial for blocking appointments (and if you think Chuck Schumer isn't going to toss the filibuster completely once he takes over, you don't know Chuck Schumer), and holding the House is the last bit of leverage the GOP has to stop Clinton passing whatever laws she likes.
Ryan and company are trying to hold the final wall before the Clintonites storm the castle.
Not after they lose the Senate, they can't.
They aren't. Rubio and Portman are almost assuredly winning their seats and they were necessary gets for the Dems. The Dems aren't exactly doing great in their non-Presidential races.
Rubio and Portman aren't enough. They need 7 of 11 close races (IIRC).
"Rubio and Portman aren't enough. They need 7 of 11 close races (IIRC)."
I haven't been following the Senate polling closely, but last I checked Bayh was looking strong for an Indiana takeover, Johnson and Kirk are essentially toast, and Ayotte was in a tossup. The GOP might pull in NV for insurance, and haven't seen much on Toomey lately.
The next few weeks will be crucial. This constant "I endorse Trump, but won't vote for him!" and "He should drop out! No wait, he should stick it out!" crap probably isn't helping, and certainly takes the candidates off message. Fortunately the Dems didn't do a great job recruiting this year.
The supreme irony is if, after the GOPe's attempt to throw the election to Hillary, Trump gets elected. The look on Ryan's face would be worth preserving.
Grace,
I listened to that. To me this guy seems to be dull.
His entire POV rests on an imagined subcategory distinction. He pretends that DJT said:
'Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her [but I won't really just start, first I'll get to know her so I can determine if she's the type that likes it when a rich geezer grabs her by the pussy]. You know, I’m automatically attracted to beautiful [women who are groupie types, i.e. gold diggers]— I just start kissing them [except, I don't really just start, first I get to know them so they can let me know that they like to be kissed]. It’s like a magnet [but, this is a particular magnet that only interacts w/ subsets that like old rich men to grab their pussies]. Just kiss [not really just kiss, first have the women let me know that they're groupies]. I don’t even wait [except I do wait so the women let me know that they're a gold digger]. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything [to gold digger, groupie women].
Bush: Whatever you want.
Trump: Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything [but only to gold digger women who like pussy grabbing by rich guys].'
Blogger damikesc said...
"she asked to DRONE a journalist. Why isn't this getting more coverage?"
Not a journolist...
Wikileaks is more of a journalist outfit than the NYT. Let's be honest here.
That's what I meant.
No - the supreme irony is that Trump was a loser from the get go. He's a media pimped fraud hell bent on handing this thing to Hillary.
"The look on Ryan's face would be worth preserving."
He would be thrilled to have a Republican President.
Trump threw it to Hillary as soon as he won the nomination.
@Brando
If you really want to see who "threw" it to Hillary (if she does win--she is capable of blowing her lead), just look at the decisions made by Trump throughout this campaign. No one owns this more than him.
Trump's base refuse to remember Trump's undisciplined twitter trips and stumbles and self-inflicted wounds of the past few months. They can only focus on Paul Ryan - and blame shifting.
"He would be thrilled to have a Republican President."
The idea that Ryan would prefer Hillary over Trump--much as he is disgusted by Trump--is nonsense. Ryan is trying to tell himself that Trump would sign whatever legislation Ryan sends to him; he at least reasons that there's an outside chance of this, and that Clinton would always veto.
AprilApple said...He's a media pimped fraud hell bent on handing this thing to Hillary.
--
Seems some folks opposing Trump are prone to the same paranoid conspiracy mongering some Trumpers are.
"Trump's base refuse to remember Trump's undisciplined twitter trips and stumbles and self-inflicted wounds of the past few months. They can only focus on Paul Ryan - and blame shifting."
Of course. The very notion that the GOP had its best chance at the White House in over a decade, and holding Congress, and Supreme Court vacancies to fill, and that the Dems picked a near-unelectable fraud that most of the country cannot trust or stomach, and they blew it on a far more toxic and hated fraud-clown--and that the naysayers might have been RIGHT all along--that's too much to accept. Instead, it's got to be that no one else could have done better, and Trump was poised to win, but backstabbers ruined it. Sort of like how Germany would have totally won the First World War until those damn backstabbers undermined the war effort.
They have to sleep well. This is their therapy.
I've posted this before. It's what Ryan would do with a Trump predidency. We should be so lucky.
Original Mike, you don't get it, do you? The Populist movement that supports Trump doesn't give a fat rat's ass about a GOP Congress. What has the GOP Congress done for them with their majority? Diddly-squat. The GOPe would far rather have Hillary than Trump, as she would not upset their apple-cart.
As long as Trump is going to blow up the system and does not need Ryan or any of the GOP est. why doesn't he simply say he will do whatever it takes to establish congressional term limits? 75% of Americans support term limits.
With Congress polling so poorly this might be a winning strategy. And save the republic if he could get it done. HJ res 14, submitted by M Salmon of AZ would amend the constitution to limit congress members terms. R Desantis of FL has a joint resolution which will increase the odds of passage by applying term limits only when new members take office.
Face it, none of the important changes that NEED to be made in our nation will get accomplished until our representatives no longer have as their primary motivation the need to get re elected.
320/Busdriver: Excellent post!
PS: You should be working on Trump's campaign.
Your hatred blinds you, mockturtle. AprilApple posted a long list of things the Republican Congress has blocked the Democrats from doing. We lost both houses for two years and got ObamaCare because of it.
320Busdriver.
Be terrific IF Trump would do it. Sadly, he's fixated on his ego.
"PS: You should be working on Trump's campaign."
I've already voted; for Trump. I think he would be a terrible President, but I've never believed in cutting off my nose to spite my face.
Here it is again. I wonder if the mass hate and delusion about the hated GOP is a campaign driven by the left? If so - good job.
The GOP Has Been Bad. But Not as Bad as You Think
BTW,
I wonder if there is some sort of psychological reason that Stefan imagines DJT had stated that he was talking about a subgroup that wants to be pussy grabbed and F-ed by old, rich geezers. One thing I recall from the long video of Scott and Stefan was that Stefan said he imagines a brilliant political speech that would say taxes should be lower, regulations should be lessened, and the job creators (rich folks) should get a better deal because then they will pay great wages to hire not-rich people.
What sort of dummy thinks this is anything other than generic R boilerplate talking points. This guy can only see these points being made in an imaginary speech, as if it's not what all Rs always say.
Anywho, it's cool that this dude doesn't see how when he talks about groupies who are eager to be F-ed by rich folks, he's not listening to DJT's words, he's expressing his own subconcsious POV, though his F-ing isn't sexual.
Post a Comment