April 21, 2018

I remember when it became clear that Hillary Clinton was going to win the 2016 election.

I'm reading "It’s becoming clear that Trump won’t run in 2020" by Joe Scarborough. I mean, I'm reading the headline and laughing. It's on the most-read list at The Washington Post. It's what people want to read, and isn't that what fake news is all about, giving the people what they want (and getting them to want what you want them to want)?

Okay, now I've read the article for you. Isn't that what blogging is all about? I'll give you what I think is the most substantive paragraph in support of the proposition in the headline:
Now, even Trump’s most steadfast allies are quietly admitting that the Southern District of New York’s investigation poses an existential threat to his future, both politically and legally. Trump allies are telling the president his “fixer” could flip for the feds, just like Michael Flynn, Rick Gates and George Papadopoulos. In Washington and across the country, Republicans are sensing the president is a wounded political figure, leading them to withhold their future support or — in one high-profile case — to challenge the president directly.
Allies are quietly admitting... Republicans are sensing... and Joe Scarborough is picking up the message. It seems to me Trump has faced vicious opposition all along, and he keeps winning in spite of/because of it. I remember believing — back in October 2016 — that Trump would drop out. I had a tag, Trump drops out....

79 comments:

Michael K said...

Scarborough is an interesting example of NeverTrumpers. I don't watch his show, or much TV except college football, but they were supposedly friends at one time.

What is it with these people ? They are nourishing a delusion that seems to be very deep and persistent. It can't be healthy.

rhhardin said...

They believe in the triumph of guardrails, no matter what the guardrails are or how they got there.

Phil 3:14 said...

Getting shit on byTrump has powerful effects on people’s psyche.

Its like one of those Zombie movies where you turn into a flesh eating crazy.

Instead we have intellectual zombies who can only fixate on TRUMP!

David Begley said...

Wild speculation by Joe. He talks to Dems, Never Trumpers and eGOP types.

Joe is just wishing that this would happen.

tcrosse said...

So they get rid of Trump. Then what ? Have any of them given any thought to this ?

tim maguire said...

Foucault's Pendulum.

Excellent analysis of the phenomenon of the conspiracy theory. It's not just an idea about an event, it's mode of thinking. Once you have accepted the conspiracy, everything can be fit inside it. And because everything can be fit inside it, no facts or logic can cut through and show you the error of your ways. The conspiracy cannot be disproven.

Trump hatred is like that. Everything, absolutely everything, supports the conclusion that Trump is about to leave the White House in shame and failure. And maybe handcuffs.

Michael K said...

Everything, absolutely everything, supports the conclusion that Trump is about to leave the White House in shame and failure. And maybe handcuffs.

Yes, remember "Fitzmas?" The left wanted Cheney humiliated. They obsessed about it.

Darrell said...

Trump is running in 2020 and already has the winning slogan--Don't be a fuckhead and vote for a Democrat. Ever.

Sebastian said...

For true believers, the millennium is always around the corner.

In this case, not the Second Coming but the First Departure will usher it in.

Having immanentized the eschaton, Progs expect salvation without a Savior.

Who needs Satan when you've got Trump?

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Sue the voters!
Sue the voters!
Sue the voters!


The voters are all criminals! Deplorable criminals who didn't tow the line for the corruption machine.

JAORE said...

I don't know the odds of Trump running in 2020 although I suspect they are high.

They will be higher if the "Trump won't run" theme gains traction.

Molly said...

tcross: as others have noted for many anti-trumpers the goal is only to get Trump out of office, in some shameful way (resignation, impeachment and removal, imprisonment, or if none of those losing the next election in a landslide of historic proportions). For these people, the whole point of the removal process is to ensure that Trump is discredited in the eyes of history.

But those who have policy/political objectives (they do not want Trump priorities to be enacted, they do want Democratic priorities to be enacted), the preferred process goes like this:

1. Democrats retake House and Senate in 2018.
2. Trump is removed from office before his (first) term ends.
3. Pence becomes President.
4A. Pence is removed from office before he can choose a VP and Speaker of the House (Pelosi, or someone else -- Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Keith Ellison, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama) having been chosen as House Speaker) becomes President.
or 4B. Pence is removed from office after he has chosen an acceptably bipartisan VP (that is to say, a Democrat), who then ascends to the Presidency.

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Perhaps the corrupt leftwing machine can build prison camps like Kim Jong Un and his grotesque sister do (beloved by CNN) and place each and every deplorable Trump voter in those prisons.

Howard said...

Trump 2020, the most effective Democrat since FDR.

gilbar said...

in fairness, was Joe ever wrong about Anything? Ever?

i mean, back in 2016, Joe said about Trump:
"That’s a guy who knows he is going to lose. That’s a guy who knows he is going to lose. You start talking that way and, again, I don’t know that he’s ever wanted to win. It’s sad. It’s sad and pathetic what’s going on out there. "

he sure nailed that!

Hagar said...

There's got to be a pony in here somewhere!

Sam L. said...

Dream on, folks, so as to overwhelm (if you can) the Trump nightmare in your mind.

Brian said...

It seems that relatively few people actually like Trump. Like Althouse, those nominally on Trump's side are merely anti-anti-Trumpers who feel a visceral antipathy or disdain toward those who strongly dislike Trump.

Elise Lee said...

I'm ready for #Trump2020. #KAG

Mark said...

telling the president his “fixer” could flip for the feds

Again, the idea that an attorney would turn on his client is not only a fundamental Sixth Amendment violation, it is cause for immediate disbarment.

AllenS said...

I like Trump. I put my Trump yard sign back up after people started to scream bloody murder about him being President. It's still up. I wasn't voting for someone to perform the duties of the Pope. A man has to know his expectations.

Saint Croix said...

I'd never withdraw. I've never withdrawn in my life. No, I'm not quitting. I have tremendous support. Zero chance I'll quit.

That's fascinating to me because (of course) Trump has withdrawn from things in the past. He quit two marriages. He quit a presidential campaign.

He's not focused on reality, on describing reality, on being honest in his speech.

He's attempting to motivate himself, and his followers.

Don't quit, can't quit, impossible to quit, zero chance, I've never quit in my life!

What's fascinating, of course, is that this works. He pulls off an incredible upset. People are still dumb-founded, and refusing to believe that this is our reality now. And it is!

I think the weird and strange Democrat behavior ("let's say he's working with the Russians and it's treason and get him fired!") is happening because…

1) Ignoring reality and trying to motivate people worked for Trump

2) Trump showed us how to win and so we should model our behavior after him

I think it's a bad idea for the left to mimic Trump. Why would you do that? Especially if it's his behavior that you find so upsetting. Anyway, mimicry just means that he's ape leader and you are ape followers. He picks up shit and throws it and so now you pick up shit and throw it, too. Why? Because Trump's ape leader and you recognize his alpha status. Embarrassing. Obviously Democrats should be serious and responsible right now, to give people an alternative to Trump. It's weird, really strange, that they are incapable of that.

YoungHegelian said...

The most likely reason Trump won't run again in 2020 is old age & the health issues that follow from it.

Trump's spry for his age, for sure. The physical presence he could maintain on the stump in 2016 for a man of 70 was impressive compared to the 69 year-old HRC's (perhaps literally) anemic performance. I'm sure such health concerns moved the dials for more than one on-the-fence voter.

But, inaugurated for a second term at 75? That's pushing it. Trump may go down in history with JFK & the last admin of FDR as administrations that wouldn't have happened had the public known the truth about the health of the candidates.

Yancey Ward said...

I had always given it 50/50 that Trump doesn't run again in 2020 since the night he won, but I think the odds that he runs again are increasing by the day. I now put it about 30/70.

chickelit said...

“Obviously Democrats should be serious and responsible right now, to give people an alternative to Trump. It's weird, really strange, that they are incapable of that.”

An alternative to Trump is supposed to be a fall fashion. This is still Spring. This Summer may get really hot.

Michael K said...


Blogger Howard said...
Trump 2020, the most effective Democrat since FDR.


I assume Howard is trying to be funny. It's hard sometimes to figure out.

Trump was a Democrat when it was necessary to be one in NYC doing business.

There was a time when he might have been a Democrat but Democrats are extinct. Those that call themselves Democrats now are Democratic Socialists.

Big Mike said...

@Saint Croix, I see nothing in common between Trump’s actions and the increasingly hysterical actions of his adversaries. Trump uses — overuses — hyperbole. Maybe even we can say abuses hyperbole. But Joe Scarborough isn’t doing hyperbole; he’s inventing things out of thin air.

alan markus said...

In June of 2010, Obama was declared "snakebit". He did manage to get reelected in 2012.

A Snakebit President - Americans want leaders on whom the sun shines.

dda6ga dda6ga said...

Stale Joe is hearing "Music of the Spheres" again, perhaps from an unseen nebula.

Fritz said...

He's on TV a lot. He has to say something.

Etienne said...

I don't think Trump will run.

1) He's bored out of his mind.
2) He's an old man.
3) Melania and Barron won't let him.
4) The Democrats are spending billions to recapture Congress
5) Republicans are scratching their ass every day and trying to calculate the dew point.

rcocean said...

Who would know more about Trump than Joe (I'm not a Republican")Scarborough?

After all, they're such good friends.

/obvious sarcasm off/

rcocean said...

Trump needs to start pardoning people and stop this clown show in its track.

tcrosse said...

I don't think Trump will run. (continued)

6. He's made his point.
7. He's done all he could.
8. It's a huge pain in the ass.

langford peel said...

The only people who have to worry about what Clueless Joe Scarborough has to say are his interns.

He is the perfect example of the ultra liberal who pretends that he was a Republican to get a gig trying to destroy the a republican party. You know like Jennifer Rubin or John McCain.

Big Mike said...

It seems that relatively few people actually like Trump

People on Trump’s side include people who like Trump’s results, on the economy, on the Middle East, on North Korea. They include people who recoil in disgust from the self-be clowning lefties like Maher, Colbert, Scarborough, Pelosi, nearly every news anchor on CNN, MSNBC, NBC, CBS and ABC, and nearly every writer for the New York Times, the Post and points west. They include people who were on welfare through all of the Obama years but now have good jobs. And that’s a huge majority of the voting public.

Howard said...

No humor Doc Mike, realpolitik. Trump will end up doing more for the democrats and deep state than the republicans and his base. He's been turned. All this Comey Cohen Mueller Putin piss prostitutes is the circus to keep the punters entertained and distracted.

Howard said...

What sober etienne and sobering tcrosse said.

Howard said...

Ask Meade why Joe Scarbourough says what he says.

Molly said...

(Eaglebeak)

I like Trump. Smart and funny. Never drinks coffee (does he know Coke is loaded with caffeine?)

I don't like Morning Joe. Cranky and grumpy, morning coffee notwithstanding.

Aside from saying he never gives up, Trump is also on record as saying--surprised that someone should question it--"I always win." And he's smart enough to turn losing into winning, something most of his opponents can't manage.

Howard said...

In case you didn't notice it, Bill Clinton was the most successful republican agenda president since Calvin Coolidge.

buwaya said...

I agree that age and health would be the most likely problem for Trump.

His incredible energy won the campaign for him, certainly. It was a masterful performance, one for the ages. And done with a remarkably tiny, and moreover shifting staff. He flipped through people like changing tools on a Swiss Army knife. This was hands on management work at a superhuman level.

And even now he has no grey eminence, no grand vizier, like GHW Bush had James Baker or Obama had Jarrett. He uses people as tools, he is not just the chairman of some collective. He is much like Napoleon Bonaparte in this. His is really a one-man act. Uniquely so in the category of US presidents.

But its just this genius that falls away with age and illness. And then there is the destructive effect of the office. It really isn't a place for an old man, or an old woman. Trump will be Trump, up to a point, and no further.

Perhaps at some point he will put together a collective, but its not likely as the US elite will not cooperate. There is a tremendous effort at limiting Trumps access to talent.

Mark said...

Why Trump would run --

He knows that if he does not, then the Establishment, the Deep State and the progressives that want to turn the U.S. into the third-world, they would all win. And he'll be damned if he lets that happen.

tcrosse said...

In case you didn't notice it, Bill Clinton was the most successful republican agenda president since Calvin Coolidge.

While he lasted, the most successful Liberal Agenda president was Nixon.

Michael K said...

There is a tremendous effort at limiting Trumps access to talent.

Yes, this is why McConnell has been foot dragging.

I also wonder about 2020. Pence and Haley ?

Michael K said...

Blogger Howard said...
In case you didn't notice it, Bill Clinton was the most successful republican agenda president since Calvin Coolidge.


More Howard attempts at humor, Bill Clinton got the Congress to go GOP for the first time since 1932.

buwaya said...

The genius is the disruptive element in history, the thing that makes nonsense of calculations, of trends. And then he leaves everything fundamentally changed, and for generations others deal with the overturned world he left them.

Alexander, Caesar, Genghis, Frederick, Napoleon, Hitler.
And many lesser ones, who perhaps did not slot into the right moment, or fortune got rid of them too early - or just in time.

Michael K said...

And many lesser ones, who perhaps did not slot into the right moment, or fortune got rid of them too early - or just in time.

Nixon appointed Ruckleshouse who gave us the DDT ban in spite of science and malaria to keep the third world population sick.

Leland said...

I'm so old, I remember when MSNBC used to have wall to wall coverage warning us of the Y2K bug. NBC even made a movie to make sure we were good and scared. They definitely have an audience for their "news".

Rick said...

Trump allies are telling the president his “fixer” could flip for the feds, just like Michael Flynn, Rick Gates and George Papadopoulos.

Since these three "flips" provided exactly zero evidence against Trump why would people believe linking those examples advances the argument? How does someone reach Scarborough's position without thinking about what they write?

Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...

AA: Okay, now I've read the article for you. Isn't that what blogging is all about?

Yes, and thank you for that.

Now, even Trump’s most steadfast allies are quietly admitting that the Southern District of New York’s investigation poses an existential threat to his future...

Writing stuff like this *used to work*. The co-ordinated production of stuff like this *used to work*. Now it just makes the people who churn it out look mentally ill. And that's interesting, because objectively the content and even the tone of what used to be considered "respectable" media hasn't changed all that much. Not all that long ago a paragraph like the one you excerpted would have been accepted by most news-consumers as sober, professional, and credible reporting, reporting that could and did break its subjects. Now it just sounds batshit.

buwaya said...

Nixon was an intelligent man, but not a genius in the historical sense. This is an indefinable thing, though many of these people had extraordinary mental abilities.

Napoleon had a near-photographic memory, an instinctive grasp of mass psychology (he could "read" a crowd), a tremendous ability to multitask - he could keep a dozen clerks simultaneously busy, dictating correspondence to each. And that uncommon skill of fully grasping a complex situation. He had no planning staff as such, though he did put together an efficient staff for coordination and communication under Berthier. A campaign or battle, with all the moving pieces and the qualities and state of each and where they were on the map (though he obsessed about physical maps), this was all in his head. Like a chess master, he could play the game deeper than his opponents even when they were collectives.

Arguably he began to fail when the wars and armies and the complexity of politics simply got too big for his individual abilities and his multiple semi-independent enemies and his own dispersed forces just created too chaotic a situation to personally grasp and control. The game got too big.

Its likely other genius-level players had similar mental qualities.

And then there is the quality of dominance, or force of personality. All leaders have some at least. The historical genius has it off the scale.

John said...

Young Hegelian said:

Trump may go down in history with JFK & the last admin of FDR as administrations that wouldn't have happened had the public known the truth about the health of the candidates.

What basis is there for suspecting that President Trump's health is nothing less than what it seems? Yes, he is 70 like me and he is somewhat more vigorous than me but I am still pretty active. No health problems. Travel, work out daily, work 50-60 hours a week. I enjoy my life and in 20-25 years may think of scaling back a bit. I don't think of either of us as elderly, though I am happy to get head of line privileges (In PR, by law, anyone over 60 gets to go the head of any line) and the senior discount in restaurants.

My wife is slightly older, still teaches high school full time and this semester is teaching some sort of adult ed 3 hours a day, 4 days a week, also very active in the church. Like Redd Foxx, she keeps telling me she might die tomorrow but I suspect she will outlive me.

I see President Trump, healthwise, as similar to myself. Clean living (no smoking/alcohol) and lots of activity seem to help us both.

If President Trump had any health problems, no matter how minor, we would hear about them on a daily basis.

As for FDR and JFK, their serious health problems were well know at the time. But only by reporters and other politicians and all worked very hard at keeping them secret.

So I call BS that President Trump is secretly unhealthy. Unless you can give us some evidence?

John Henry

Dr Weevil said...

Poor chumps don't seem to have figured out that most of us know that "Trump's most steadfast allies" don't confide in JournoListers, or MSM propogandists, or NeverTrump pseudointellectuals, or in anyone who would confide in such people. Trump and his allies are quite capable of keeping secrets, and anyone who does claim to know what they are thinking is either insane or simply lying.

Unknown said...

Arguably he began to fail when the wars and armies and the complexity of politics simply got too big for his individual abilities and his multiple semi-independent enemies and his own dispersed forces just created too chaotic a situation to personally grasp and control. The game got too big.

This was Churchill's strongest criticism of Kitchener, that he was trying to run WWI out of his head with no staff support as if it were some limited Colonial campagain. (Of course they two men disliked each other on a personal level as well).

John said...

Blogger buwaya said...

Napoleon had a near-photographic memory, an instinctive grasp of mass psychology (he could "read" a crowd), a tremendous ability to multitask - he could keep a dozen clerks

Yes, all true. On the other hand, he was also responsible for monstrosities from which Europe has still not fully recovered. How many deaths and how much destruction was he responsible, all for the glory of France?

Recently watched a 4 part miniseries on Napoleon on Amazon Prime. Starts at 18 Brumaire to his death on St Helena. Called "Napoleon".

Madison's own Mike Duncan has a podcast series called Revolutions. 6-7 series, each 25-30 episodes, each 30-40 minutes, on the revolutions in England (Cromwell), America, France, Haiti, South America, Europe (1840s). I skipped about half of France and am most of the way through the South America series. One of the interesting things I learned was that the head of the Chilean Navy, a Scotsman, tried to rescue Napoleon from St Helena to become emperor of all South America. By the time they got there, Napoleon was too feeble to go anywhere.

Wikipedia calls this unfounded speculation but it is an interesting idea.

If you think it odd that a Scotsman would head Chile's navy, consider that the liberator of Chile was Irish, Bernardo O'Higgins, and that the Spanish Viceroy of the richest part of South America was Bernardo's father, Ambrose, born in Ireland.

Revolutionspodcast.com for the podcasts.

john Henry

John said...

There seems to be some wonderment about whether President Trump will run in 2020. Did everyone really miss this?

Trump’s 2020 Campaign Announcement Had a Very Trumpian Rollout

By KATIE ROGERS and MAGGIE HABERMANFEB. 27, 2018

WASHINGTON — With just 980 days to go until the next presidential election, President Trump said Tuesday that he would run again in 2020, an announcement that several White House advisers said simply meant the president would step up his preferred and much-missed activity of performing for an adoring crowd.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/27/us/politics/trump-2020-brad-parscale.html

He could change his mind, of course. No reason to expect him to.

John Henry

John said...

Lots has been made of the fact that President Trump did not win the popular vote.

Noodling around looking for something else, I found this in Wikipedia:

in 1992 Bill Clinton only won 43% of the popular vote. I already knew that. What I did not know was that he only won a majority of the popular vote in Arkansas and in DC.

Your trivia fact for the day.

John Henry

YoungHegelian said...

@JH,

So I call BS that President Trump is secretly unhealthy. Unless you can give us some evidence?

I'm sorry if my post read as if I was insinuating that Trump is now hiding some health issue. I truly doubt that that is the case, since he exists in such a hostile environment that, unlike JFK or FDR, we would likely know about it by now if he had some major health issue. I do, however, believe that the press knowingly covered up HRC's health issues during the campaign.

To clarify, by 1/2021, which is when Trump would be inaugurated for his second term, he will be almost 75. That's getting, even by modern health standards, pretty damn old for a job as stressful as president. By the end of his second term in 2024, I would bet that there will be health issues that affect his job performance.

Reagan & Trump were very close to the same age when inaugurated. There are strong disagreements among scholars over how much 1) there was any impairment in Reagan's performance as he aged & 2) if there was impairment, how much of it was age related vs related to getting shot. I haven't read up on that specific historical topic so I'm not going to argue it one way or the other.

cubanbob said...

The prosecutor for the SDNY? Why does Trump have to worry about him? Trump can pardon Cohen and the other targets of this political prosecution and then fire the prosecutor. It's doubtful the House will impeach him and even more doubtful the Senate will convict him. Trump has already succeeded in demonstrating the corruption in DC so any attempted prosecution will be seen as a political prosecution by half of the country. In the meantime the criminal referral of Andrew McCabe , a very senior person at the FBI and tied to the Democrats is what really needs to be looked at instead of the deflection of the Bimbo Stormy Daniels.

Bruce Hayden said...

“Now, even Trump’s most steadfast allies are quietly admitting that the Southern District of New York’s investigation poses an existential threat to his future, both politically and legally.”

Let me remind everyone here that the SDNY is probably the least sympathetic federal jurisdiction to PDT in the country. The prosecutors there, the AUSAs, were almost all hired by Loretta Lynch, James Comey, and Preet Bharara, the previous USAs for the district. Indeed, Lynch was USA under both Clinton and Obama, before she became AG, and Bharara was her handpicked successor. The guy who put fellow Indian-American in prison for half a year for making two illegal contributions to a doomed Senate race by a college friend, while helping to keep the Clinton investigations under control. Indeed, at one point, the USA for the EDNY was threatened by AG Lynch with the transfer of one of the Clinton investigations to Bharara in the SDNY, if they didn’t toe the line. Bharara, the one USA that Trump had to fire because he refused to tender his resignation. Let me reiterate that - most of the career prosecutors in the SDNY were hand picked by Lynch, Comey, and Bharara.

FIDO said...

Joe Cheater is outraged at the effrontery of Trump.

Stay classy, Joe!

I remember when you used to be relevant and less unhinged but that was before you dove face first into Mika's cleavage. She must have a magic bosom to make you go that unhinged.

mccullough said...

I question the “talent” that Trump is being shut out of.

Comey, McCabe, Rosenstein, and Miller are not talented. They are incompetent swamp rats who our sycophantic national media tries to sell us as Competent Public Sevants. These guys couldn’t find their collective ass with both hands. Comey’s claim to fame is prosecuting Martha Stewart. What a fucking joke.

Comey and Mueller completely botched the anthrax investigation they supervised. To an arrogant moron like W these guys seemed great. To people who expect results, they are Rosencrantz and

Now multiply Comey and Mueller by 1,000 positions. That’s the swamp “talent.”

People with the ability to kiss the right ass and knife in the back the people who actual get the job done. That’s the “talent.”

Fire all these guys and nominate the people who get the job done in these departments and agencies. No one on the Hill or in the national media will have heard of these men and women. Give the back of the hand to the Congress and the media. Tell them these are the best people by Tweet. Tell them by Tweet the Swamp Rats are gone. We want people who get the job done. We are tired of the ones who dont



AllenS said...

If Crooked Hillary can run in 2020, why can't Trump?

Michael K said...

Fire all these guys and nominate the people who get the job done in these departments and agencies.

That's the problem. The harassment of Trump nominees is designed to isolate him.

The Democrats did the same thing to Bush but 9/11 interrupted the game.

JAORE said...

I also remember when it became clear Hillary would not win the election.

Good times.

JAORE said...

Lots has been made of the fact that President Trump did not win the popular vote.

Hillary did not win a majority of the popular vote either.

Khesanh 0802 said...

I get the impression that Trump is very good at pacing himself and delegating important activity to his subordinates ( Pompeo to NORK for example, or the smooth, quiet coordination of the allied Syrian strike for another ). I think the inability to pace and delegate is what causes such burnout for Presidents. Most are professional politicians who are used to doing everything themselves and try to keep that up in office. (Obama is the perfect example.) I think this past week is a good example of Trump pacing. He got the hell out of Washington where everyone is always on stage, and met with Abe at his place in Florida where he could manage the time schedule - and expectations - as he wanted.

The longer Trump is president the more I am impressed with how he handles the job itself. The man knows how to manage a gigantic enterprise with a minimum of fuss.

Michael The Magnificent said...

Yes, remember "Fitzmas?" The left wanted Cheney humiliated. They obsessed about it.

I remember how the left demanded that Scooter Libby be frog marched to jail for leaking Valerie Plame's identity to Robert Novak.

But when it came out that it wasn't Libby, but Richard Armitage that had leaked her identity to Novak, how not one lefty demanded that Armitage be frog marched to jail.

They didn't give a crap about Plame, they wanted a scalp from the Bush administration.

tcrosse said...

I suppose an existential threat is that the ghost of Sartre is going to come and blow Gauloise smoke in your face.

Matthew Sablan said...

God. Election night was surreal. I remember hearing she'd opened champagne in the afternoon. It was beautiful seeing hubris in action.

Drago said...

MS: "God. Election night was surreal. I remember hearing she'd opened champagne in the afternoon."

Here's the video of the staged, non-spontaneous, totally faked "congratulations" given to Hillary by Bill and Chelsea.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGIQLYhMerk

My favorite part of this faked 'genuine moment' (as fake as LLR Chuck's and Inga's hoax dossier) is Bill setting up and then performing the fake gee, I'm so excited about this win that I just have to jump up and down like a pogo-stickin' moron!

And wouldn't you know it, a camera person just happened to be there to catch this wonderful 'genuine' moment.

LOL

Every bit as genuine as the loving and warm dance shared on the beach by Bill and Hillary many years back that gee, whiz, was supposed to be totally, totally private but some nosey reporter got in there without any Secret Service members being able to stop him.

Darn it!

Matthew Sablan said...

I'd warn against trying to mock Trump into submission. Ask Obama how well that plan worked. I'm convinced spite was a major Trump motivator.

Howard said...

Blogger Dr Mike says... Bill Clinton got the Congress to go GOP for the first time since 1932. Yes, and he embraced their agenda (triangulation) much to the chagrin to the Hillary wing of the left. Your grade-school naiveté of sausage making does you no credit.

Howard said...

Blogger tcrosse said... While he lasted, the most successful Liberal Agenda president was Nixon.

Yes, and Clinton actively sought out RMN's counsel. Both were very successful at getting shit done.

Howard said...

Blogger Michael K said...
Nixon appointed Ruckleshouse who gave us the DDT ban in spite of science and malaria to keep the third world population sick.


Fake news from Fox/Rush brainwasting

Douglas said...

What I'm not getting is what Cohen is going to "flip" on. What crimes did he commit with Trump? Take the Stormy Daniels case, for example. If there's a victim there, it's Trump, who was extorted by Stormy threatening to go public with their consensual one-night stand. What's Cohen going to say, yes, she extorted us? What am I missing?

Breezy said...

Joe is just throwing meat out to his hyenas.

hstad said...

Young Hegelian states...

"... Trump may go down in history with JFK & the last admin of FDR as administrations that wouldn't have happened had the public known the truth about the health of the candidates....."

4/21/18, 11:22 AM

I think you need to revisit your conclusion? Remind us how many millions of people voted for Hillary Clinton during the 2016 Presidential elections, despite the public and MSM evidence of major health problems. She might have won other than her arrogance of not visiting Wisconsin and expecting Michigan and Pennsylvania to be in her colum. And please, don't come up with the Electoral College defense. This is about your comments about people not voting for an unhealthy candidate LOL.