"... stemming from what NBA commissioner Adam Silver called 'disturbing and heartbreaking' allegations of harassment and violence toward female employees within the organization, the league announced Wednesday. The NBA launched an investigation seven months ago following a Sports Illustrated report in February which described
'a corporate culture rife with misogyny and predatory sexual behavior' that spanned decades in the Mavericks' organization... 'First, just an apology to the women involved,' Cuban told ESPN. '... This is not something that just is an incident and then it's over. It stays with people. It stays with families. And I'm just sorry I didn't see it. I'm just sorry I didn't recognize it.' While Cuban himself was not cited in any of the incidents of harassment or misconduct, the NBA said that he didn't pay enough attention to the business culture within the Mavericks' organization...."
ESPN reports.
We were just looking at the 2020 election odds, and Cuban was on the list, with 50-1, trailing Beto O'Rourke.
And here's a post from February 2017,
"Trump is trying to figure out who's going to run against him in 2020":
It's really hard to figure out:
Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon, asked consultants to scour the backgrounds of four outspoken Democrats — Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown, Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, two sources close to the administration said....
The White House believes both Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren are “too old” to mount a serious campaign three years from now, sources said....
Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?
Posts
79 comments:
Then dammit we will just have to force Oprah to run!
It won't be one of those guys
"Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?"
GW Bush?
When you're a rich NBA owner, they let you do what you want. You can grab 'em by the playbook.
'disturbing and heartbreaking'
That was written by a committee. Two words with divergent meanings.
The committee included women: heartbreaking is a wholly feminine word.
I think it was also lawyer heavy: disturbing is a word used by lawyers in public. It sounds good but is non specific.
-XC
Howard Schultz.
Danegeld is back. But who picks the Danes that recieve it.
"Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?"
I don't see Trump as vulnerable as you do. Remember, when the time comes, most people won't go to the polls outraged about Twitter or personal shortcomings, but what's in their wallets, on their dinner tables, and how much gas can they put in their tanks.
Are we at war? Are we winning? How is crime?
If the economy remains healthy until 2020, then Trump will win. It will still be close. The days of Reagan/Mondale are long gone and the media is overwhelmingly Democrat to let that happen again.
None of this is surprising to me as alpha males who seek out power and influence tend to abuse that power and influence to get even more.
"Have we ever had such a vulnerable President"
Why do you think Trump is vulnerable?
Why do you think Trump is vulnerable?
I wondered that too. Every incumbent President is vulnerable to a certain extent but Trump doesn't seem as if he's extreme in his vulnerability. In fact he has more things working in his favor that have sunk other incumbents.
Bill Clinton was vulnerable, and the best the Republicans could do was a guy who couldn't even get himself excited.
Spartacus is credible.
Trump wins 40 states. People aren’t stupid. He has a great record.
Nice & convenient that they can just pull a big $$ dollar amount out of thin air and absolve Cuban's organization of its alleged ugliness. Would they do the same for a Repub? How much would Cavanaugh have to pony up? And why didn't the old nasty Clippers' owner get a similar deal from the league?
Woman feelz rule the airwaves.
Report crimes, suck it up on the rest. Nobody cares but your husband. Your husband likes to care about the woman stuff you go through. win-win there.
I don't see president trump as particularly vulnerable either.
Economy is screaming hot
Nork Korea seems to be resolving
We seem on the way to mostly zero tarriffs
Obamacare dead
$5bn in borderwall funding
Illegal immigration way down
50-60 new circuit and appeals court judges (26 in the last 2 weeks)
2,perhaps 4, new Supremes
Closer to peace in the mideast than anytime in the past 4 years
And more
All in the face of tremendous headwinds
And in just 2 years when most other presidents are still trying to find their footing.
If he is at all vulnerable it is because it will be tough for him to top his performance so far.
John Henry
Mark Cuban, girlie man,
Re Cuban
This feels like extortion more than anything else
John Henry
Oh, for Christ's sake, Althouse, the NBA is stacked with alpha black men who don't give a shit about your feminism, are making millions and are racking up a new pussy every night.
How are the corporate people at the top of this pile of shit supposed to exempt themselves from this and relate to the players?
I'll go with Kamala. She's a fairytale. She's clean and articulate and just a few years ago she would have been bringing us coffee.
Cuban is legendary at The Cheetah in Atlanta.
Is Trump "a vulnerable President"? I don't see it.
Blogger Bill, Republic of Texas said...
"I'll go with Kamala. She's a fairytale. She's clean and articulate and just a few years ago she would have been bringing us coffee."
She provided Willie Brown with more than coffee. That makes "clean" hard to defend.
Does "articulate" now mean "reads well from a script?
You are dead on when you say she's a fairy tale.
You'd think the team name would have been a clue to prospective female employees.
"She provided Willie Brown with more than coffee. That makes "clean" hard to defend."
That will go nowhere fast with the media.
What right-thinking person would want to run for President? Look at the hell thrown at BK for alleged hijinks as a 17 year old! Normal people have embarrassing youthful indiscretions, and what sane well-adjusted person would want to put himself or herself (and family!) through the inevitable microscopic scrutinization and cartoonish vilification. While we have many folks who would like the job and could do it well, we have become a nation where only weirdos and nutty egomaniacs would actually expose their loved ones to the process's inevitable cruelty and embarrassment.
AJ Lynch said...
Nice & convenient that they can just pull a big $$ dollar amount out of thin air and absolve Cuban's organization of its alleged ugliness.,
That just makes the actual lawsuits easier
The NBA is the Golden State Warriors and LeBron. But LeBron is getting old and tired. The Dallas Mavericks, like most teams, aren’t even an after thought.
"Why do you think Trump is vulnerable?"
He's President. There are a million issues. He's done things in a way that gives his critics openings. Come on, want a fight? I think he's amazingly resilient and flexible. But it's just crazy that no one knows how to get to him. He's so abnormal that it might seem to be easy, and the abnormality weirdly works in his favor a lot of the time. But come on! He's vulnerable! Other people are just to grounded in normal politics that they can't find the inroads.
It's a mistake to think he's too vulnerable, but why can't any of these political geniuses figure out what he's doing and how to reach people?
Trump is vulnerable because he has no party structure to call on. He's the Lone Ranger.
The elite of the Republican Party despise him as much as the Democrats do.
I think he'll probably win re-election, but then we'll face the same problem we faced the Reagan, the lack of a successor.
Remember how we kept waiting for the Next Reagan? There never was one. Trump is a one-off, too. The elite of both parties only have to wait one 2 or 6 more years and then they take everything back.
He's not particularly vulnerable from the left because:
1) He's not very ideological - just wants to solve problems and then very loudly take credit for solving them
2) The left has already "shot their wad" (the original meaning, Lazlo!) against him, and it hasn't worked.
He could be vulnerable from the right, if someone made a third-party run, resulting in the Demo candidate winning. The question is if there enough never-Trumpers who would support such a candidate. Would they really rather have a Demo president, or have they just been saying that because it makes them seem cool?
He's President. There are a million issues. He's done things in a way that gives his critics openings.
Yes, that comes with the territory. But you said, "Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?" This suggests he's unusually vulnerable, more vulnerable than most incumbents. Every incumbent in the last 50 years except Reagan and Clinton has been at least as vulnerable--Obama because of Obamacare and his general crappiness, W because of Iraq, HW Bush and Carter obviously were.
It's a mistake to think he's too vulnerable, but why can't any of these political geniuses figure out what he's doing and how to reach people?
He knows negotiation, and he knows how to take over the soap channel with his own message.
The soap channel includes the traditional posturing as expert that Trump's critics on the right use. Trump beats that too.
Actual expertise might work against Trump but is most likely to appear as a sense of humor.
And he hated Trump too. They all hate Trump because he doesn't pretend.
There's so few credible candidates because Clinton is the only possible candidate.
"1) He's not very ideological - just wants to solve problems and then very loudly take credit for solving them"
I think his play on Kavanaugh is hilarious. "Sure, I'll dump him if she shows up and is credible." (because he knows she isn't)
There are so few credible candidates because none of them are allowed to be normal. (not that Trump is -- my belief is that it takes a sociopath to run for the Presidency, no matter the party) They have to kowtow to the extreme elements of the party or they risk being unpersoned.
First term senators and various billionaires look at recent history and the mirror and say "why not me". We've had two dark horse candidates in a row win. Maybe the next winner will come from a different, unexpected place. The lawyer for a porn star?......We've been at war for quite a while now. This is the first war that has not produced a presidential contender.
If you just went statistically Trump isn't vulnerable. Historically, Presidents overwhelmingly win re-election. In the last 120 years there have been only 5 one term presidents:
1. Bush
2. Carter
3. Ford
4. Hoover
5. Taft
An argument can be made that the American people will tolerate almost anything to maintain the status quo. The exceptions being major recessions, depressions and someone that wasn't elected to the office in the first place. Tweeting or "style" isn't one of those reasons.
What is the old saw of politics? There are only 2 types of campaigns, "Don't change horses midstream", and "Hope for a new future".
If I was one of the younger candidates thinking about running for election I'd be looking instead for 2024. If the economy is humming along he'll be re-elected. Pence is a much harder sell in 2024. He will "own" all the "vulnerabilities" of the previous administration, while still representing a change to the status quo, and with none of the media challenging abilities of the Trump campaign.
Obama was "vulnerable" in 2012 Obamacare, right up until Candy Crowley beat Mitt Romney in the second debate.
Sometimes I wish I had some interest in genetic freaks on steroids playing with balls, because then I could boycott them.
If the point of the statement is not really Trump's unusual vulnerability, but the low quality of the contenders, then just say, "Have we ever had such a lack of credible contenders?" But two years out from the election, I suspect the answer is yes. Contenders gain credibility mainly from running a successful campaign for the nomination. Two years out there are just a bunch of question marks.
What makes this time possibly different is that the Democrats have gone off the rails. They've damaged the brand and shifted hard left to the point that they have little chance in 2020, and are less likely to to take the House than anyone would have thought a year ago.
He's President. There are a million issues. He's done things in a way that gives his critics openings. Come on, want a fight? I think he's amazingly resilient and flexible. But it's just crazy that no one knows how to get to him. He's so abnormal that it might seem to be easy, and the abnormality weirdly works in his favor a lot of the time. But come on! He's vulnerable! Other people are just to grounded in normal politics that they can't find the inroads.
Style not substance. That works for an initial election, where there is no substance yet just promises so you can only go with style. The thing is Trump's style worked in 2016. It was an anti-elite style. That's where the election was. Trump knew it. Exploited it. Jeb Bush was the traditional style of campaigning. You saw how far it got him. "Please clap".
I thought that the correct way for Clinton to combat Trump was to do the exact OPPOSITE of what she did. Instead of painting Trump as "dark" and scary and dangerous she should have painted him as a clown and not serious. Then his tweets become liabilities. They reinforce the negative image. They tried that on the edges, but the 2 messages are in opposition. The problem she had with painting him as a clown was that clowns are fun, and Clinton was never "the fun one" in any room. She was Tracy Flick.
How do you combat him in re-election? Especially after painting him as "dark" but with no concentration camps showing up yet and with some arguably moderate successes (economy, Korea, etc). All while still not sounding like the elite (Trump's not elite remember and he attacks the elite). Maybe "our luck is running out". But that isn't a "hope and change" election.
The best shot the democrats have in 2020 is someone from outside the political process. An actor of some sort. Oprah, yes, but also George Clooney, etc. Business person of some sort. I don't think Zuckerberg is likely since he's now seen as creepy. Anti-elite. Bernie was anti-elite after all. He wasn't even a democrat!
Bezos maybe but he's more interested in going to space than the White House. I do think that Trump is worried about a Bezos, which is one of the reasons he attacks him. When Bezos bought the Washington Post, I think Trump saw that as a way to manipulate the media for a possible run.
The good news is that the democratic party is filled with insiders that will manipulate the process to garner the result they want. Even Obama's nomination was because Harry Reid didn't want Clinton to win. I think that's one of the reasons why Trump ran as a Republican, he didn't have to worry about getting backstabbed by the party.
The republicans also have an "insider" system but Trump identified the way they operate. Money. The donors picked the candidates in the past (Dole, Bush, McCain, Mitt, Jeb) by ensuring that they got the most money in the primary process. Trump didn't need money though. That was the genius.
I read this, and then the clear position on gender relations articulated in the subsequent post, as the very initial, (& subtle) cautious steps of a cruel neutralist (who has noted an interest in moving out of Madison) offering to throw her hat in the ring.
More political savvy folk than I might do the calculus of the checkboxes that Candidate Althouse would have vs. the incumbent. First thing that comes to mind: Where did President Trump achieve victory? Was it some place they call the Midwest? There be dragons there?
The downfall of possible Candidate Althouse would be the twisting of some words found on her Ripkenesque blog. Start the scrubbing!!
Trump’s contenders are weak because the Dem Party has become about half Socialist whiners who are focused on creating more pronouns.
Even Obama can’t apoease these people much. He pardoned Private Manning but that wasn’t enough. The more Dems have to appease their Socialist Transgendered Base, the worse they look to the 80% of Americans who think they are fucking nuts.
Trump is making inroads with minorities because most of them aren’t interested in the Major Issues We Face about Transgenders, most of whom are wealthy white kids.
Yeah, well. Nixon was vulnerable in 1972 too. How did that work out?
"It's a mistake to think he's too vulnerable, but why can't any of these political geniuses figure out what he's doing and how to reach people?"
The reason Trump is not vulnerable from the Democrats is simple. It's the same reason he won in the first place. It's the reason Stormy Daniels or the "grab 'em" comment did not do him in. The Democrats have less than zero credibility, and the American people at large realize this. It's not just the hypocrisy regarding Bill Clinton that is on dazzling display, but on virtually every subject as well. Collusion with Russia? Check. Corruption? Check. Big spending? Check.
Oh, and the economy is going at, what, over 4%?
We have a vulnerable President because he has no credible contenders. Trump would never have been elected otherwise.
"It's a mistake to think he's too vulnerable, but why can't any of these political geniuses figure out what he's doing and how to reach people?"
And in case I misinterpreted your comment...
Perhaps by political geniuses you mean: why can't a Democrat like Cory Booker or Elizabeth Warren do what Trump does?
It's like asking why can't more people be like Warren Buffet, or Steve Jobs, or Michael Jordan.
It sort of answers itself, doesn't it?
" I don't think Zuckerberg is likely since he's now seen as creepy. "
I also don't think Zuck is as committed to the socialist left. At heart, he's still an outsider - a nerd. He's also a capitalist and probably believes-- deep down-- in a meritocracy.
"Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?"
There are so few credible contenders because the brains of the Left have atrophied. For decades, Democrats and Leftists have not been forced to defend their behavior or the ideas. Leftists do not, and cannot, contend with outside ideas. Conservatives make a living doing this. It's why liberal talk radio fails.
1. Bush - 2. Carter -3. Ford - 4. Hoover - 5. Taft
You need to add LBJ to the List. He wanted to run in '68 but knew he would lose. Of course, technically, he was as 2nd term president.
Ford, was selected as VP, because he was the only one the D's would support. He was designed to fail. Carter, Bush, and Hoover were victims of Rescission/depressions. Taft lost because TR split the party and ran against him.
Since Trump has been trumpeting the economic good times, he'd better hope there's not a recession in 2020, or he's toast.
48% of USA Voted for Hillary. The worst candidate ever.
You can be sure at LEAST 45% will vote for Cuban, Harris or even Booker.
67 million households don't speak English at home. These people vote. And they vote Democratic 2-1. Blacks vote 80-90% D. If the R's run a black candidate he *may* get 25% of the black vote. IOW, 75% of blacks would vote for a Yellow Dog if it ran as a Democrat.
Demographics is destiny.
"There are so few credible contenders because the brains of the Left have atrophied. For decades, Democrats and Leftists have not been forced to defend their behavior or the ideas. Leftists do not, and cannot, contend with outside ideas. Conservatives make a living doing this. It's why liberal talk radio fails."
Yes.
Trump is a Blessing from God. No one else even talked about doing what he has done. He's the miracle we needed.
Rich men can always buy themselves out of trouble, be it Mark Cuban or OJ Simpson.
The Invulnerable Trump is in control of the information on his opponents methods and vulnerabilities. And he is protected from assassination by the Military and Blackwater. The game is playing out on Trump's bid of 7 Notrumps. The only way to get to Trump is to over through the table with a Soros paid riots turned into a civil war to replace the Constitution.
Trump vulnerable? Why? He has kept more promises than any president since Reagan. BIG promises. Important promises.
Vulnerable because of Mueller? That witch hunt will end up helping him by 2020. If it all hits the fan by November, it will help him solidify the GOP hold on Congress.
Vulnerable because of a news media overwhelmingly against him? He has higher ratings than they do. The more they rage and slander him, the better he does.
Vulnerable because the elites hate him? The are a lot more non-elites. The elites have trashed America for so long they no longer have any credibility.
There's no way to pancake-powder the Mark Cuban story - especially his retaining of the Mav.com Reporter and Domestic Abuser, Earl Sneed.
You need to add LBJ to the List. He wanted to run in '68 but knew he would lose. Of course, technically, he was as 2nd term president.
I thought of that, but that's still a non-issue for Trump because if he doesn't run, he can't be re-elected. It's sort of a "fix itself" problem. I don't think there's anybody that saying Trump is so vulnerable he's going to not run? Only in fantasies or barring a health scare of some sort.
Since Trump has been trumpeting the economic good times, he'd better hope there's not a recession in 2020, or he's toast.
Agreed that is probably the biggest danger to Trump. Unless he can make a credible argument that it's someone else's fault. Like, say, democrats taking the house and attempting to impeach him.
Demographics is destiny.
Yes, but the "Obama coalition" appears to have been unique to Obama. It's why Hillary didn't campaign in Wisconsin, it's why she basically ignored Michigan. Their numbers had Hillary pulling in the same demographics that Obama did, and they just didn't. There is credible evidence that Hillary drove Trump voters to the polls. GOTV doesn't work if you just assume that people will vote for you based on the color of their skin.
I think Trump will get more Hispanic and African American support than he did the first time around (again, barring a recession, etc). That won't show up in polls, but it will show up in anonymity of the ballot box.
Kamala Harris has the best chance of being the nominee, IMO, for just that reason. She ticks off 2 of the identity politics boxes that Democrats want. A black woman. A woman to avenge Hillary and a african american to regain the Obama coalition.
Which is why she will probably be torpedoed behind the scenes, by Hillary. Who it seems hasn't gone away.
There are so few credible contenders because the brains of the Left have atrophied. For decades, Democrats and Leftists have not been forced to defend their behavior or the ideas. Leftists do not, and cannot, contend with outside ideas. Conservatives make a living doing this. It's why liberal talk radio fails
Simple feedback loop theory would tell you that if you were corrupt (financial, sexual, violent) in some way, its better to be a democrat than a republican in America. Which means that the party will attract those that need the get out of jail free cards.
It's a shame and disgrace the way this president has been treated. His response should be studied for the incredible restraint, intelligence and guts this man has shown while facing down deranged mobs, traitors, and assassins without respite. What other man could stand so strong and accomplish so much while under unrelenting attack? This man Trump is an American hero, a legend forming before our eyes. The greatest president since Lincoln.
Oh, and Cuban's a phony piece of shit Democrat party member, just like the normals expected. Democrat party members never fail to demonstrate what deceitful, hypocritical scumbags they are.
@Althouse, perhaps the fact that Trump has so few credible contenders means he isn’t all that vulnerable? Just a thought.
Hope Bannon right about frontrunner being too old to be credible. That was the problem for Republicans in '96 and '08.
And ten million dollars out of his pocket for Mark Cuban is like a ten dollar bill out of my pocket to me.
Restrained Trump? What did he say about FBI yesterday (just another day in TrumpWorld)?
The way in which Trump is most abnormal, Ann, is that he doesn't back down or sit quietly when assaulted by the media- he punches back twice as hard. That abnormality isn't a weakness or a vulnerability, though the media and the Democrats try concern trolling him on it relentlessly.
It's nice that left-leaning rich men can pay indulgences and gain forgiveness for their (Sexual) sins. Why should they be bound by our petty rules.
Darrell: "Trump is a Blessing from God. No one else even talked about doing what he has done. He's the miracle we needed."
Ditto, ditto, ditto ........ and Amen.
Watching ESPN's report, it's clearly a Cuban whitewash -- no outrage whatsoever.
Cuban's political aspirations died yesterday, unless he wants to run as a Republican.
It's a shame and disgrace the way this president has been treated. His response should be studied for the incredible restraint, intelligence and guts this man has shown while facing down deranged mobs, traitors, and assassins without respite. What other man could stand so strong and accomplish so much while under unrelenting attack? This man Trump is an American hero, a legend forming before our eyes. The greatest president since Lincoln.
Trump was not my first choice, but I am beginning to think this might be true.
Cuban's political aspirations died yesterday, unless he wants to run as a Republican.
Mark Cuban is a 9/11 Truther - or has in the past - at least played footsies with them. He was never a viable candidate.
(eaglebeak)
Trump is abnormal only because we live in an age in which normality = political correctness, metrosexuality, and duplicity.
Trump is not politically correct, is not a metrosexual, and--although he lies like a trouper when he thinks it's necessary--not furtive.
Also, when he thinks he needs to--"Donald pisses ice water," as Roy Cohn observed.
In other words, there's a lot of calculation behind that bull-in-a-china-shop.
Look how deftly he's handling the Kavanaugh-Ford mess--he can be totally restrained if it serves his interests.
Trump's opposition are living in the Mountains of Madness, far away across the Sea of Resistance. He's as vulnerable as anyone his age - he could stroke out unexpectedly, I guess - in his health. But politically he has changed the scene drastically, and to his benefit. If he's still walking and talking in 2020 he will win.
"Look how deftly he's handling the Kavanaugh-Ford mess--he can be totally restrained if it serves his interests."
A few smart democrats are sick to their stomachs today upon realizing for the first time he's more intelligent and disciplined that they had ever assumed.
Chris Murphy, nasty little weasel faced man that he is, is no threat to anyone as a presidential candidate. Only he and his mother think he could be president.
The media always forgets that, with a few exceptions, Obama's approval ratings hovered in a low to mid forties range, with a boot licking simpering sycophant press core as his PR team. And Trump is not far off that, with a tsunami of shite thrown at him every day since his election. Amazing.
Have we ever had such a vulnerable President and so few credible contenders?
Nixon in 72?
Post a Comment