You might think Trump has set the midterms up as a referendum on himself, and I think that's true. But if the GOP wins, Trump antagonists are not going to give it to Trump and say his referendum passed and bow to democratic choice. They're going to say that racism won, and resisting and fighting is even more important now that we know so many Americans have been caught up in Trump's horrible scheme.
ADDED: I shouldn't have put a question mark in the post title. I really did mean you know. I'm not trying to be inventive. Sometimes there's reason to put the obvious down in print, to make a record in case anyone might doubt that we all knew. Also, it saves the trouble of having to write, after the fact, about not being surprised or wheel out the old "shocked, shocked" cliché one more time.
এতে সদস্যতা:
মন্তব্যগুলি পোস্ট করুন (Atom)
পোস্টগুলি
২২৪টি মন্তব্য:
224 এর 1 – থেকে 200 আরও নতুন» সবচেয়ে নতুন»Well yeah.
Winning hearts and minds.
Q "How do I convince people to listen to my arguments and respect them, especially if they disagree? I'm tired of losing."
A: "Just call them racists and see how that works."
what do they do if the "people of race" vote breaks in his favor
Exactly correct. Because no outcome can be a righteous rejection of "truth & justice" as defined by the progressives.
what do they do if the "people of race" vote breaks in his favor
Blame the Russians.
"what do they do if the "people of race" vote breaks in his favor"
Probably soil themselves.
When the Dems don't win the Presidency -- Putin!
When the Dems don't win the Electoral College -- outdated anti-democratic Constitution!
When the Dems don't win the Senate - outdated anti-democratic Constitution!
When the Dems don't win the House - Gerrymandering!
When the Dems don't control the Supreme Court -- Merrick Garland!
When the Dems don't control the Governors' mansions -- racism!
I jest, and I fully acknowledge the many, many flaws in the GOP as a party (too numerous to list here), but the Dem leaders, elected officials, activists and media enablers are just batshit crazy these days.
I'd be more impressed by this prediction if it wasn't entirely predictable.
Russia has spent $14 so far to influence this election.
That will be the difference.
Yup.
I supported a third party candidate last time, but the Democrats' refusal to be a loyal opposition, and insistence on being the “resistance” as if America were occupied France, has convinced me that the GOP needs to win. The kavanaugh shit show in particular makes me hope they win bigly in the senate.
Mattman26 said...
Well yeah.
Perfect.
"I'd be more impressed by this prediction if it wasn't entirely predictable."
Yeah, I should have left off the question mark in the post title. I really did mean you know. You already know.
If they lose, they will double down on what we have seen the last two years. They will yell louder, resort to increased levels of violence by groups like antifa and blm, etc.
They will not spend anytime trying to understand that a difference in political views does not make the other guys nazi, racist, white, misogynist, anti-semtic deplorables that need to be killed.
There will be seismic changes after this election.
The electorate has been completely re-divided.
Angry white women took over the democrat party and alienated black and hispanic voters.
The fallout will be grotesque.
Democrats will only accept that the election (any election) was a referendum on their ideas and their ideas lost if everyone accepts that their ideas lost because the electorate is made up of uneducated racists who can't grasp the beauty of liberal ideals.
I was impressed enough by Nate Silver’s essay on the breath of the systematic error needed for his forecast to be dead wrong that I don’t think we have to worry about it. Sadly.
In other news, water is wet.
Ann Althouse said...
"I'd be more impressed by this prediction if it wasn't entirely predictable."
Yeah, I should have left off the question mark in the post title. I really did mean you know. You already know.
What will be more fun will be to see how you all deal with the fact that angry single women have driven the democrat party off a cliff.
It will be black men and hispanic men that defect.
Achillies proves he's no mysogynist by clearly and openly celebrating his housewife soap opera brain-wiring by gushing about his wet dream of a catastrophic season ending finale.
You should help make your prediction come true by voting for the Republicans. Otherwise we'll never know.
“Achillies proves he's no mysogynist by clearly and openly celebrating his housewife soap opera brain-wiring by gushing about his wet dream of a catastrophic season ending finale.”
I sure hope he doesn’t go bonkers tomorrow and shoot up some League of Women Voters group.
Howard said...
Achillies proves he's no mysogynist by clearly and openly celebrating his housewife soap opera brain-wiring by gushing about his wet dream of a catastrophic season ending finale.
Poor Howard.
Reduced to complete drooling idiocy by the failure of every thing and every one he supports.
Your troll act is boring.
Where is steve uhr to police foolishness this up?
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“Achillies proves he's no mysogynist by clearly and openly celebrating his housewife soap opera brain-wiring by gushing about his wet dream of a catastrophic season ending finale.”
I sure hope he doesn’t go bonkers tomorrow and shoot up some League of Women Voters group.
You are just a complete and total piece of shit.
Of course if the conservative side wins tomorrow, I guess Inga can be counted on to go shoot up a few Republican campaign offices in her local area?
Barbra Streisand, Live From Toronto!
It's high time sensible people turned a deaf ear to these 'racism' aspersions meant to intimidate. They don't work any more.
“Of course if the conservative side wins tomorrow, I guess Inga can be counted on to go shoot up a few Republican campaign offices in her local area?”
Um...no. I don’t own a gun and I don’t have violent tendencies, unlike Achilles who has on numerous occasions threatened liberals on these threads. I recall once he was considering getting his old military buddies to do some “wet work” relating to liberals.
I recommend more costuming and spittle-flecked rage. Don’t skimp on the withering scorn, either.
What Democrats will say if the don't win the House:
Mommy, Mommy! Call my therapist. That mean orange man triggered me.
I need a blankie. I need my safe space.
I recall once he was considering getting his old military buddies to do some “wet work” relating to liberals.
Our resident Bedpan Commando is the wet work expert.
As an aside, I had a balloon catheter that needed to come out last Monday. My surgeon said that I could do it as well as a nurse.
The nurse gave me incorrect instructions, but I figured it out.
It terrifies me to think of the incompetent Ingas out there.
Um...no. I don’t own a gun and I don’t have violent tendencies
You simply cheer when the James Hodgkinsons of the world do your dirty work for you.
"You know what Democrats will say if they dont win the House?"
"We lost fair and square. In the marketplace of ideas, ours were found lacking and our vision for the country was not shared by the majority of voters, who also rejected our disdain for them. Congratulations to the Republicans, and we, humbled and chastened, look forward to working with them, and the American People, to advance this great nation."
sorta like what Podesta said in '16
“As an aside, I had a balloon catheter that needed to come out last Monday. My surgeon said that I could do it as well as a nurse.”
No one cares about your urinary issues.
After an election defeat,
the pundits always say that the party should "do some soul-searching" to explain why *their* actions caused the defeat.
But that almost never happens, because no politician is going to tell the base of his party that *he* was part of the problem.
The usual excuse instead? "The voters were stupid."
The GOP didn't engage in any soul-searching after the twin defeats of 2008 and 2012. They just kept on keeping on.
Just once, I would love to see a candidate who *wins* an election attribute his victory to the stupidity of the voters.
The Democrats will decide to move further to the Left.
As always.
The Deplorables are out in force. The Pollsters are down to their last faked poll results and making sure the Dem's checks that ordered them are all cashed by tomorrow.
@Traditionalguy
5:5
They started at DSEF "deplorable". We were at DSEF "Nazi" for several trimesters. Then the progressed to DSEF "warlock". The likely returns are that they jumped they ass.
I won't care what they say if they lose. If they lose; it will be a clear vindication for Trump. With the gains in the Senate, which will no doubt happen if Republicans keep the House; Trump will have more freedom to make appointments. Democrats will have completely lost not just the moral argument but most reasonable political arguments to stop his nominees.
This leaves Democrats with two things to do between now and 2020. Continue their violent attacks on Republicans and do everything they can to keep RBG alive (ref. Terry Schiavo). Everything else is just talk.
The interesting question, if Republicans hold the House; will they do something about ACA in 2019? I think the answer to that is "nay". I think what Trump will do (besides lining up nominees) is make sure a budget is passed for all departments.
RBGs replacement on the Court would be a destabilizing event.
Violence would ensue.
Sounds nifty.
Violence would ensue.
more violence would ensue. They will up the Anti fa
I accept that correction.
I meant mass violence as opposed to sporadic violence.
sinz52 said...
The GOP didn't engage in any soul-searching after the twin defeats of 2008 and 2012. They just kept on keeping on.
GOP party didn't do any soul searching. They tried to foist Jeb on us.
The GOP voters did do some soul searching.
Now we have Trump.
If the republicans hold serve, Achilles and his Incel Army of the Republic will no longer target Hot Yoga Pants teases.
@Birkel
yes. I didnt mean it as a correction, but as an enhancement to your prescient statement. This slow-motion civil war will go real-time. My comment above re: "what Dems will say" was obviously laughably nowhere near the sentiments of the unhinged left.
"keep your powder dry", so to speak, my friend
Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
“As an aside, I had a balloon catheter that needed to come out last Monday. My surgeon said that I could do it as well as a nurse.”
No one cares about your urinary issues.
I bet whomever washes his drawers cares.
No one cares about your urinary issues.
Explains why you are no longer a nurse.
Since the normal thing in a year like this would be for the Dems to win back a lot of seats and normally you could expect them to win back both houses, but if that does not happen and the Repubs even gain some seats in the Senate, wouldn't that be the opposite of Trump being repudiated? Wouldn't that actually be a Yuge win for him, and a repudiation of the Dems to some degree? The answer depends not on the facts, but rather on what network you are watching.
exactly bago.... but will the dems learn from it and take the anti-Hillary medicine they so desperately need or will they double-down on stupid. I'm betting on Trump in 2020 because at the end of the day, we live in the slow learner universe.
They had to go thru all the humiliation and soul-searching after 2016 election. That would not happen now. It will be all racism and hate.
What will you write if the Democrats do win the House? That in a referendum on Trump the electorate has rejected him?
What will you write if the Democrats do win the House? That in a referendum on Trump the electorate has rejected him?
If they rejected Trump, how did Republicans gain seats in the Senate? At this point, the best the Democrats can do is split Congress, which is not a mandate for Democrats.
Bill Harshaw,
Are you suggesting the House is more important than the Senate?
Was Obama rejected in 2010?
Go away NPC guy.
They're going to say that racism won
They're going to say that the election was stolen and therefore illegitimate, thereby justifying all efforts of obstruction and revolt.
I bet whomever washes his drawers cares.
I had a cutting edge modern laser procedure that not one of the hospital nurses understood. My surgeon is the only one in the area trained to perform it.
Advantages to this procedure: no incisions, no incontinence, no ED.
I hope the surgeon becomes a billionaire as reward for his expertise.
Thank God for capitalism.
Leland and Birkel: the House is not more important than the Senate, but the results do represent the entire nation, not 1/3 of it, so the votes are a more valid snapshot of the electorate's opinion.
I'm wondering whether Ann truly believes that the election is a referendum on Trump. If she does, IMO I think she would agree to accept the reverse position.
Hapless John Boehner bemoaned having "only one half of one third" of the government.
The Dems -- if they seize control -- will show what can be done with that amount of power. More than enough to destroy.
I was impressed enough by Nate Silver’s essay on the breath of the systematic error needed for his forecast to be dead wrong that I don’t think we have to worry about it. Sadly..
Did Nate cover the systematic error that led to his 2016 prediction being so incredibly wrong?
Let me get my prejudice out right up front: I think ideas matter in history. They matter a lot. Some folks don't.
That being said, the Democrats have a real "ideas problem" -- i.e. they are joined at the hip with post-Marxist Lefty nutjobs. Even for the moderates, many of their cherished political assumptions are in reality only defensible within a post-modernist framework.
Do the Righties have nutjobs? Sure, lots of 'em. But, almost all of them live in trailers parks in places like East Bumfuck, Georgia, while on the Left they sit in endowed chairs at major universities. You think I'm kidding? Okay, then go do this exercise. Pick a major university or two & track down its graduate reading list for Women's Studies. In that reading list, it will not be outlier assumptions that all hertero-sex is rape & every "authentic" woman must be lesbian. It'll be mainstream. Liberal Women outside of the academy will go on pretending that feminism is about jobs, reproductive choice, blah, blah, blah, like nothing has changed since Betsy Friedan. But what our nations finest schools are cranking out year after year on the taxpayers' dollar are lesbian nutjobs.
The liberals cannot ever be seen in public telling those nutjobs to STFU & go away, because you instantly become a fascist for doing so. And now the Righties all know just how whacked-out the post-modern Left is, just as they know that the lefty moderates will never do anything to stop them.
Bill Harshaw, when you type one-third when referring to Senate elections in 33 states, I question your math skills.
The Dems would need to win big to be a negative message about Trump, since usually any President would lose at least one house under the current conditions. I don't quite understand why that is, but it is a pretty reliable thing historically.
Bill Harshaw said...
Leland and Birkel: the House is not more important than the Senate, but the results do represent the entire nation, not 1/3 of it, so the votes are a more valid snapshot of the electorate's opinion.
There are 33 states with senate elections...
Bill Harshaw, when you type one-third when referring to Senate elections in 33 states, I question your math skills.
Yes, technically his math is one-third of one percent off.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“Of course if the conservative side wins tomorrow, I guess Inga can be counted on to go shoot up a few Republican campaign offices in her local area?”
Um...no. I don’t own a gun and I don’t have violent tendencies, unlike Achilles who has on numerous occasions threatened liberals on these threads. I recall once he was considering getting his old military buddies to do some “wet work” relating to liberals.
You are part of a violent and nasty political tribe. You are a disgusting human being who thinks Scalise deserved to be shot because he is an NRA member.
There have been hundreds of politically motivated attacks by leftists against people they disagree with over the last two years.
The democrat party was caught on video admitting they pay for it.
The way things are going a lot of lefties will be going to jail soon no matter who wins the house.
There will be a minimum of 55 republicans in the Senate and 3 less traitors without Flake, Corker and McCain.
Trump will get whatever AG he wants.
I would expect massive investigations into the organized busing from California to Nevada and into the shenanigans going on in Vermont.
I also would expect a second Special Prosecutor who has some actual crimes to pursue.
My position is that pieces of shit like you will never have power over us again.
It looks like you and your corrupt gang of goons and shitheads will all be broken up peacefully and arrested.
I am glad for that.
Earnest Prole said...
Bill Harshaw, when you type one-third when referring to Senate elections in 33 states, I question your math skills.
Yes, technically his math is one-third of one percent off.
So 33/50 = .33333333...?
tsk tsk.
What would I write if the Dems win back the House?
They should in a off year election.
Yes, technically his math is one-third of one percent off.
So you think that 66.7% - 33.3% = .3333333%?
This explains so much about Democrats.
The House holds the checkbook.
He's technically "off" by the difference between 33/100 and 33.33/100, but regardless, thanks for beating the leetle joke to death.
No, he's "technically" off by the difference between 33/50 and 33/100, but regardless, thanks for reinforcing how mathematically challenged you are.
I was told there would be no math. Whats next - what the meaning of 'is' is?
math is fun.
He got crossed up between 1/3 of the senators up for election and 1/3 of the states. Kind of like a typo only different
The left has gone all in on the crazy. They let the mask drop during their Kavanaugh kabuki production. There they were, in all their bat shit lunatic glory - shrieking like demons, clawing at doors and sputtering that they were Spartacus. Their leaders either said nothing or encouraged their ground orcs to attack any who disagree with them. There will be blood flowing in the streets, we've been promised (as opposed to a baseball field). They won't be chastened by defeat tomorrow, as they are incapable of self-reflection, any more than a toddler is. If they have their fangs kicked in at the ballot box, their berserk antics will only increase in intensity and outrageousness. Ditto if the evil swine - God help us - retake the house.
If the Democrats take the House they will be insufferable. If they lose they may be even more insufferable. Says something about Democrats. Are there any adults in that party? Any st all?
You're all wrong, but most especially 33 of 50. There are 50 states, 100 senators. But there are 35 senate races tomorrow, 33 regular elections, 2 special elections, in 33 states. Mississippi and Minnesota have both a regular and special election. Maybe someone else has the time to calculate what percentage of the population that covers.
Althouse called it. Headline at daily kos: "The Republican Party made a bet that racism could sustain them—we'll know tomorrow if they're right"
I don't think it really matters what happens tomorrow. Trump will continue to love what he does. I can't recall a President who seems to be having such a good time, especially when he baits the leftists. He will continue to get things done. The left can't touch him, and they can not come up with any better policies either. Wed morning, we will all be here, including the trolls. The Professor will continue to enlighten, and amuse us with her interesting posts. We will have a lovely holiday season, and the the insanity will continue in 2019.
Jim - stop being so damned rational and 'normal'.. LOL
The GOP didn't engage in any soul-searching after the twin defeats of 2008 and 2012. They just kept on keeping on.
And they would have kept on losing too if that meddling Trump hasn't come along!
I don't think it really matters what happens tomorrow. Trump will continue to love what he does.
Yeah. Make deals.
Been saying for months now - if the Ds take the House - watch the base go batshit crazy when he starts cutting deals with them.
@Arashi . I can't help it. At this point, the options are to relax and enjoy life or become completely hysterical and end up naked in downtown Wailuku with an Uzi. The great thing about this blog is the humor, and the tongue in cheek responses from many of the illustrious commenters. The Professor has her bias I know, but manages to run a pretty nice Salon here, for all types, even the hysterical and crazy ones.
Nate Silver is going to be embarrassed (again).
Republican chances of holding the House are only about 1 in 1,000.
And, in the same article(!)
If there’s a typical polling error of 2 to 3 percentage points and it works in Republicans’ favor, the House would be a toss-up.
So, anywhere from 1 in 1000 to 50-50. That sounds rigorous.
@Jim at said."Been saying for months now - if the Ds take the House - watch the base go batshit crazy when he starts cutting deals with them."
Exactly! Trump spent his working life in deep blue NYC. He still got things done. So well he became a billionaire. The dems will be a challenge, but then so were McCain, Flake et al. And I think he just loves it, no matter who is in opposition to him.
Jim - So I take it that there might be some sunlight in Wailuku today? Another pissy, gray day here in the Seattle area - though the rest of the week shoukld have some sun.
The rain is OK, though as it keeps me from having to work on fence repairs.
It's not correct to claim that that statement is what Ds would say. It is silly (and funny) to pretend otherwise.
Some may say that. But, many will focus on many other things.
E.g., they'll jabber about the amount of seats lost by Rs and compare this to other POTUSs losing seats re their party.
And, there will be plenty of self-reflection re saying the Ds need to listen to the forgotten people that are missed by the coastal elites' POVs. As if there hasn't been all sortsa think-pieces and jabber re that since 2016.
And, individual factions and folks will angle for power. I.e., internal finger pointing for advantage.
Anywho, the real reason Althouse wrote this post is because if the Ds do take the House, she won't be able to feed the Hillbillies this chum. Now or never, maybe.
Duh.
Blogger Saint Croix said...
Nate Silver is going to be embarrassed (again).
Republican chances of holding the House are only about 1 in 1,000.
And, in the same article(!)
If there’s a typical polling error of 2 to 3 percentage points and it works in Republicans’ favor, the House would be a toss-up.
So, anywhere from 1 in 1000 to 50-50. That sounds rigorous.
11/5/18, 4:50 PM
---
Holy shit, you cannot read. I know there are some low standards for thinking among the Althouse commentariat, but this is an all-time classic performance.
Gospace,
I was not wrong. I used the other commenters metric (number of states with elections) recognizing that Minnesota and Mississippi have two Senate elections.
Neener, neener.
Arashi,
That weather is beautiful on the coast of the Olympic Peninsula today.
IMHO.
Generic Polls released today:
Rasmussen D+1
Politico D+3
If those numbers are true Nate Silver will blame others.
And I can continue to ignore him.
Blogger YoungHegelian said...
Do the Righties have nutjobs? Sure, lots of 'em. But, almost all of them live in trailers parks in places like East Bumfuck, Georgia, while on the Left they sit in endowed chairs at major universities. You think I'm kidding? Okay, then go do this exercise. Pick a major university or two & track down its graduate reading list for Women's Studies. In that reading list, it will not be outlier assumptions that all hertero-sex is rape & every "authentic" woman must be lesbian. It'll be mainstream. Liberal Women outside of the academy will go on pretending that feminism is about jobs, reproductive choice, blah, blah, blah, like nothing has changed since Betsy Friedan. But what our nations finest schools are cranking out year after year on the taxpayers' dollar are lesbian nutjobs.
11/5/18, 2:59 PM
---
The left and the right both have "ideas" problems. That said, this is idiocy.
First, women's studies are outlier departments even among the left. (They'd better be, given how often the commentariat around here claims that lefty ideas dominate academia, and given how different the thinking is between various departments.)
Second, those are views you might find in some women's studies departments, but they certainly are not pervasive. Hang out in a history department, in a philosophy department, in a political science department, etc., etc. You will find a broad range of views, albeit a broad range centered on the moderate left. (You will definitely find conservatives and libertarians in those departments as well.)
Third, you can definitely find right-wing nut jobs on campus. There are plenty of them in economics departments and in business schools. (They certainly aren't the majority in either place, but as long as we're playing find-the-outlier...) It amazes me that some of those b-school people are respected by anyone. And holy moly are some of the people in computer science departments right-wing, end-of-days, I-think-I-could-survive-in-a-night-watchman-state crazy.
Finally, you can find plenty of right-wing nut jobs off campus without going to the woods. While I think there are plenty of good ideas and smart people at the NRA (in suburban DC, if I remember right), that place is chock goddamned full of idiots and nut jobs who cannot reason half as well to their own positions as I can, despite my not spending all my working hours there. Or take a listen to right wing media. Alex Jones is enough to end this debate.
anto-de Sitter space..
ala Calvin - "THBPBPTHPT!"
Another pissy, gray day here in the Seattle area - though the rest of the week shoukld have some sun.
Been sunny in the South Sound since noon. Patience.
Not quite enough "Scott Adams" in this post.
Did anybody mention the Master Persuader? I may have missed it, but I didn't see it.
What is a "GOP" win tomorrow? Keeping a House majority? (That certainly would be win, under the circumstances.) Would it be a win, to lose only 30 seats? (That would be an average number for recent historical trends; it would not necessarily be viewed as a negative referendum on Trump.) Will it be a win if the Dems win 50 House seats, but the GOP holds onto 54 Senate seats?
Anyway, Althouse; if your concern is related to the specific possibility of the Republicans holding their House majority, I don't think you have to worry too much about that.
Craig is here to tell lies and chew bubble gum.
And he's all out of bubble gum.
The pronoun bull shit and the post modernist intersectionality bull shit dominate administrative offices and faculty lounges. From Harvard down to Podunk U the story is the same. And the political donations demonstrate those facts beyond reasonable dispute.
Oh,
I forgot one thing for my list of D jabber that doesn't relate to DJT's racist appeal if they don't win the House: the Ds will fuss about how many more votes they got. E.g., Hildabeast getting almost three million more votes.
Achilles you were taunting me a few days ago saying that the Republicans would hold their majority in the House and would win 60 Senate seats.
I begged you for a bet on those terms.
Can we please get ourselves a wager on that?
Politico D+3 generic ballot
Rasmussen D+1 generic ballot
Blue wave possibility if those are correct = No way!
Although originally a very skeptical Trump voter, I guess I'm now pretty much a member of "the base". I think most of us expect the Dems to take the house, but narrowly. We will not be devastated. Disappointed, but not broken like a weak-kneed lefty. We won't be screaming in the streets or crying in each others arms. We also hope and believe it quite possible that the Dems will not prevail tomorrow. That would be awesome, but not for Trump so much as for the country. We do not want the foul behavior and tactics the Dems and media have employed with psychotic fervor for the last two years to be rewarded. That would not be a positive development for the country. We like what Trump has done, and although we certainly want more of it, we already got more than we expected. At least I have. I never expect much from any President, as promises generally expire on inauguration day, but this President is different. One could say "Trump is not a normal President". I sure would.
"I begged you for a bet on those terms."
He says he placed bets w/ the pros yesterday.
FTR, he's getting good payouts. IOW, a straight bet w/o odds would favor you. According to the so-called pro betting markets.
Take out California, and Trump wins the popular vote. If that was the contest, he would have campaigned there. But it wasn't.
TinV,
There are some competitive CA R House seats this year. Is DJT campaigning for those, when it does count?
P.S.,
What if the CA Rs do lose (net) seats?
Is that a referendum re DJT?
BTW,
I can't not let y'all in on it. The coolest thing about this post from Althouse is that it gets all y'all goin' on record re how DJT is uber awesome if the Ds do not win the House.
Then, who will it be who will be making excuses and backtracking re it's not correct to say DJT was effectively rebuked by America?
Not that y'all will have trouble being inconsistent. That's yur appeal! Funny is as funny does.
Ezra Klein has conjured up a House popular vote ex nihilo. He tweets:
"I don't think people are ready for the crisis that will follow if Democrats win the House popular vote but not the majority."
Yet another election that is not "the most important" ever.
Democrats can honestly win 20 seats, can dishonestly win 40.
If they win 15 to 45, the public story will be all about the "the mood of the people".
But the full real story with respect to the Congressional elections will not be told until a couple decades from now, when old and retired former campaign honchos with a conscience finally admit, before dying, how well the tricks worked in the ten or so races that could have gone either way if there were no cheating and no lies. That is, in the Congressional elections that were stolen.
This is why, by the way, Franken resigned so quickly under circumstances no Democrat has ever resigned under (lots of Republicans resigned under such circumstances, but they have a different honor code) ...
He knew he (more accurately, the people funding him) had stolen that Minnesota Senate seat. I am no big fan of Feingold, but Feingold ran an honest campaign and lost to a dishonest campaign. Franken knew that, and giving his seat to another Democrat was an easier salve to his conscience than admitting he had betrayed the public trust and stolen an election.
Yes, Republicans do it too, but not so well, and, because they have more rich people on their side, who have more to lose from election fraud, they do it less often.
And, years from now, when this November is history, there will be historians writing books, based on the repentant confessions of old people who had stolen elections back in the day, and we will have a better idea of why, in 2018, the number of Democrat pickups was as high as it was, or low as it was, and that is something we will not know tomorrow, or Wednesday.
All I am saying - and I am not being anti-Democrat here, they used to represent the working poor and so they got good at street-level politics - all I am saying is that most of us think the factor of cheating is about one to two percent and, in years like this where the difference between Chairman Pelosi and Chairman Barletta is about one or two in a hundred votes, nationwide - and focused on 40 races, with about 10 of them in districts with a long history of election cheating - then cheating is key.
"Ezra Klein has conjured up a House popular vote ex nihilo. He tweets:
"I don't think people are ready for the crisis that will follow if Democrats win the House popular vote but not the majority.""
Ha ha ha ha ha.
He knows that's already the way it is.
Sure the Ds jabber and fuss. But, so what? Makes no difference.
@Craig,
Second, those are views you might find in some women's studies departments, but they certainly are not pervasive. Hang out in a history department, in a philosophy department, in a political science department, etc., etc. You will find a broad range of views, albeit a broad range centered on the moderate left. (You will definitely find conservatives and libertarians in those departments as well.)
There you go, Craig, proving my point -- "We're so rational" is the moderate Lefty version of "Ohhhh, baby! It's sooooooo biiiiiig!". "All the News that's Fit to Print", "Democracy Dies in Darkness", "The Mind is our Medium". You really do believe, deep in your souls, that you are the guardians of societal rationality.
Now, onto your specific points. Who really cares what most those "moderate Lefty" humanities guys think? Not the modern Left, in any case. Like what, there's active strains of e.g. Neo-Kantian morality on the Modern Left? C'mon! Most of the stuff you mention is historical scholarship, and, while I certainly think it's worthwhile, it's certainly not relevant, especially to the modern Left & by their own admission.
As for these "moderates", please tell us how many of them have spoken against Antifa shutting down conservative after conservative who sought to speak on campuses? Who has come out in support of someone as anodyne as Jordan Peterson against the Canadian State Thought Police? No, these academics are simply part of the Democratic Party machine, and they, too, whitewash the insanity within their ranks by their silence.
You will definitely find conservatives and libertarians in those departments as well.
Find a University that isn't conservative Protestant that has a faculty where more than 10% of the non-STEM departments self-identity as conservative. Let us know where.
You may find the notion of an NRA 2nd A "absolutist" more nut job than I do. They aren't my favorite people, but, then the modern Left has lots of problems with 1st A "absolutists", too, and those are my favorite kind of people.
As for Alex Jones, you may notice he just got shut down in a serial coup by a group of corporations who just together & silenced a voice they didn't like. I'm not fond of Jones, but I'm less fond of corporate bullies. Especially, when those bullies find no problem with guys like Farrakhan who thinks because I'm white that my ancestors were invented by an evil mad scientist on Crete, & yet somehow he's still on Twitter, Facebook, & noshes with multiple Democratic Presidents.
I have seen projections that Republicans may lose as many as two seats.
Other projections show none.
Let's have a referendum in CA.
Now, let's talk about the Senate.
OK, not quite:
"Republican candidates received 49.13% of total votes cast in 2016 and won 55.4% of U.S. House seats. Comparatively, Democratic candidates received 48.03% of votes and won 44.6% of races. Third-party and write-in candidates received 2.56% of votes."
https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections,_2016
Birkel, Achilles, et.al. You're right, I'm wrong. I think the actual number is 35 states this year (given AZ and MN), so the Senate elections will represent 70 percent of the country.
Can we at least agree that 100 percent (House elections) is greater than 70 percent?
:-0
”Ezra Klein has conjured up a House popular vote ex nihilo. He tweets:
"I don't think people are ready for the crisis that will follow if Democrats win the House popular vote but not the majority.""
This is the dickwad who thinks the Constitution is 100 years old, right?
Ha! Proof that he knows. It 2012 as reiterated in 2014 from Ezra-Vox:
"In 2012, the Democrats infamously won a plurality of votes cast in House of Representatives races nationwide, but didn't end up winning back the majority of seats."
https://www.vox.com/2014/11/7/7173403/gerrymandering-2014-election-results
Works for me, Bill Harshaw. Can we agree the Senate is important and likeliest to show movement toward the Republicans?
PB&J,
Why you Leftists congregate together so densely and dilute your voting power is confusing. Maybe as the states and cities you have corrupted collapse, you will spread out and ruin everything more quickly. I say this as somebody quite confident that Leftists won't learn any lessons from repeated failures. (See, e.g., USSR, Cambodia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea, San Francisco...)
Hang out in a history department, in a philosophy department, in a political science department, etc., etc. You will find a broad range of views, albeit a broad range centered on the moderate left.
Sure. The far left believes everyone who disagrees with them from their right is racist/sexist/homophobic and should be fired. The moderate left believes everyone who disagrees with them from the right is racist/sexist/homophobic and should never have been hired in the first place.
It's a key distinction.
@Birkel,
Why you Leftists congregate together so densely and dilute your voting power is confusing
I think there's just a gold mine of sociological work to be done on what's cause & what's effect correlating population density with voting patterns. It just seems like you squish a bunch of Americans together & they go all liberal on ya. You spread 'em out over the landscape & they go all rightey.
It's downright weird.
it's the net number not the percentage that matters,
https://babalublog.com/2018/11/05/mexicos-amlo-remains-loyal-to-leftist-tyrants-invites-venezuelas-dictator-nicolas-maduro-to-his-presidential-inauguration/
”It just seems like you squish a bunch of Americans together & they go all liberal on ya. You spread 'em out over the landscape & they go all rightey.”
Some kind of quantum mechanical effect.
YoungHegelian,
A great part of it has to do with policies implemented by Machine pols who wanted to drive unpredictable voters out of the cities. There were explicit goals that pushed the middle out.
There is evidence to support that thesis. And it disputes quite a bit of the received wisdom that makes Leftists look good and everybody else look bad. (READ: -ist, -phobic, etc)
Blogger Birkel said...
Craig is here to tell lies and chew bubble gum.
And he's all out of bubble gum.
The pronoun bull shit and the post modernist intersectionality bull shit dominate administrative offices and faculty lounges. From Harvard down to Podunk U the story is the same. And the political donations demonstrate those facts beyond reasonable dispute.
11/5/18, 5:08 PM
---
Nope. But keep enjoying the late 80s and early 90s. (And a false view of those days at that.)
Blogger YoungHegelian said...
@Craig,
Second, those are views you might find in some women's studies departments, but they certainly are not pervasive. Hang out in a history department, in a philosophy department, in a political science department, etc., etc. You will find a broad range of views, albeit a broad range centered on the moderate left. (You will definitely find conservatives and libertarians in those departments as well.)
There you go, Craig, proving my point -- "We're so rational" is the moderate Lefty version of "Ohhhh, baby! It's sooooooo biiiiiig!". "All the News that's Fit to Print", "Democracy Dies in Darkness", "The Mind is our Medium". You really do believe, deep in your souls, that you are the guardians of societal rationality.
Now, onto your specific points. Who really cares what most those "moderate Lefty" humanities guys think? Not the modern Left, in any case. Like what, there's active strains of e.g. Neo-Kantian morality on the Modern Left? C'mon! Most of the stuff you mention is historical scholarship, and, while I certainly think it's worthwhile, it's certainly not relevant, especially to the modern Left & by their own admission.
As for these "moderates", please tell us how many of them have spoken against Antifa shutting down conservative after conservative who sought to speak on campuses? Who has come out in support of someone as anodyne as Jordan Peterson against the Canadian State Thought Police? No, these academics are simply part of the Democratic Party machine, and they, too, whitewash the insanity within their ranks by their silence.
You will definitely find conservatives and libertarians in those departments as well.
Find a University that isn't conservative Protestant that has a faculty where more than 10% of the non-STEM departments self-identity as conservative. Let us know where.
You may find the notion of an NRA 2nd A "absolutist" more nut job than I do. They aren't my favorite people, but, then the modern Left has lots of problems with 1st A "absolutists", too, and those are my favorite kind of people.
As for Alex Jones, you may notice he just got shut down in a serial coup by a group of corporations who just together & silenced a voice they didn't like. I'm not fond of Jones, but I'm less fond of corporate bullies. Especially, when those bullies find no problem with guys like Farrakhan who thinks because I'm white that my ancestors were invented by an evil mad scientist on Crete, & yet somehow he's still on Twitter, Facebook, & noshes with multiple Democratic Presidents.
---
Ha! The classic change-the-subject move. You claimed something about where the left's nutsos dominate. I gave you lots of reasons to think that claim was wrong. You abandoned that claim, and in doing so also claimed to be right. Cute! When you go from younghegelian to youngadulthegelian and then full-fledgedhegelian I think you'll appreciate what has happened here!
"Why you Leftists congregate together so densely and dilute your voting power is confusing."
Those dumb Ds keep ending up in horribly shaped House districts which junks their ability to have their POV reflected re elected officials. Coincidence?
Anywho, it is interesting that they don't fuss about that numbers thing-y. The Tbaggers went on and on about an accurately representative government shoving shit down their throats. But now, the majority reacting to the tyranny of the minority (Tbag-type) seems to not be very effective re results re gov.
"Some kind of quantum mechanical effect."
Every thing is.
If the Republicans keep the house, we all know the reason. "I can't spare this man, he fights."
Incl gravity.
IMHO.
I gave you lots of reasons to think that claim was wrong.
Actually you gave no reasons: you simply asserted it.
Craig pretends that people don't know the political donations of faculty and admin.
Nobody tell him.
And he ignores the pronoun nonsense and the intersectionality (Marxism reconfigured) stuff.
It takes an awful lot of self-imposed ignorance to be a Leftist.
the nation of islam was cross pollinated with the Japanese black dragon society,
Blogger anti-de Sitter space said...
“Incl gravity.
IMHO.”
Nope. Gravity is pure geometry.
IMO
Look for Democrcats to race-bait after their loss. Look for them to Race-bait after their win too.
Look for the Republicans to blame voter fraud after their loss.
If Dems do win the House; I expect Trump to tweet, "I have a pen and a phone."
I expect the National Review to say, "See, I told you so."
Dem's will say "impeach, impeach, impeach" based on whatever happens with the caravan and backed by globalist in the UN.
Craig said... Holy shit, you cannot read.
Or handle math. It's hopeless.
Rick said...
I gave you lots of reasons to think that claim was wrong.
Actually you gave no reasons: you simply asserted it.
11/5/18, 6:04 PM
---
You do know what numbers are, right? Maybe not. That's pretty rough. Sorry buddy.
Birkel said...
Craig pretends that people don't know the political donations of faculty and admin.
Nobody tell him.
And he ignores the pronoun nonsense and the intersectionality (Marxism reconfigured) stuff.
It takes an awful lot of self-imposed ignorance to be a Leftist.
11/5/18, 6:11 PM
---
You're always a reliably great nutso. You see anything in this thread where I've suggested anything about the political donations of faculty? Nope. You see anything where I've suggested anything about the political leanings of faculty? Yep -- I said they were to the left.
Also: I would bet high dollar you have never read Marx or any Marxist and you have no idea how Marxism relates to intersectionality. Reading that sort of stuff would be reading. That's far beyond you.
I look forward to your retort. Will it be bitter? Empty? Dismissive? So many options for you!
They will just blame russia and 15k of ad buys in Facebook just like last time. Sad!
Henry,
On what will Republicans blame their increase of Senators?
Russia takes on voter fraud in earth 2. I can hardly wait until Wednesday.
(Me)
And the political donations demonstrate those facts beyond reasonable dispute.
11/5/18, 5:08 PM
---
(Craig)
Nope.
(Me again)
Yeah. I can see where you made no statement about political donations.
Maybe your nope wasn't a flat denial of what I had written.
But how could a reader know?
Birkel said...
On what will Republicans blame their increase of Senators?
That's actually an interesting question. How many of those returning and newly elected Senators will give credit to Trump?
You do know what numbers are, right?
This is an interesting comment since numbering your assertions was the only numerical inclusion of your post. Apparently you're used to a world where stupid insults work instead of revealing your posturing.
Maybe stick to the drum circle.
Birkel, ellipses give you at leas plausible deniability when you're misrepresenting someone.
and the lamentations of their women
Blogger Rick said...
You do know what numbers are, right?
This is an interesting comment since numbering your assertions was the only numerical inclusion of your post. Apparently you're used to a world where stupid insults work instead of revealing your posturing.
Maybe stick to the drum circle.
11/5/18, 6:47 PM
---
Yes, it is interesting. You might look to the right of each number, and there you will fine squiggles evidencing that I did not simply assert my claim. I provided reasons. You might not like 'em. You might not think they are sufficient. You might even think they are false. But you're a dunce if you cannot even notice them, such that you might delusionally say that I "simply asserted" my central claim.
The drum-circle thing is real creative. You must be quite the thinker, between the insult of two decades (three?) back and the inability to read.
Henry,
Was the nope a flat denial of everything I had written? The only answer, based on Craig's typing, is yes. So he denied everything . And that denial includes my final sentence. No elipses necessary.
Now, the other explanation is that the nope referred to the last thing presented. And that was my statement about political donations.
The nope cannot be constructed to mean some statement in the middle.
So, you're wrong.
I did not simply assert my claim. I provided reasons.
Be sure to come back after you learn to identify assertions.
Birkel:
Fine, you've got me. I did say something about political donations. I said that "The pronoun bull shit and the post modernist intersectionality bull shit dominate administrative offices and faculty lounges. From Harvard down to Podunk U the story is the same. And the political donations demonstrate those facts beyond reasonable dispute." was false, and that wet-dream fabrication of yours included something about political donations.
But "The pronoun bull shit and the post modernist intersectionality bull shit dominate administrative offices and faculty lounges. From Harvard down to Podunk U the story is the same." is no more true than the letters in Penthouse Forum. It's just stuff that gets the Althouse commentariat foaming at the mouth. I'm deeply skeptical that you even know what post-modernism is to know whether it is possible to be post-modernist and intersectional. Keep foaming, pal, keep foaming.
Blogger Birkel said...
Henry,
Was the nope a flat denial of everything I had written? The only answer, based on Craig's typing, is yes. So he denied everything . And that denial includes my final sentence. No elipses necessary.
Now, the other explanation is that the nope referred to the last thing presented. And that was my statement about political donations.
The nope cannot be constructed to mean some statement in the middle.
So, you're wrong.
11/5/18, 6:53 PM
---
And even if it did, the last sentence was false, because the last sentence was the claim that political donations proved something that is actually false to be true. Which is nuts. Low-hanging fruit, Birkel.
Henry,
Why does whether a newly elected Republican Senator gives credit to Trump matter?
The question is "If a loss in the House redounds to Trump's detriment, why would a Senate win not redound to his benefit?"
The answer partisans will offer is "Because reasons" but I find that unsatisfying.
By the way, if the Democratic advantage is smaller than four or five - the lowest generally admitted extra number of Congressional seats due to the rule that those who are unlawfully residing in the united States are counted for purposes of Congressional distraction - the likely number is probably closer to nine or ten - if the Democratic advantage is that small, the disputed issue of citizenship status on the 2020 census is going to be bigger than it would be otherwise.
Blogger Rick said...
I did not simply assert my claim. I provided reasons.
Be sure to come back after you learn to identify assertions.
11/5/18, 6:55 PM
---
This is the best. I would pay good money to know what is going through your mind such that you think this is a substantive response.
Distraction = districting .... a spellchecker offense , but distraction works too
Craig,
Your denial of obvious truth w/rt faculty and admin is noted.
I would pay good money to know what is going through your mind such that you think this is a substantive response.
Reasonable people don't expect substantive responses to juvenile insults, but then they don't offer juvenile insults either. Be sure to complain about tone also. That will get you to 11 on the lack of self awareness meter.
Birkel said...
Craig,
Your denial of obvious truth w/rt faculty and admin is noted.
11/5/18, 7:02 PM
Pithy. Compelling. You do know that post-modernism lost its fight on college campus years ago, right? I know that it is a word you've heard your buddies say through bathroom stall walls, but that's not the place where you should be discovering truth.
Blogger Rick said...
I would pay good money to know what is going through your mind such that you think this is a substantive response.
Reasonable people don't expect substantive responses to juvenile insults, but then they don't offer juvenile insults either. Be sure to complain about tone also. That will get you to 11 on the lack of self awareness meter.
11/5/18, 7:04 PM
---
Rick, I am just sending you hugs. You messed up. You claimed I was simply asserting my central claim. It's either because you don't know what assertions are, you don't know what "simply" means, or you have some mouth-frothing idea of what support and evidence are. In any case, I don't expect a substantive response from you. I never expect a substantive responses from the commentators who fill the Althousian coffers. On the rare occasion one of you has a flash of thought, I am very surprised and impressed. But I never do expect it.
@Birkel:
Craig said... You see anything in this thread where I've suggested anything about the political donations of faculty? Nope. You see anything where I've suggested anything about the political leanings of faculty? Yep -- I said they were to the left.
I'm guessing that's the "Nope" you quoted. Which is a direct rhetorical answer to the preceding sentence, not Craig biting his thumb at you.
Henry,
Your guess is wrong.
No one fantasizes about violent civil confrontation between Americans more on these comment boards than Achilles.
I just wish to raise that point, for the record.
Craig,
Post-modernists lost?
If you say so.
Which brand of neo-Marxists replaced them?
As for Alex Jones, you may notice he just got shut down in a serial coup by a group of corporations who just together & silenced a voice they didn't like. I'm not fond of Jones, but I'm less fond of corporate bullies.
Or, apparently, property rights. Or brand preservation.
I never realized how close "conservatives" were to being commies. The whole Putin-Trump thing makes more and more sense every day.
Let Jones find a technology company that believes racism and conspiracy theories aimed at getting grieving parents death threats are great things.
I'm sure there's at least one or two racist, hateful conservatives who might be smart enough to invent and monetize such technology.
Nah! Of course there isn't!
Losers.
Blogger Birkel said...
Craig,
Post-modernists lost?
If you say so.
Which brand of neo-Marxists replaced them?
11/5/18, 7:15 PM
---
Do you know what either post-modernism or neo-Marxism are? Neo-Marxism barely made any serious inroads in academic circles. (That said, if thinking that the post-modernists and the neo-marxists are running the academy gets you hot and horny, by all means keep up your fantasizing.)
You really do believe, deep in your souls, that you are the guardians of societal rationality.
Rationality is not social, you dummy. It's either contained (or lacking) within the argument.
If you were actually familiar with the arguments conservatives use, you'd know how badly they fail. As do their policies.
But no, much easier to just blindly hate on the progressives and that philosophy of theirs that actually founded the fucking country.
I hope all your nutters fail tomorrow and get flushed down their Teapot Dome scandal-sized toilet bowl with maximum vortex velocity. A bigger crop of losers and scumbags than they has probably never existed before in history.
I already noted your denial of obvious truth, Craig.
Now you're just guilding the lily.
Do you know what either post-modernism or neo-Marxism are?
Bickel knows nothing. He's basically the Taxi Driver of political conservation in America.
Guess who's been Published in the Wall Street Journal?
I didn't really mean the question mark :)
Blogger Birkel said...
I already noted your denial of obvious truth, Craig.
Now you're just guilding the lily.
11/5/18, 7:23 PM
---
Ooooh. I can play this game.
I already explained to you that you were wrong, Birkel.
Now you're just guilding the lily.
(Does this count as simply asserting, Rick? Help me out with these complicated analyses of argument!)
Craig,
I understand your opinion. Your opinion is not an explanation. And your opinion is unsupported.
Now what?
We will not be devastated. Disappointed, but not broken like a weak-kneed lefty. We won't be screaming in the streets or crying in each others arms.
True. You're already quite used to taking it up your asses from the lobbyists, your exes, and the world at large. And certainly from the rest of the country. It's kind of a recurring theme in your lives.
We're learning that it's basically the way to define you.
Blogger Birkel said...
Craig,
I understand your opinion. Your opinion is not an explanation. And your opinion is unsupported.
Now what?
11/5/18, 7:29 PM
---
I don't think you know what "opinion," "explanation," or "support" are. But in any case, as you might have inferred had you tried to think about it, you saying something false is also neither explanation nor supported. You might have said something true, e.g., "Many academic fields are dominated by Democrats and people on the left." You did not do that. You wrote words you don't understand, and it turned out trying words you don't know led you to say something false. And now you're retreating. It's completely understandable li'l B.
You're all wrong because you assume equal populations in each state.
Craig,
The Left in academia is postmodernist, to a large extent.
Your assertions otherwise are fine and dandy.
Are you a former colleague of Althouse's?
Craig -
You sound new here.
Bickle is basically a parrot. He takes right-wing talking points and simplifies them further. (If that's even possible).
He's not capable of thought, let alone an original idea.
Don't waste your time assuming he has anything intelligent to say. Or even anything that he could come up with on his own.
Blogger Birkel said...
Craig,
The Left in academia is postmodernist, to a large extent.
Your assertions otherwise are fine and dandy.
Are you a former colleague of Althouse's?
11/5/18, 7:34 PM
---
You've got to be kidding me. Postmodernism has lost in academia even among the left. You are 25 years late to the party, bro. Unless by to a large extent you mean, "Among a handful of old holdouts in nook departments in rare universities." Maybe that is what you mean?
PPPT - Oh I know. Like I said above, I don't expect much in these comments. The shift from Althouse's posts (especially her close readings) to these comments is as big an intellectual tumble as any comments section I've seen.
Blogger Birkel said...
Henry,
Your guess is wrong.
Craig came to you in a dream and said "Nope"?
Henry,
Search the page, guy.
It's easy if you try.
Birkel said...The question is "If a loss in the House redounds to Trump's detriment, why would a Senate win not redound to his benefit?"
Are you concerned about what actually redounds to Trump, or what people claim redounds to Trump? And if the latter, that's a dull question. Why care about what people say?
Are you concerned about what actually redounds to Trump, or what people claim redounds to Trump? And if the latter, that's a dull question. Why care about what people say?
Because then Trump will say, "People are saying things. They're saying things."
Oh wait, he already does that anyway.
Henry,
I am asking you to place a marker.
Bickle,
I am asking you to stop bending over and taking the doggy dick up your ass.
Birkel. I see. He should have said Nope. Nope. Nope.
“Bickle is basically a parrot. He takes right-wing talking points and simplifies them further. (If that's even possible).
He's not capable of thought, let alone an original idea.
Don't waste your time assuming he has anything intelligent to say. Or even anything that he could come up with on his own.”
And he’s a huge weirdo.
I guess: Hyperbole. Hyperbole. Non sequitur. would also work.
"Don't waste your time assuming he has anything intelligent to say. Or even anything that he could come up with on his own.”
And he’s a huge weirdo."
I think he tricked me.
That purple panda thing that he kept repeating was so SAD! that I felt bad fer the little fella.
Since he stopped that I've felt like I need to encourage him to keep making progress and keep getting better.
OTOH, maybe I'm right re my optimism. Maybe he is less awful. [Not that 'less awful' is a high measure, obviously.]
I dunno.
“That purple panda thing that he kept repeating was so SAD! that I felt bad fer the little fella.”
Hahaha, he thought that was so clever.
Henry, still not taking a position?
Fine.
Preserve your options.
Whenever I read "purple elephant," I imagined some dumb hick GOP dude in a rage re some sorta backward POV such that his face had turned from white (technically pinkish) to purple.
Anywho, I think Birk is teachable. He did stop that.
I'm a glass is half full sorta person. Sometimes to a fault. Hopefully the little guy won't let me down.
Birkel prefers gilding the crapper
PB&J,
Do you not know the old trick about asking somebody not to think of something (usually a pink elephant) to prove the power of suggestion? It's a quite common thing.
It is similar to a trial attorney raising an issue to which a relevant objection exists, and then arguing about the objection in front of the jury for further effect?
The effect of Trump's tweets was and is very similar. It is a simple observation. And a majority on the right (in addition to many on the Left who call for ignoring the tweets) now see the method to Trump's madness.
Now that so many have come around to my thinking, it's cute that you still recall how I called attention to my early adoption.
Further, I don't explain myself most of the time. And I don't mind that people miss my points.
See Inga and Ritmo!
He admits that his jabber doesn't have explanatory value.
Think of baby steps.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA7LGqwjhYs
One little step at a time. Eventually he won't be awful.
“Now that so many have come around to my thinking, it's cute that you still recall how I called attention to my early adoption.”
LOL
BTW,
Isn't this supposed to be the thread where the cons get to pre-game party their guaranteed victory tomorrow that will result in folks noting that DJT is popular w/ racists.
Not a lot of DJT exuberance.
PB&J,
Are you going to celebrate fewer Democrats in the Senate?
I used an old trick to put a thought in your heads.
Months later the thought is still there.
And the point I was making should be obvious based on those two sentences.
The point is missed by at least one of you.
Blame it on Russian butterfly ballots
"Are you going to celebrate fewer Democrats in the Senate?"
I'll be doing an idiot exercise thing cause I'm in a week long competition that ends tomorrow. The whole thing is going to come down to who can wreck themselves the most for 24 hours. And, while I'm fit as hell, the other person is more so.
Anywho re the Senate, I see con Senators (not to mention the occasional House folks, e.g. Ryan et. al.) who are close to the whole DJT government show and who are unsettled. I know that you and Meadehouse and other such folks think that you have a sense of what's goin' on. You know better than the folks who actually know what's gonin' on, according to the neurons between your ears. But, I'd like to see some tapping of the brakes.
"And the point I was making should be obvious based on those two sentences.
The point is missed by at least one of you."
You can't claim success and failure re yur mind control scheme.
Pick one.
When some of a POTUS's own cabinet thinks he's an F-ing moron and other such things.
Maybe those are folks know more about the situation that people sitting in front of screens jabbering on blogs.
Maybe.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন