Here's the entire statement — a tripartite tweet (1, 2, 3):
So interesting to see 'Progressive' Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly........and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how.... ....it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!That's from 22 hours ago. He got a lot of pushback — including Power Line's "A Blunder of Epic Proportions" — but he didn't walk it back. He's Donald Trump; he doubled down. From 11 hours ago — a 2-part tweet (1, 2):
So sad to see the Democrats sticking up for people who speak so badly of our Country and who, in addition, hate Israel with a true and unbridled passion. Whenever confronted, they call their adversaries, including Nancy Pelosi, “RACIST.” Their disgusting language..... ....and the many terrible things they say about the United States must not be allowed to go unchallenged. If the Democrat Party wants to continue to condone such disgraceful behavior, then we look even more forward to seeing you at the ballot box in 2020!1. Who is he talking about? He doesn't name names, so it's an invitation for others to do the defining. I see many people talking about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and expressing outrage that Trump would speak of her as an immigrant when she was born in the United States. But he didn't name her. His words exclude her. She's really got a hold on people's mind!
2. What, exactly, is supposed to be racist here? Clearly, these tweets cause some readers to feel that racism is being expressed, but it's hard to find it in these words. I see "RACIST" but that's in the context of ostensibly sticking up for Nancy Pelosi. Some Democrats are calling her racist, and that shows how unfairly quick they are to see racism. Defending Pelosi, he implicitly defends himself.
3. Is it xenophobia? He's not saying get out and stay out. He's saying don't criticize the United States if you immigrated from a worse country. Go back to that place, fix it, and "The come back and show us... how it is done." He's welcoming the immigrant back, after these steps are taken. Of course, it's unrealistic to expect someone to return to a place they left and become involved in changing that place, but it's a figure of speech. He seems to be saying that those who were not born here, who chose to move here, have a special obligation to express love for America, that they should tone down their criticism of America.
4. If telling these Congresswomen to tone it down is wrong, Nancy Pelosi was wrong too. (See "Tensions Between Pelosi and Progressive Democrats of ‘the Squad’ Burst Into Flame" (NYT).) So, again, Trump lines himself up with Pelosi. How do you defend Pelosi without defending Trump? In this view, it's a clever (and cruel) rhetorical move by Trump.
5. Here's Ernest Tubb in 1965:
Well, I'm gettin' mighty tired of seein' hippies runnin' wild... It's kinda hard to understand when you read about a man/That's talkin' 'bout love and knockin' the place he was born/If things don't go their way, they could always move away/That's what democracy means anyway....
Posts
380 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 380 of 380As I understand it, and correct me if I am wrong Buwaya, he is not an immigrant. He is a visitor. A long term and legal visitor to be sure but still a visitor who has no intention of becoming an American. As he says, his real allegiance is to Spain and he will return(?) there on retirement.
This is a real shame as I think we need more Buwayas. I like him and think he is an asset but I do not like the idea of long term visitors. In or out. Become American or go "home"
If I ruled the world I would put some sort of time limit. 5 years? 10? I don't know how long but after some period one would need to become a citizen or leave.
It is the exact same thing that has been going on for 3 years now on a daily basis. Trump says something true and/or innocuous, and his enimies and the subgroup of them known as the media, then refashion the statement in the worst possible way and attack that straw man they just created. Much of the public through bias or ignorance believe he said the thing that was made up. Even when shown the actual innocuous quote they still hear the lie, and that is what they remember. Three years of this now, day in and day out. Three years of nonstop lying. If Trump was really so bad, why would the lies be necessary?
Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King are the epitome of the best in the American character.
Judge Taney has gone down in history as the worst example.
And becoming a citizen includes renouncing all other citizenships and passports.
John Henry
Judge Curiel is an American.
The national origin, or race, of one's ancestors does not make anyone "less" of an American.
Howard said...
immigrant citizens have no more obligation than anyone lucky enough to be born in this lap of luxury
As an immigrant citizen I beg to differ. I am here of my own choice and have always felt that if the results were not to my liking, I should indeed return to the old country, or try elsewhere.
Born and raised here, you do not have that obligation.
Go back to that place, fix it, and "The come back and show us... how it is done." He's welcoming the immigrant back, after these steps are taken. Of course, it's unrealistic to expect someone to return to a place they left and become involved in changing that place....
Why?
In Germany, Syrian refugees are returning to Syria to vacation.
If I understand German law correctly, one gets 21 days in absence and if you have no assets, Germany pays for it.
Sweet deal.
Although he never identifies AOC, most of the criticism I heard was about him supposedly attacking her as from another country, even though he clearly excludes her. That's just nuts. It's willful lying, it's no accident.
I thought dual citizenship was allowed.
Canada learned the hard way and I think we did too there should be no dual citizenship.
Blogger wwww said...
Trump asked if Judge Curiel could be a "real" American due to his ancestors.
No, PDJT asked if Judge Curiel could be a "real" American not due to his ancestors but due to his citizenship.
He is definitely a 14th Amendment US citizen, being born in Ohio. (Ted Cruz and John McCain are statutory citizens, born outside the US)
But he also has (had?) Mexican citizenship via his parents. As such, under Mexican law, he has the right to live in Mexico, he has the right to a Mexican passport.
Much the same way that Ted Cruz, born a Canadian, has American citizenship, American passport and the right to live here because of his mother's US citizenship.
Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship though he claimed he never realized he had it.
Has Curiel ever given up his Mexican citizenship?
It was never about ancestry. It was always about citizenship.
John Henry
“As an immigrant citizen I beg to differ. I am here of my own choice and have always felt that if the results were not to my liking, I should indeed return to the old country, or try elsewhere.
Born and raised here, you do not have that obligation.”
Oh baloney. I’m sure you had plenty of negative stuff to say when Obama was President. What hypocrisy.
is this a fair summation
Pyramid of Ability
¶
When you live in a rational society, where men are free to trade, you receive an incalculable bonus: the material value of your work is determined not only by your effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the world around you.
When you work in a modern factory, you are paid, not only for your labor, but for all the productive genius which has made that factory possible: for the work of the industrialist who built it, for the work of the investor who saved the money to risk on the untried and the new, for the work of the engineer who designed the machines of which you are pushing the levers, for the work of the inventor who created the product which you spend your time on making, for the work of the scientist who discovered the laws that went into the making of that product, for the work of the philosopher who taught men how to think and whom you spend your time denouncing.
The machine, the frozen form of a living intelligence, is the power that expands the potential of your life by raising the productivity of your time. If you worked as a blacksmith in the mystics’ Middle Ages, the whole of your earning capacity would consist of an iron bar produced by your hands in days and days of effort. How many tons of rail do you produce per day if you work for Hank Rearden? Would you dare to claim that the size of your pay check was created solely by your physical labor and that those rails were the product of your muscles? The standard of living of that blacksmith is all that your muscles are worth; the rest is a gift from Hank Rearden.
For the New Intellectual
Galt’s Speech,
Trump says something true and/or innocuous
No, what Trump said was a lie (if he had said singular "congresswoman" he could have at least claimed some connection to the truth), and it was not "innocuous". It was demeaning and divisive. The idea that disagreeing with, or criticizing him, is un-American (a view echoed by many here) completely turns the idea of America on its head.
Darkisland said... If I ruled the world I would put some sort of time limit. 5 years? 10? I don't know how long but after some period one would need to become a citizen or leave.
I am of the opposite view - no Naturalization at all (avoid involving bureaucrat in the approval by process) but children can become natural borm citizens via constitutional provision.
I want to circumvent the entire immigration debate - welcome here to make a living by honest work or no
Stevenson, the guy who made so many improvements of the steam locomotive, was mostly illiterate. It was the nexus of money, science, and technology that enabled the industrial revolution. Social workers have had very little to do with the great leap forward in improved living standards throughout the world. Nor aristocrats.....I think an American whose forebears have lived in this country for two or more generations is a more acclimated and perhaps better American than someone who just arrived here or who is the child of an immigrant. Home is where when you go there, they have to take you in. America is my home. Immigrants and their children pine for the auld sod.
The reason 2nd generation immigrants don't assimilate is too-fast immigration. They live together and never need to pick another culture.
The math can be automated via software.
Perhaps I should say the calculation of the math can be automated. I think the math, itself still requires a human brain.
But perhaps this is pedantry over the meaning of the word "math".
Anyone here know how to use a slide rule? You really had to know some math to use one of those. I tried to give me daughter my old K&E when she went off to engineering school in 93 (CheEng). She laughed and made me buy her a TI graphing calculator.
I still think she would have seriously benefits from knowing how to use a slide rule. The slide rule helps you visualize what you are doing.
Buwaya mentioned teaching linear programming. I taught that a bit, basically 1 class session, when I taught operations management. This can be automated with software but one needs to know how to set the problem up. I always taught the graphical solution first because I thought it important for students to "see" how it works.
Ditto teaching Net Present Value and Internal Rate of Return. We would do some problems with 4 function calculators before going to Excel.
Payback evaluation can be done in one's head. (Depending on the head)
John Henry
Cruz renounced his Canadian citizenship though he claimed he never realized he had it.
Did he really? Usually renouncing one's citizenship is a formal process. I assume that the process in Canada is the same as the U.S. or the U.K. You have to renounce your citizenship under sworn oath in front of a Consular official.
In the U.S. they are particularly picky about this, because U.S. citizens living abroad are still subject to U.S. income taxes (which is not the case for most countries). Tina Turner had to jump through a lot of hoops to officially renounce her citizenship. Some countries do indeed automatically revoke citizenship if you become a citizen of another country, but I don't think Canada is one, and the U.S. is definitely not.
Trump asked if Judge Curiel could be a "real" American due to his ancestors.
Try not to be so obvious. Trump questioned Curiel's neutrality because he belonged to a Mexican revanchist group, La Raza, that wants the southwest to be returned to Mexico. Why would you expect such a judge to be unbiased on illegal immigration ?
Blogger Freder Frederson said...
Did he really? Usually renouncing one's citizenship is a formal process. I assume that the process in Canada is the same as the U.S. or the U.K. You have to renounce your citizenship under sworn oath in front of a Consular official.
Back in 15 or so it became a campaign issue. He claimed he never realized and took whatever steps were required to renounce it under whatever the Canadian law is.
I assume he did since it would have been easy to check if he had not.
You could probably look it up.
I don't guarantee my memory as being infallible.
John Henry
I think Trump made a mistake although his words were nowhere near as incendiary as the press has made them out to be. I did look up Pressley on Wikipedia because I was curious where she was born (US). This is what she had to say about Trump" During her victory speech following the September primary election, Pressley called out President Donald Trump, claiming he is "a racist, misogynistic, truly empathy-bankrupt man." Were I Trump I would get tired of this and be tempted to tell these people where to go as well.
Of course there is not a single word about race in his tweet that is all extrapolation by the press. That their fellow Democrats are now forced to rally round the ant-semitic, anti- American "squad" is not an especially good thing in the long run. Encouraging the "Squad" to become even more obnoxious may have been one of Trump's motivations.
The Tweet story will last a week. "The squad" will continue to make life uncomfortable for their fellow Democrats much longer.
Oh baloney. I’m sure you had plenty of negative stuff to say when Obama was President. What hypocrisy.
Gotta be careful here, folks. The bedpan commando can read minds.
Google Trump interviewed on Curiel. He's very obvious.
Judge Taney has gone down in history as the worst example.
Those whom know little or no history come to those simple minded conclusions.
Dred Scott and his wife had lousy lawyers. There is book about it that you should read.
The Supreme Court decision was wrong but so have others been wrong.
truly empathy-bankrupt man."
That’s the prog right there.
They want to show how empathetic they are with my money, never their own.
No more world ATM.
TFRIC “I feel your pain.”
And they fell for it.
I'll go with Merle Haggard's "The Fighting Side of Me". As I recall the lyric, "If you're running down our country hoss, you're walking on the fighting side of me. Let this song be a warning, if you don't love it leave it, you're walking on the fighting side of me."
Of course Haggard used the word "hoss" to describe the bad mouthing fellow. Trump had a different problem in that he was referring to horse's asses on the AOC squad.
I believe that AOC's chief of staff "Chakrabarti" is an Indian immigrant. He is referred to by some insiders as AOC's "brain".
Why the fuck do you think wall street gobbles up the math and physics majors from MIT? Trial and error?
I consulted to a prominent financial management firm ($50 million minimum to get in) that wanted to experiment with psychological assessment of their hedge fund managers. After sitting in on a few meetings, I said, "These guys don't know anything about business. They are just mathematicians".
My clients looked at me like I was a moron. Everyone (but me) knew they were just mathematicians. Our financial markets are determined more by mathematical formulas than business analysis. There is certainly trial and error involved in adjusting those formulas.
She hasn’t been having a good week. Lololol
As predictable as the sunrise. Yet, I still fall for it.
It, being 200+ comments and thinking "wow. This must be a lively and interesting discussion."
Turns out it's never lively, or interesting. It's always just Inga.
I'll go with Merle Haggard's "The Fighting Side of Me"
As he matured, Haggard regretted that period in his life (Fighting Side of Me and Okie From Muskogee).
Haggard said: "It was the photograph that I took of the way things looked through the eyes of a fool... and most of America was under the same assumptions I was. As it’s stayed around now for 40 years, I sing the song now with a different attitude onstage. ... I’ve become educated. I play it now with a different projection. It’s a different song now. I’m different now."
ST: The audacity of Inga is breath taking.
It's not audacity. You can't have useful idiots without a supply of idiots.
Granted, there are plenty of intelligent operators brassing it out in what looks the same style - but they're doing it on purpose, with full self-awareness. For them it's a useful tactic, and it often works very well on people like...Inga.
I sincerely doubt that even now Inga has any understanding of the "Russia collusion" farce. She's a parrot, and there isn't much Russia! noise lately. For "audacity" to be an apt description, you'd have to assume higher-cortical mental constructs put together by reasoning and goal-oriented, clear-sighted hypocrisy. What we have here is just output from the limbic murk, over which a failing neon sign fitfully blinks "Or__g_ _an B_d".
Judge Taney's decision applied to free African Americans. In the 1850s states, it was a live debate if free African Americans could be expelled from states because they were not "real" Americans. Oregon. When Taney wrote his decision, it was a legal question: who could be an American citizen with the rights of American citizens? Who was entitled to live in the United States? African Americans like Frederick Douglass argued that free African Americans were, indeed, full American citizens. Others told them to "go back to their own country." "go back to Africa."
I see Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King as the epitome of The American Character. The cultural debate has continued. Some argue that those with ancestors from England or Scotland are more "real" Americans then those whose ancestors were slaves.
Predictions in 2020. Remember this in Nov. 2020 because I'll be too busy to be around. This is the summertime. Most people aren't paying attention. We're at the lake having BBQs. So, not many will pay attention now.
But this rhetoric will continue up to the even of the 2020 election. DT will look for inflammatory tweets and other ways to juice his base. It will work. He will juice turnout. I predict record turnout. Republicans will surge to the ballot box. But the problem with juice is that it juices everybody. It's gonna be record turnout for everyone. Ds and left-leaning Ds will surge to the ballot box too. Record turnout for younger voters. Record turnout for older voters (but they vote every election). Record turnout for rare voters. The red states will go more deeply red. Rural areas will go deeply red. Kentucky, Tenn, Missouri, deep red.
But every action has an equal and opposite reaction. It may be "fun" for you to "own" the libs, but this inflammatory stuff juices independent D leaning turnout. The Ds are so unorganized. Arguments in their own caucus. But that disorganization and circular firing squad will not matter. As we can see with these tweets, DT is going to juice their turnout. The R. turnout will have to overcome the independent left-leaning surge. All those Jill Stein voters are in formation for 2020.
The suburban areas will change their margins in northern and southern states. Suburbs have been trending blue. So, if they've been 65% R in the past, they'll be 56% R. Watch the suburbs in Arizona. Arizona will be in play in 2020.
You all can have fun bashing Inga but her vote is going to matter more then most people's votes.
If you vote doesn't change from 2016, your vote matters less then Inga.
Inga is in Wisconsin. She voted 3rd party in 2016. Will she vote 3rd party in 2020? It's voters like Inga that will decide the 2020 election.
Arizona will be in play in 2020.
Yes, Arizona was a test bed for vote harvesting in 2018. Massive fraud, just like Orange County, CA. Lots of "late" votes.
Sooner or later we will have to go back to paper ballots and in-person voting.
The golden ring the refugees are reaching for is the day that WASPs culture can be suppressed and the USA withers away like England has in large measure. We are the Muslim’s enemy. That is what Trump is saying. We can take Hispanics in a measure but not in a deluge that breaks the social welfare system, schools in English and medical care for mothers of anchor babies.
Michael,
I've read the book. What are you talking about RE his lawyers?
Having opinions about this or that in American life is not the same as rejecting America and its people en masse.
It's the suburban vote in AZ. County breakdowns from 2018.
I don't know what will happen in 2020 but turnout is going to be juiced all around. A lot of people don't vote or vote 3rd party in normal years. That's not going to happen in 2020.
4dub: You all can have fun bashing Inga but her vote is going to matter more then most people's votes.
And Inga can (and will) have fun bashing other posters even if it comes to pass that Trump wins re-election. What's your point, dub? That "we all" will sure be sorry! that we mocked other posters if their guy wins?
Uh, why? I haven't noticed that (potential or actual) victory-gloating by the guys on the other side ever put a damper on the fun to be had bashing their scrofulous characters and cretinous views, before or after any election.
You know, you could easily express your anger (whatever it is you're so angry about) without resorting to fun-ly bash-worthy non sequiturs.
And becoming a citizen includes renouncing all other citizenships and passports.
"New citizens need not (depending on the laws of their home country) give up their original citizenship."
I knew a guy with dual US-Mexican citizenship (and passports and and driver licenses). He'd usually use the Mexican IDs here; they confiscated his license once for not having insurance and he got it back in the mail along with an apology for accidentally trying to take away a foreign drivers license.
Blogger Hagar said...
Howard said...
immigrant citizens have no more obligation than anyone lucky enough to be born in this lap of luxury
As an immigrant citizen I beg to differ. I am here of my own choice and have always felt that if the results were not to my liking, I should indeed return to the old country, or try elsewhere.
Born and raised here, you do not have that obligation.
First, you just speech for yourself, you know, individual sovereignty. It sounds like you might not willing to put in the work necessary to make the US better. That would make you a fair weather immigrant citizen. Also, it's not your place to tell anyone, including the natural native born, what obligations they should or shouldn't have to this country.
Trump 5 pointer:
1. Expand Overton window
2. Expose hypocrisy of various Dems on anti American comments / support
3. Troll anti Trumpers, with usual over reaction
4. Increase awareness of the 4 women reps of color...
5. Expose how legal immigration system is broken
As he matured, Haggard regretted that period in his life (Fighting Side of Me and Okie From Muskogee).
@Freder, I rather doubt that. Here he is in 2014, singing "Fighting Side of Me" with as much enthusiasm as his younger days. He would die just two years later.
Inga: Sure, sure, such sweeping generalizations are so intelligent.
Just yesterday you were making sweeping generalizations about Trump yard signs.
Even better, you were trying to make the point that assumptions based on bigoted stereotypes of people was wrong.
I sometimes wonder if the centrifugal force caused by your situational ethics is the only thing keeping your brain from falling out of your head.
"without resorting to fun-ly bash-worthy non sequiturs."
Nope. It's simply a fact not a statement of affect.
Inga's vote, and votes like hers, will be the determinative factor in the 2020 election. Any vote that does not change from 2016 is not a new factor in 2020. Inga's vote will matter more then any other vote in the outcome of 2020. It will be more powerful then any other vote on this blog. It's more powerful because it's a change from 2016.
In Wisconsin, people voted 3rd party at 5 times greater then average in 2016. DT will juice his voters. They will turn out at record levels. But juicing the vote juices ALL voters, including those who voted 3rd party in 2016.
All actions have an equal and opposite reaction. What will happen? That's for the future to say. We'll find out in 2020 what happens when the Jill Stein voters go back to the D party.
Robert Cook wrote: Human progress has never been the product of "normals," but of "abnormals" fighting against the quicksand of ignorance, fear, hatred, superstition, and groupthink always so intrinsic to "normals."
Cookie never misses an opportunity to exalt himself.
It is wrong of trump I think to suggest that persons born in the USA are immigrants. I’m okay with his tweet as to Omar.
3. Is it xenophobia? He's not saying get out and stay out. He's saying don't criticize the United States if you immigrated from a worse country. Go back to that place, fix it, and "The come back and show us... how it is done." He's welcoming the immigrant back, after these steps are taken. Of course, it's unrealistic to expect someone to return to a place they left and become involved in changing that place, but it's a figure of speech. He seems to be saying that those who were not born here, who chose to move here, have a special obligation to express love for America, that they should tone down their criticism of America.
Why is it "unrealistic to expect someone to return to a place they left and become involved in changing that place"? If they're so amazing that they know a better way to run America, then surly they're so amazing they know better ways to run Somalia.
If America isn't good enough for them, then they should go back to wherever it is that's better.
Fredder said:
"No, what Trump said was a lie (if he had said singular "congresswoman" he could have at least claimed some connection to the truth), and it was not "innocuous". It was demeaning and divisive. The idea that disagreeing with, or criticizing him, is un-American (a view echoed by many here) completely turns the idea of America on its head."
So if he said it in singular, you would be here saying what I'm saying? I doubt that. He still never identified any particular person, and he was not writing a legal brief to the court. He was simply talking and conflating a larger group of people who criticize our government while ignoring the atrocities of governments they refuse to criticize, and including specifically someone who actually came from such a place. It's common way of speaking, not some nefarious release of latent xenophobia. But this is my whole point. People have no problem jumping though those whoops to impugn him while purposefully ignoring the obvious and much simpler explanation.
Was it demeaning and divisive? Not as much as the statements he is referring to, or things such as "we're gonna impeach that motherfucker". Did you bitch about that?.
And, Trump was clearly referring to criticism of America, not criticism of himself, but deep bias against the man always leads to such obvious mischaracterizations over and over.
Robert Cook wrote: Human progress has never been the product of "normals," but of "abnormals" fighting against the quicksand of ignorance, fear, hatred, superstition, and groupthink always so intrinsic to "normals."
Totalitarian dictatorships and mass murder have never been the product of "normals," but of "abnormals" fighting for power so they can overturn the claimed "ignorance, fear, hatred, superstition, and groupthink" always so intrinsic to "normals."
FIFY.
Successful revolutions are very rare, esp. when you define "successful" as "not resulting in pools of blood, and actually making life better for normals".
But Cookie doesn't care about making life better for normal human beings, just for the "exalted elite" that he deludedly thinks he's part of
Wow, Trump speaking now. Maybe he should’ve taken his own advice and have left when Obama was President. He had a lot of negative things to say about our government. Fucking asshole hypocrite, worst President in history. Nice legacy, you idiots.
Nice legacy, you idiots.
Trump's probably the best president since Reagan.
Hope you continue to choke on it, moron.
When I heard how Trump spoke about our country when Obama was President, he sounded like he was an anti American “enemy of the state”. Gander/ goose.
Smoke a doobie and shut up, Inga.
The stupid just rolls out of you.
@ Fen to Inga
"I sometimes wonder if the centrifugal force caused by your situational ethics is the only thing keeping your brain from falling out of your head. "
Heh.
“Inga's vote, and votes like hers, will be the determinative factor in the 2020 election.”
Yep and not one liberal I know in Wisconsin will be voting third party this time around.
" Anyone who lives here has a right and an obligation to criticize those aspects of our nation that we each find wanting. This is part of our duty as citizens of a purportedly "self-governing" nation."
In essence, I agree with you. However, I think the issue is more with Talib et al trying to transform America into something it's not really designed (and never was) to be.
Yep and not one liberal I know in Wisconsin will be voting third party this time around.
I predict Trump will be re-elected.
I certain hope so. An side benefit will be observing Inga braying like a jackass for another four years.
"Yep and not one liberal I know in Wisconsin will be voting third party this time around."
Sure thing, Pauline.
"quicksand of ignorance, fear, hatred, superstition, and groupthink always so intrinsic to "normals."
You should really get out more.
Such narrow limited thinking. You people think that 2020 will be a do over of 2016? Think again. 2018 midterm results should be giving you a hint, but you are so entrenched in your Trump Cultism. It’s no longer just sycophancy, it’s cultish.
“An side benefit will be observing Inga braying like a jackass for another four years.”
Like your so called “singing”.
Shouting Thomas’s singing could make one think they are hearing a wild boar with sinusitis.🐗
Via Insty:
Nearly 1 Million Californians Registered to Vote Are Ineligible, Says Non-Partisan Group
“Nearly 1 Million Californians Registered to Vote Are Ineligible, Says Non-Partisan Group”
Hahahaha, yeah, we’re all going to believe Insty’s “non partisan group”.
Omar is a Jew-hating America-hating creepazoid. Normal Americans understand this.
Inga writes: "Yep and not one liberal I know in Wisconsin will be voting third party this time around."
The reason I underline Inga's significance is not just that she comments on the blog. It's that she is politically significant in a way that few commenters seem to comprehend. You're concentrated on Chuck, but people like Chuck are not numerous to make a difference. It's people like Inga that have the numbers to potentially change the 2020 election.
The WOW countiesshifted in their voting patterns in 2018. The margin of R votes lowered. One of the main reasons Scott Walker was voted out. This was consistent with the suburban vote in other places, such as surrounding Nashville or the suburbs in Arizona. Suburbs, in the South and the North, are trending blue, or the margins of R votes are going down.
In red rural areas, the vote is growing increasingly Red. The margins are rising. +5 to +15 or +15 to +30. Will the suburban vote margins offset the rise in the red rural areas?
Inga is representative of suburban women who voted 3rd party over D. This group of voters is going to vote D in 2020. The rural voters who don't usually vote will turn out in higher proportions. Women suburban voters are going to turn out in higher proportions. Young voters will turn out in higher proportions then normal. Independents will turn out.
This will be a turn out election. Many people will be juiced by DT to vote. There will be a reaction. There will be a equal and opposite reaction. Many people who do not vote, or vote 3rd party, will vote.
It will break records in turnout counts. People like Inga will be determinative. You won't unless you change your vote. If your vote doesn't change from 2016, you're not a new factoid for 2020.
4dub: Nope. It's simply a fact not a statement of affect.
Implying future mental states to others has nothing to do with "fact".
I wasn't disputing your prediction about the relative value of votes (which, btw, is also an opinion, not an established fact), so calm down and make an effort to read a little more carefully before galloping away on whatever hobby horse you happen to be riding hell for leather at the moment.
It will break records in turnout counts.
Oh yes. One district in California had 114% turnout.
Huh. Ok. Well, I find the WOW county margins interesting.
Inga's vote power is representative of a group of suburban voters that may very well determine the 2020 election.
Fucking asshole hypocrite, worst President in history. Nice legacy, you idiots.
Yes, all those ladylike Wisconsin voters will elect the generic Democrat. The car parked next to us at the restaurant last night had a bumper sticker "Anybody else 2020."
You gotta pick one.
"Yes, all those ladylike Wisconsin voters will elect the generic Democrat. The car parked next to us at the restaurant last night had a bumper sticker "Anybody else 2020.""
This is accurate.
DT juices the vote on both sides. He turns it up to 11 and it'll drive record turn out for both sides. People less likely to vote 3rd party.
4dub: It's people like Inga that have the numbers to potentially change the 2020 election.
There are a number of voter groups that have the potential to change the 2020 election, including the dumb white woman demographic. Tell us something we don't know.
I know you enjoy playing the soi-disant expert-on-all-issues blowhard here, 4dub, but nobody doesn't know that.
(And you still haven't offered any rational explanation for why one ought to refrain from "bashing" the opinions of members of any such electorally-significant group.)
Inga's vote power is representative of a group of suburban voters that may very well determine the 2020 election.
Nope. You're fighting the last war.
2020 will be determined by a 21% black turnout for Trump. Inga won't matter.
Inga: Yep and not one liberal I know in Wisconsin will be voting third party this time around.
No, but if the Dems nominate another stinker they'll be saying they did in the years to come.
“DT juices the vote on both sides. He turns it up to 11 and it'll drive record turn out for both sides. People less likely to vote 3rd party.”
Exactly right. The more trump spews his hateful comments the more of us in states that matter will make sure he isn’t reelected by NOT voting third party.
"2020 will be determined by a 21% black turnout for Trump. Inga won't matter."
I do not believe this will be a accurate number for African American turnout in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin or Michigan. If Trump wins in Wisconsin, it'll be due to increased margins among non-college white men in rural counties.
I do not know who will win Wisconsin, but I believe it will be quite close. The suburban women in the WOW counties, who did not vote, or voted 3rd party in 2016, will play a determinative role. Inga is the most important voter on this blog, with the exception of Althouse. But I suspect Althouse will vote in a similar pattern to her 2016 vote. So, that makes Inga the most important voter on the blog.
After the election study the margins of WOW and contrast them with 2016. I've looked at the 2018 numbers for Republican voting suburbs Wisconsin and Arizona and contrasted with earlier elections.
Inga,
Yes, the more agitated people are, the higher turnout will be. Trump knows this, and he's doing a base play.
The problem for T: His base play drives up turnout on the other side. Turning it up to 11 makes it more likely Ds will win. T can win if he could turn it up on his side while relaxing the other side. But he can't do that. Because every action has an equal and opposite reaction.
“No, but if the Dems nominate another stinker they'll be saying they did in the years to come.”
At this point Dems could nominate a dog catcher and we would vote for him to make sure trump loses.
readering said...
Google Trump interviewed on Curiel. He's very obvious.
Yeah. Curiel was a member of "La Raza" or The Race.
It is an explicitly racist organization that wants to return the South West US to Mexico.
There is no significant difference between the democrat founded La Raza or the Democrat founded KKK.
Democrats are still racists and have decided they need to lose another civil war.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“No, but if the Dems nominate another stinker they'll be saying they did in the years to come.”
At this point Dems could nominate a dog catcher and we would vote for him to make sure trump loses.
Because you are stupid people who vote for racists and hate this country.
Specifically why 90+% of vets hate democrats.
This is normally statistically impossible but the democrat party is so obvious in it's hatred of this country it is completely odious to the people who defended it.
“Turning it up to 11 makes it more likely Ds will win. T can win if he could turn it up on his side while relaxing the other side. But he can't do that. Because every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”
It’s one of the laws of nature. Democrats are on their toes, we know what is at stake.
"No, but if the Dems nominate another stinker they'll be saying they did in the years to come."
Disagree. The Ds didn't think they could loose. Thought it was inevitable against DT. They misread the polls. They were sure people wouldn't vote for Trump. Didn't campaign in upper-midwest. Didn't travel to Wisconsin. They thought they would win and it was inevitable.
That's why people voted 3rd party or didn't vote. Now the Ds can nominate pretty much anybody and they will see a huge vote surge. The rhetoric agitates people too much to stay home. And the rhetoric will get increasingly inflammatory as the election nears. It'll be record turnout on both sides. Very few will stay home or vote 3rd party this time around.
The electorate is agitated and ain't nobody voting 3rd party this time around, everybody, all sides. It'll be a major turnout breaking-all-records of votes voting time Nov 2020.
Trump is targeting Omar, and his trump card will be her incestuous former marital status. He wants her up on stage for the unveiling.
"Democrats are on their toes, we know what is at stake."
Wisconsin will be very close. Some red rural counties are increasing the margins for Trump.
It'll be huge turnout, but I don't know which way Wisconsin will jump.
wwww said...
"Yes, all those ladylike Wisconsin voters will elect the generic Democrat. The car parked next to us at the restaurant last night had a bumper sticker "Anybody else 2020.""
This is accurate.
DT juices the vote on both sides. He turns it up to 11 and it'll drive record turn out for both sides. People less likely to vote 3rd party.
Democrats raise mexican flag at ICE HQ juicing the vote on both sides.
Trump: Stop hating the US.
Democrats: Fuck the USA turn it into Mexico.
We know what appeals to legal voters and we know why democrats want more vote fraud.
Oh yes. One district in California had 114% turnout.
Which one was that? Two outright lies in the same thread. Nowhere near a record for you, but you are on a roll of bullshit today.
I remember once you claimed that Los Angeles had more illegal immigrants than foreign born residents. And that even after I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you meant the Los Angeles metro area, not the city of Los Angeles proper (mostly because the number you cited exceeded the entire population of Los Angeles). Of course you would have crucified me for such an error.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
It’s one of the laws of nature. Democrats are on their toes, we know what is at stake.
Democrats promise:
Open borders.
Endless Wars.
Crony Trade.
Higher taxes.
Spying on political opponents.
Endless phony investigations of political opponents.
Illegal coups.
Government funded infanticide.
They know what is at stake.
It's people like Inga that have the numbers to potentially change the 2020 election.
The total vote for candidates other than Trump/Clinton in 2016 was 215,108
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election
62,984,828 Trump
65,853,514 Clinton
___215,108 Other
=129,053,450 Total votes cast
215,108 / 129,053,450 = 0.0017
Team Inga = 0.17% of the vote
spread out over 50 states
assuming all 0.17% votes Blue
Freder Frederson said...
Oh yes. One district in California had 114% turnout.
Which one was that? Two outright lies in the same thread. Nowhere near a record for you, but you are on a roll of bullshit today.
When asked how many inactive registrations were in Los Angeles County as of June 15, 2017, the county employee reported that there were 3,475,328.
"That makes the total voter registration in L.A. County 144 percent of the citizen voting-age population. More than 40 percent of L.A. County’s voter registrations are inactive, and we don’t know how many of the “active” registrations are people who have moved, which the county would know if it checked its voter file against the National Change of Address database."
"Under new election laws in California, counties will soon be mailing absentee ballots to every registered voter, and there will be unattended drop-boxes where ballots can be returned."
We all know how a dozen republicans had races flipped weeks after the 2018 election.
California is brazen in it's voter fraud.
OK, since we're talking predictions, here we go! I'll be long gone from this blog by Nov 2020. It's going to be DRAMA here w/ many personal insults leading up to the election.
There's going to be lots of debate about who the D candidate will be. My prediction will not make an difference for these outcomes, with the possible exception of Bernie Sanders.
You can revisit this comment in Nov. 2020 if you want. But I imagine this comment will be long forgotten by that point:
Penn, Michigan: D
New Mexico: D
Nevada: D
Arizona: In play
Wisconsin: In play, edge to Ds. too close to guess.
North Carolina: In Play
Florida: In play, leans R
Ohio: R
Everything else: Votes as they did in 2016.
I do not know who will win Wisconsin, but I believe it will be quite close. The suburban women in the WOW counties, who did not vote, or voted 3rd party in 2016, will play a determinative role. Inga is the most important voter on this blog, with the exception of Althouse. But I suspect Althouse will vote in a similar pattern to her 2016 vote. So, that makes Inga the most important voter on the blog.
No. Wisconsin won't be in play. Inga will not matter.
In fact, I predict that Inga will be committed before absentee voting begins.
And 3 months later, no one will remember who ran against Trump.
Mondale?
"Team Inga = 0.17% of the vote"
Popular vote isn't relevant in the electoral college. I'm looking at the vote patterns in Wisconsin, Penn, Michigan. It was in Wisconsin that the 3rd party vote was 5 times higher then normal in 2016.
It's the # of votes in Wisconsin in 2016 cast for 3rd parties and look at the undervote. Inga's vote is representative of the critical vote in Wisconsin, in addition to the red rural vote increase I expect to see. If there is no change from 2016, that's not relevant.
To see the pattern I'm talking about, look at the WOW county voting patterns in 2018 and compare to earlier elections w/ Scott Walker running.
Trump'a initial tweets were factually wrong -- he referred to "Congresswomen" plural, when there's only one (Omar) who fits the description. Also, immigrant Americans have never had a duty to return to the countries they left and reform them, before having standing to criticize and attempt to reform the US. Nevertheless, the criticism of the tweets was WAY over the top. The tweets certainly weren't racist (even if Muslim were a race -- or even if Somali were). If I were a betting man, I would bet that this kerfuffle will somewhat increase the odds against a "moderate" winning the Democratic Presidential nomination. And if I were Trump, the last thing I'd want to do is run against a moderate Democrat. And BTW, if the Dems were to nominate a "moderate", all those third-party candidates would begin to look more attractive to Leftist voters.
The electorate is a lot more polarized then Reagan V. Mondale. The negative polarization forecloses a landslide like Reagan's. The outcome of this election is pretty much baked in the cake, with the exception of a few small changes.
It's many months until that point, so we'll wait and see what happens. I'm sure it will be interesting.
Things have changed even since then. I hear many of my conservative neighbors who now admit they didn’t vote for Trump. Shocked me. And even less of these college educated women are going to vote for trump this time around.
The conservative suburbs: Trump had a “Waukesha problem” in Wisconsin, but it wasn’t big enough in the end to truly cost him, thanks to his strengths elsewhere.
Trump won the state’s most important GOP county by 28 points (62% to 34%) and 66,320 votes. Both margins were smaller than Romney’s in 2012 (34 points, 84,019 votes) and Bush’s margins in 2004 and 2000. Trump’s lead in Waukesha was 10 points smaller than Ron Johnson’s margin on the same ballot. Trump won neighboring Ozaukee by 19 points; Romney won it by 30 four years earlier.
Waukesha, Ozaukee and Washington were the three reddest counties in Wisconsin in each of the last six presidential races (from 1992 to 2012).
This contest was a thorough break from that 20-year pattern. Trump’s biggest landslides came up north. Washington gave Trump his third-best winning margin, Waukesha his 16th best and Ozaukee his 37th best.
Why was this one of the few places in Wisconsin where Trump underperformed?
Pick your factor: the preponderance of college graduates in these counties; their greater affluence; the anti-Trump drumbeat on some talk radio shows; doubts about Trump’s conservatism; his clash with popular GOP leaders.
Tank said...
Even though he has failed on immigration, ya gotta love the guy.
Failed? Shame on you Tank, you know better than that. PDJT is like the quarterback at the 20 yard line with 6 people hanging onto him and even a couple of his own teammates trying to trip him up.
Yet he keeps moving the ball forward. Slowly perhaps but moving forward. They can slow him down but they can't stop him.
-Wall construction. Not as much as there should be but it is ongoing
-Mexico has put 20m of their troops on the northern border to stop illegal border crossing. Another 6m on their southern border
-Guatemala just agreed to be the "Safe third country" for asylum seekers
-...and more
It is not as much as you and I would like, perhaps. Not as fast as we'd like perhaps. But it ain't nothing. In fact it is a Helluva lot.
Most presidents facing the kind of resistance from within and without would have given up.
PDJT has not.
John Henry
"Think again. 2018 midterm results should be giving you a hint,'
In 2008, Obama won 53% of the vote and 365 electoral votes.
In 2010, Republicans gained 63 seats.
In 2012, Obama won with 53% of the vote and 332 electoral votes.
Midterms rarely show trends.
"Things have changed even since then. I hear many of my conservative neighbors who now admit they didn’t vote for Trump. Shocked me. And even less of these college educated women are going to vote for trump this time around."
I do think the WOW counties are lowering their vote margin. But margins will go up in red counties. People who didn't vote, or voted 3rd party, will vote for Trump in those red counties in 2020.
The suburban blue vote has to offset that increased red vote, or Wisconsin goes red again. If your neighbour's 2020 vote is for the same party as 2016, that voter won't be the critical vote. The critical voters are ones who change their party vote, or go to vote instead of staying home.
I do think Wisconsin leans blue, but it's a very very very close call. Could go either way.
"We don't care if Trump is not precise in his words, we know what he's talking about."
Depends on which movie you have in your head...
either he is the biggest bigot in the world, or he's just spouting common sense...
Sorry Fen. The total vote for candidates other than Trump/Clinton in 2016 was 215,108. Not.
Popular vote:
Clinton 48.18%
Trump 46.09%
Johnson 3.28%
Stein 1.07%
McMullin 0.54%
Others 0.84%
It's the # of votes in Wisconsin in 2016 cast for 3rd parties and look at the undervote.
Yes, I know the "Other" vote in Wisconsin was 6.3%
You need that to break 60-40 in your favor to make it close.
Attempting to forecast something like that this far out is a fool's errand. There are too many unknown factors that could come into play between now and then, and Inga has destroyed her credibility here so her reporting on neighborhood trends are wish-casting. We heard the same from her about WI in 2016.
Love it or leave it? Not what Trump is saying, but is a rather simplistic way of looking at any country.
Are there problems with American government? Yes. Most of them caused by not adhering to the U.S. Constitution where the federal government has limited powers. So, do you think there should be some reforms? Sure, and you're not being the least bit unpatriotic by saying so.
OTOH, do you think the U.S. is uniquely evil and the government needs to be totally replaced and redone? In that case- GTFO! I don't want you here, and pretty much neither does anyone else. That is being unpatriotic. I think it applies to those who Trump left unnamed, bit everyone seems to know who they are.
And think- How is it that everyone knows who they are if they didn't hate America and it's government and it's people?
If you're first generation born here and hate it- go back to where your parents came from. If they're the ones who carefully taught you to hate it here- take them with you. Love it or leave it is somewhat appropriate for this. You or your parents came here because you lived in a shithole. Demanding changes because you don't like it here- well, find somewhere you do like and move there. I feel no need to change to accommodate you. 4 of my 8 great-grandparents were immigrants, 2 from England, 2 from Ireland. The Irish ones faced discrimination because they were Irish. Also died young, orphaning my grandmother at age 6. She was brought up by an aunt. From Ireland. From family stories, none ever expressed any desire to go back to where they came. No love lost for the Old Country. In every other family branch, they were in North America before the Revolution, some in Nova Scotia, some in the 13 colonies, many of whom fought with the pro-independence armies and militias. Until recently, immigrants came here to assimilate, become Americans, without a hyphen. Now, they come here demanding their old identity- and the rights of Americans. You can't have both. Other identities are incompatible with American.
"You need that to break 60-40 in your favor to make it close. Attempting to forecast something like that this far out is a fool's errand"
Yes that is my prediction of how it breaks. However, the red rural vote in Wisconsin could swing Wisconsin to Trump. Or the suburban vote in the WOW counties could swing it blue. I expect WOW to vote for Trump but the margins will be lower then 2016. But the margins in certain red rural counties will be higher. Lower 3rd party vote in Madison and La Crosse.
It'll be very close. It is too far out. It's not a poll. It's simply my guess based on the patterns of negative partisanship I see in the electorate. I don't think it matters who wins the D primary.
Predictions are fun. There are many unknown factors leading up to an election. I do think many things are baked into this election, which make it easier to guess. I could be wrong, and that's ok.
2018 midterm results should be giving you a hint,
You mean like in 2010 - when Obama 'lost' 64 House seats - and went on to lose in 2012?
My gawd, you're dumb.
Sorry Fen. The total vote for candidates other than Trump/Clinton in 2016 was 215,108. Not.
I don't know what that sentence is meant to say.
I double-checked and got 221,822. My mistake.
Working backwards with the difference of 6714, I find that I skipped over the American Solidarity Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_presidential_election
So, corrected:
221,822 / 129,053,450 = still equals 0.0017, or 0.17%
...as I had rounded up 0.00166 from the prior result:
215,108 / 129,053,450 = 0.00166
221,822 / 129,053,450 = 0.00171
Lower 3rd party votes in Milwaukee too.
I looked at WI, MI, and PA. In all three, Trump + Libertarian > 50%.
I'm pretty sure those suburban women weren't the ones goosing Gary Johnson's totals.
No, the Jill Stein voters aren't going to make a difference. It's the not college educated white males leaving the Democrat Party who are going to make the difference
Sorry Fen.
Oh my bad, I see what you mean now. The wiki page didn't include Stein, McMullen, Sanders, Castle in the "Other" totals. So my numbers are borked.
Well frack. I'm not going back over all that again.
It's simply my guess based on the patterns of negative partisanship I see in the electorate. I don't think it matters who wins the D primary.
I agree the Dims will vote for whoever but Inga is not a typical white suburban woman voter. She is and was a far left loony and that vote will not be enough to offset Hillary voters whose lives are better with good jobs and lower taxes.
The Dims are trying to pretend this is Obama's economy where every summer was going to be "Recovery Summer."
Only massive vote fraud like that in Orange County CA can save them. I doubt Trump will win California but that will not determine the election.
Why do I think they break 60-40 or greater? In general, Indies have been breaking like that since 2016 in elections and polls. College educated suburbans are breaking hard for Ds, especially women. White non-college, rurals are breaking hard for Rs. Because of demos in Wisconsin it's very close & hard to make a prediction about which wins out.
1) 3rd party vote both libertarian and Jill Stein
2) Suburbans who didn't vote because kids were sick with the flu and they were busy with groceries and they thought Clinton would win and they didn't like Clinton anyways. And they're kind of a-political and would rather not get into it.
This time they'll go the polls even if the kids have the flu and they have to crawl over broken glass. Every time Trump juices them up like today it gets more positive they're going to the polls even if the kids have the flu and they're busy with a thousand other things they'd rather do then vote.
Wisconsin will be super close.
Thanks, Milwaukie, that was a stupid oversight. I'll just work it backwards instead, subtracting the Trump-Clinton total from the overall total:
Which leaves 7,830,934 Other votes
= 0.05729 or 5.7%
Thanks for the heads up.
"Inga is not a typical white suburban woman voter."
She is very typical of the Wisconsin suburban woman voter who
(1) did not like Clinton
(2) Thought Clinton was inevitable
(3) Didn't vote D because of those two items.
Trump is juicing up the electorate for 2020 and he's juicing both sides. Everything he does to invigorate his base when he "owns the libs" increases the juice on the other side. It's a hand-in-hand dynamic. That's gonna juice turn out all around.
You have to remember the dynamics of 2016. People thought Clinton was inevitable. They were demoralized and bummed out. They thought she was gonna win anyways so they didn't need to vote. That factor is gone for 2020.
Now, Trump does have the advantage of incumbency. However, due to negative partisanship in the electorate, incumbency doesn't give the same advantage. Likewise for economic factors. The negative partisanship has hardened the electorate along wedge issues. People don't vote the way they used to vote.
Anyways very close election in Wisconsin.
Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
Things have changed even since then. I hear many of my conservative neighbors who now admit they didn’t vote for Trump. Shocked me. And even less of these college educated women are going to vote for trump this time around.
Stupid is as stupid does
Trump won WI without their votes in 2016. A bunch of the actual conservatives, who didn't vote for Trump in 2016 (people like me), are looking at Trump's actions, and are going to vote for him in 2020.
"I'm a conservative who doesn't like Trump, so I'm going to vote for the socialist the Democrats have nominated" is not a sentence that will be uttered by any sane human being.
Trump won in 2016 because a chunk of WWC Obama voters took a flyer on him. Trump has repaid them with economic policies that make them and their friends better off.
Democrats control in upper midwest and northeast is based on getting those WWC votes. They're going away.
Then there's hispanic and black working class men. Both of whom are doing far better economically under Trump than they every did under Obama.
Kamla Harris put them in jail, Trump got them jobs. Yeah, I like that election
You have to remember the dynamics of 2016. People thought Clinton was inevitable. They were demoralized and bummed out. They thought she was gonna win anyways so they didn't need to vote.
You need to apply to the people who didn't bother to vote for Trump too.
I didn't vote in 2016, and I'm registered as an Independent.
Fen, if you're interested look at Charles Franklin of Marquette University he has the numbers & has posted them online I believe. Some others have cracked them too but I can't remember off hand where they are on the web and I've gotta run. Maybe Nate Cohn posted them too. Anyways Franklin is the Wisconsin guy.
I gotta run so this isn't the exact link but you can find them. Anyways Franklin is the Wisconsin numbers guy to follow and the election is gonna come down to WI.
https://twitter.com/PollsAndVotes/status/1145479995277680642
She is very typical of the Wisconsin suburban woman voter who is crazy with Trump delusion.
There were white women suburban voters who didn't care or thought Hillary was inevitable but that didn't make them vote for the Green Party or exhibit the lunacy we see here everyday.
Time will tell but there is probably a significant segment that will vote their vote on their pocketbook, just as they did for Clinton in the 90s.
The economy will prevail unless the left can get 3 or 4 million illegals to vote and that will probably be in blue states anyway. I do have concerns about Arizona as I think the left ran a test bed of fraud in 2018.
"I didn't vote in 2016, and I'm registered as an Independent."
honestly nothing is gonna matter but voters in Wisconsin, Penn and Michigan. There will be plays for other states but all other states votes how they did in 2016. It's baked in the cake.
"just as they did for Clinton in the 90s."
things are different from the 90s. economics don't drive votes like they used to do, negative partisanship does.
Cook: Anyone who lives here has a right and an obligation to criticize those aspects of our nation that we each find wanting. This is part of our duty as citizens of a purportedly "self-governing" nation.
Anyone who declares, (in essence), "America, love it or leave it" doesn't know the first damned thing about the nation they adore like simple-minded children or idiots.
Wrong.
You have the right to your opinion about America.
I have the right to my opinion about your opinion about America.
If you have a problem with that, there's the door.
"And he'll be poaching more in 2020. If you can't grasp that, and what it means, you can't offer meaningful commentary on 2020."
Yeah I understand the play and I see non-college white male vote margins rising for Trump. It's baked into my analysis.
“And he'll be poaching more in 2020.”
No he won’t. 2018 results say he won’t.
“If you have a problem with that, there's the door.”
And just how do you think you’re going to make them leave?
Then Trump should’ve left when he was bashing the US under Obama’s policies. He should’ve loved the US under Obama or left it. Or he could've STFU.
Blogger wwww said...
Inga,
Yes, the more agitated people are, the higher turnout will be. Trump knows this, and he's doing a base play.
No he isn't. Trump is going for previously Democrat-voting working class voters, of all "races".
They were "Reagan Democrat". They "went home" to Bubba Clinton. They voted for Obama, twice. Trump didn't win in 2016 because he "juiced the base", Trump won in 2016 because he poached a chunk of the Democrats base.
And he'll be poaching more in 2020. If you can't grasp that, and what it means, you can't offer meaningful commentary on 2020.
It's why Trump's victory map in 2016 in MI, WA, and PA was different from the victory maps of the GOP Senators who won each State, too. Trump pulls from a different vote pool than the average Republican. But when the Local GOP run with Trump, each pulled enough to the other that both won.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“And he'll be poaching more in 2020.”
No he won’t. 2018 results say he won’t.
Yep, and Big GOP wins in PA, MI, and WI in 2010 meant Obama would lose all three States in 2012.
Thank you for demonstrating that you really do have to be stupid to be a leftist
Inga: "And just how do you think you’re going to make them leave?"
Stop projecting. I never said anything about MAKING anyone leave. You should know, you hate this block so much why you keep coming here?
Inga...Allie Oop said...
Then Trump should’ve left when he was bashing the US under Obama’s policies. He should’ve loved the US under Obama or left it. Or he could've STFU.
Obama was a fucking traitor.
He spied on political opponents working with foreign governments to do so.
He was caught on tape colluding with Russia.
There were numerous policies that were obviously in service to Russia including limiting domestic fossil fuel production and starting numerous stupid wars in the ME and shipping cash to Iran in small unmarked US bills.
Democrats are raising Mexican flags in our country. None of you are denouncing this violence.
You are just terrible people.
Even if you manage to get enough illegal votes to win elections in 2020 we will never be ruled by you people.
Blogger wwww said...
"And he'll be poaching more in 2020. If you can't grasp that, and what it means, you can't offer meaningful commentary on 2020."
Yeah I understand the play and I see non-college white male vote margins rising for Trump. It's baked into my analysis.
Not really, if you've claiming that Trump's doing a "base election" strategy.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/even-when-accounting-for-shy-trump-voters-the-president-needs-his-numbers-to-improve/
“Is there a shy Trump voter factor the way there used to be “shy Tory factor” in polls? Probably.
The final polls in Michigan in 2016 put Hillary Clinton ahead by 4 to 5 percentage points, and Trump won by three-tenths of one percentage point. The final polls in Pennsylvania in 2016 put Hillary Clinton tied to leading by 4 points, and Trump won by seven-tenths of one percentage point. The final polls in Wisconsin in 2016 put Hillary Clinton ahead by 6 to 8 points, and Trump won by seven-tenths of one percentage point.
The good news for the Trump reelection campaign is that that they can feel reasonably optimistic that Trump will outperform the final polls conducted before Election Day 2020. The bad news is, we don’t know if this “shy Trump voter factor” will be good for one percentage point, 5 percentage points, or 10 percentage points.
Let’s say the shy Trump voters are worth a five-point swing in favor of Trump compared to the most recent numbers in key states. In a matchup against Joe Biden, Trump would still lose Michigan, lose Pennsylvania, and lose Wisconsin, as well as losing the national popular vote by a slightly larger margin than in 2016. If Biden won those three states, and kept Hillary Clinton’s states, he’s at 278 electoral votes and Trump would be a one-term president.
If you’re wondering about the other likely swing states, with a five point swing, Trump would still win Ohio. The limited number of polls in Florida range from a tie to nine point lead for Biden, and North Carolina has an even wider range. Iowa would probably be close.”
That makes the total voter registration in L.A. County 144 percent of the citizen voting-age population. More than 40 percent of L.A. County’s voter registrations are inactive, and we don’t know how many of the “active” registrations are people who have moved, which the county would know if it checked its voter file against the National Change of Address database."
Even if the anonymous employee contacted by phone had his numbers right (and earlier in the same article they cited the Los Angeles number as 112%), that is entirely different than a 114% voter turnout.
So your defense of Michael K is inaccurate and irrelevant.
economics don't drive votes like they used to do, negative partisanship does.
You are assuming that all Democrat voters are like Inga. I suspect only about 25% are. Why do you think Biden was doing so well in the polls ? There are lots of people who pay little attention to politics until close to the election.
Well there is no benefit to arguing with people whose minds are made up and will not change. They used to call them "Yellow Dog Democrats." My father was one. I just don't think there are as many as you assume.
And blacks are figuring out who their friends are. Not , certainly, but enough.
So your defense of Michael K is inaccurate and irrelevant
Freder continues to blather nonsense. Have fun, Freder
Democrats will vote for WHOEVER the Dem nominee is. You folks can try to placate yourself by thinking Dems are going to be voting for trump this time around, or 3rd party, yellow dogs or not.
This is like Redskin fans trash-talking during pre-season. Then RG3 goes down with a bum knee.
You Dems don't even know who your nominee will be. Sleepy Joe Biden? You think that's going to motivate inner city turnout?
Or the DNC could rig the primaries against Bernie again and make him run 3rd party.
This conversation only proves how desperate Dems are to find good news for their party as it implodes due to identity politics. You think it's bad now, wait till Sleepy Joe wades into the AOC fight and offends half of your victim class.
“Sleepy Joe Biden? You think that's going to motivate inner city turnout?”
You people have NO clue how much trump is hated. All it will take for trump to lose is for trump to continue his racist, misogynistic, biogoted rhetoric. Let trump be trump. Thank you trump.
Inga: You folks can try to placate yourself by thinking -
LOL. We're not the ones trying to placate ourselves with wish-casting, sweetheart.
Tell us more about how we are much trouble Trump will be in once Mueller finally releases his report. That was the same talking point script you are using now.
"Just you wait!" she said. Hehe.
Inga: You people have NO clue how much trump is hated.
Inga, you spend all your time online, your outrage meter dialed to 11.
You have no idea what normal people outside of Twitter think.
“You have no idea what normal people outside of Twitter think.”
I don’t do Twitter.
You’re a very foolish man.
'Fucking asshole hypocrite, worst President in history. Nice legacy, you idiots.'
Best Monday evah!! 😎
"Inga is in Wisconsin. She voted 3rd party in 2016. Will she vote 3rd party in 2020? It's voters like Inga that will decide the 2020 election."
That was an exceptionally ill-informed vote, wasn't it? Regardless, I think more of the 3.6% that voted libertarian will split off to vote for Trump than the entire 1% that voted for Stein.
All it will take for trump to lose is for trump to continue his racist, misogynistic, biogoted rhetoric. Let trump be trump. Thank you trump.
Delusions are not good for you but you just go right ahead and rant.
Bless your heart,
Twitter agrees with Althouse:
Twitter's new policy for holding powerful leaders to account for engaging in hate speech and harassment received its first major test this weekend when President Donald Trump called on several Democratic members of Congress to "go back" to their countries - prompting widespread allegations of racism against women of color.
Twitter said Monday that the president's tweets didn't violate its policies, but independent researchers who study social media said they struggled to see why.
Twitter says Trump's tweet didn't violate its rules against racism but won't say why
“...but you just go right ahead and rant.”
Yes, let Trump continue to rant. We’re listening.
Yes, let Trump continue to rant. We’re listening.
No, you're not but go ahead.
"Twitter says Trump's tweet didn't violate its rules against racism but won't say why"
Maybe because it didn't say anything racist?
Freder continues to blather nonsense. Have fun, Freder
And you still haven't defended, or admitted to, the two outright lies you told in this thread.
Seems to me that you are the one blathering nonsense.
Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
You people have NO clue how much trump is hated.
Of course we do! We see you TDS sufferers foaming at the mouth on a regular basis
"All it will take for trump to lose is for trump to continue his racist, misogynistic, biogoted rhetoric. Let trump be trump. Thank you trump."
All it will take for Trump to win is for leftists like you to keep on publicly defining "racist" as "disagreeing with a left-winger who claims to be non-white" and "sexist" as "disagreeing with a left-winger who claims to be female."
There's a significant chunk of WWC male voters who didn't vote for Trump in 2016. You all are doing your damnedest to make sure every single one of them votes GOP in 2020
Thank you.
You people think that 2020 will be a do over of 2016?
Not hardly likely. If Trump wins — not a given! — it will be because he peels voters away from the Democrats. Open boarders is very unpopular with blacks and legal Hispanic immigrants. How many of them will break with the Democrat Party to vote for Trump? I don't know, and I am certain that no one else does either. Trump will be able to go into black churches and make the case that Democrats gave their parishioners midnight basketball and black on black murders while he gave them jobs. Will that resonate in black communities? I don’t think anyone knows. If Warren is the nominee, as many “Progressive” Democrats seem to want, will blacks and Hispanics be resentful that this whiter than white bread woman passed herself off as a POC? Or will they overlook it? Anyone who says they know is lying to us or fooling herself. And, of course, Trump has yet to start in on the nominee with a nickname. Pass the popcorn.
Trump got the chance today to Bring up the fact that AOC got Amazon to leave NY. DOWN FOR THE COUNT
I hope you limbered up before you did this kind of stretching. "Come back and show us how its done" does not negate telling native-born Americans to "go back where they came from", a pejorative used exclusively on non-white people. When Donald Trump was complaining about Obama, no one told him to "go back where he came from".
Trump got the chance today to Bring up the fact that AOC got Amazon to leave NY.
Except for a few real estate developers, I think the consensus is that Cuomo and DeBlasio sold their souls to Amazon for no good reason. Long Island City was already booming without Amazon. No reason to throw billions of dollars to the richest man in the world for some elusive bragging rights.
Cook said: "I was in Houston for several days in mid-April this year. What a dead city! Towering skyscrapers, yet virtually no one out on the streets."
That is because everyone is in the tunnels. LOL! :)
@Inga
So?
BTW- Here's Tubbs covering a Charlie Walker song tailor made for AOC.
Trump is telling them to put their money where their mouth is. They talk big but the entire Squad has not a single real-world accomplishment between them, especially fixing social problems. Their only talent seems to be playing the race card.
Mike: ..."go back where they came from", a pejorative used exclusively on non-white people.
Lol, no. Every newcomer group gets a dose of "go back where you came from" from somebody. And not just in the U.S.
Nowadays even native-born whites get it from many varieties of non-white and wannabe-non-white race-hustlers. It's an equal opportunity pejorative! (My personal favorite is 100% white Hispanic hustlers larping as indios and telling other kinds of whites to "go back to Europe".)
If you insist on being a big girl's blouse about non-existent "racism!", at least avoid the obvious baloney when trying on the talking points.
Robert Cook opines that it is every true American's duty to criticize what isn't right about America--sure, ok. And Trump does. What these 4 congress-critters do is want to destroy the country, call it an evil country, want it to be socialist, say it is the worst nation on earth. This is not criticizing things that are wrong, this is hatred of the whole enchilada. Not the same thing at all. And if the US really is the worst country on earth, it should be easy to find somewhere better to move to.
Kevin, quoting sfgate headline: "Twitter says Trump's tweet didn't violate its rules against racism but won't say why."
Man, that is one prize Orwellian headline.
You're welcome Fen.
I can't wait until the conversation moves to are they communists or just anti-American? They're all girls, why wasn't Trump sexist? He didn't tell any dudes to take a vacay. Wait until he drops that AOC should go to Venezuela.
Inga: All it will take for trump to lose is for trump to continue his racist, misogynistic, biogoted rhetoric. Let trump be trump. Thank you trump.
Even you don't believe that, else you wouldn't spend your life here yelling at strangers on the internet, trying to shame them into dumping Trump.
You are desperate. Here is my prediction:
Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020
8:00 PM
Inga checks her front doorbell for the 4th time, wondering why no one has shown up for her Election Night Party
10:33 PM
MSNBC calls the election
10:45 PM
Inga has a drunken meltdown on Althouse
11:15 PM
Inga slows her frantic pace, in pain and desperation
Her aching limbs and downcast face aglow with perspiration
Stiff as wire, her lungs on fire, with just the briefest pause
Then flooding through her memory, the echoes of old applause
And she limps across the floor, and closes her bedroom door
Cook said: "I was in Houston for several days in mid-April this year. What a dead city! Towering skyscrapers, yet virtually no one out on the streets."
Heading towards the 3rd largest city in America.
To tell a non-white, native-born American to "go back" where she came from is an evil, racist statement--in any context, without exception, and regardless of the politics of the American in question.
Ann's defense of the statement hinges on possible uncertainty as to who the pronoun "they" refers to, which may possibly exclude AOC as she was born in the US. This defense is ridiculous. There is only one "progressive Democratic congresswoman" who was not born in the United States. If Trump meant only Rep. Omar, he would have said "she" and not "they". Ergo, "they" most obviously includes non-white, native-born Americans, and is evil and racist.
This is a despicable, bad-faith rewriting of fact in furtherance of Trump's plainly bigoted speech and acts.
When Trump meets his inevitable bad end, this sort of defense of the indefensible will bring the entire GOP deservedly down with him. The arc of the moral universe is long, but it tends towards justice. History will not be kind.
The arc of the moral universe is long, but it tends towards justice. History will not be kind.
If true, then you are writing about the doom of the Democrats.
"To tell a non-white, native-born American to "go back" where she came from is an evil, racist statement--in any context, without exception, and regardless of the politics of the American in question."
But only if it's about a non-white?
LOL get fucked.
"This is a despicable, bad-faith rewriting of fact in furtherance of Trump's plainly bigoted speech and acts."
Meh. Go away you racist pos.
Inga, how many congresspersons and senior permanent bureaucrats hold two passports? Any idea? Is it zero or non-zero?
They warned us about letting all those Irish in. And just look at what's happened.
Democrats will vote for WHOEVER the Dem nominee is.
This has never been true.
Once we know the candidate, it won’t be true this time either.
Please follow the orange line on the floor back to reality.
The arc of the moral universe is long, but it tends towards justice.
Unfortunately for the leftists, they’re always 12 years away from planet going kablooey.
Inga, how many congresspersons and senior permanent bureaucrats hold two passports?
I'm gonna pull a Michael K, and point out that the correct answer is "most, if not all, of them". If you are a government employee and do a significant amount of international travel on government business, you will be issued an official (or diplomatic) passport for your government travel.
I know you mean passports from two different countries. I worked with one guy, GS14, who held two passports and traveled in Europe on his British passport. He also had a Secret clearance. That is a really bad idea. They can and will yank your clearance if you actively use a second citizenship.
Fair enough. Let us replace "passports" with "citizenships."
Paco Wove @ 7:13am,
"Pluralizing that one instance"? Au contraire! Didn't you hear Tlaib saying, shortly after she won her seat, that she was going to "give voice" to the Palestinian people? Pretty sure she's in the wrong legislature in that case.
"...must not be allowed to go unchallenged."
And with this single phrase, Trump assured his re-election.
Next maybe he can ask, in total sincerity, which policy is racist: one which treats all individuals equally under law, or one which demands different treatment based on skin color.
Exploding heads would be the minimal response.
Inga...Allie Oop said...
13% of 116 Congress are immigrants or children of immigrants
Big whoop, Inga. My in-laws are immigrants and they say the same thing as Trump. You don't like it here, leave. Go back to your or your parent's place of origin and fix it, then come back and tell us how it's done.
They also think immigrants, legal and especially illegal, should not be getting any welfare.
It's people like Inga that have the numbers to potentially change the 2020 election.
There's one Inga here telling her story. I must have heard half a dozen, maybe a dozen commenters here say that they didn't vote for Trump in 2016 but will crawl across broken glass to vote for him in 2020.
The simple fact is that President Trump has every reason to gain votes over Candidate Citizen Trump. He has delivered on many of his promises and has made genuine efforts on others. He has made many efforts to reach out beyond his base. His opposition offers nothing except, in a word, statism. I would expect him to advance on all fronts except, perhaps, Arab-Americans and Chinese-Americans.
Post a Comment