Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Brian?

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

In fairness there is a lot of voter suppression as well.

There is. But a lot of that is done by purging voter registers, so it doesn’t show in the turnout.

Brian?

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The numbers don't lie but their weighting of different polls has changed, they used to put a lot of loading onto polls that lean conservatively, now they put less loading. As I said before, they had an issue, they corrected it. Look at literally any of their weighted polling for the 2016 election and you'll see it was way beyond the margin of error out for every state when for once rasmussen was actually close in a lot of cases.

You know they changed their model based on available? As anyone should.

As for 2016, I don’t get you. Who was beyond the margin for error?

Nate Silvers method gave Trump a better chance than anyone else did, apart from blatantly GOP leaning polls. I feel you may not understand how it works. They don’t use margin of error, they give probabilities.

26000 Elephants

It seems that intelligence services had enough to sink Trump for some time. As a fall-out from "Redact-gate", John Schindler does a good write up on a possible state of play:

Mueller Is Holding Top Secret Intelligence That Will Sink the Trump Presidency

Leroy42

Jebus, I hadn't realised the importance of the Manafort revelations. This really is massive, people should forget about the non event of Trumps limp TV speech of last night and focus on what is happening.

It is amazing that so many were prepared to hate HC over alleged links to Russia, and yet here we are with almost cast iron proof of Russian collusion and nothing. The only thing, as the linked article states, left open is exactly how much Trump knew.

But he deserves no benefit of the doubt on this as he has consistently lied about any Russian interactions.

Trump should be being impeached as we speak

everlast75

I think there will be a systematic and comprehensive take down of each and every wrong doing. He will not have the ratings to run again in 2020 so either he resigns or he will walk out into sealed indictments.

There's no other way it can play out. Every rock you overturn there's more criminality. Thankfully,
they are dumb as rocks. Of this entire unfortunate sh1tshow, its one thing we can be thankful for. Can you imagine how insidious a clever criminal could have been? The damage he or she could have done?

If the SDNY, SC, etc cannot take him and his goons down, then he must be innocent - and that's sure as hell not the case!

Christy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Brian? wrote: »

Seriously? Nate might be a democrat at heart but numbers don't lie.

Can you point to one poll where "conservative support" was underrepresented?

The numbers don't lie but their weighting of different polls has changed, they used to put a lot of loading onto polls that lean conservatively, now they put less loading. As I said before, they had an issue, they corrected it. Look at literally any of their weighted polling for the 2016 election and you'll see it was way beyond the margin of error out for every state when for once rasmussen was actually close in a lot of cases.

As you say for once (though no you are wrong, they got pretty close to the overall votes and were within the margin of error for it, just the breakdown caught them). Indeed from what I saw he was the one serious voice saying that the Trump win while losing the popular vote had a non trivial probability.

For once means there was no reason to weight Rasmussen heavily. Look at 2012 when Romney's chances were way overstated. The polling error was bigger then but it gets less attention as it just meant a larger than expected margin of victory as opposed to a different result. Weightings have changed and will change again in the future. It will never be 100% accurate.

Rereading your comment I am going to need evidence that they were way out for every state. Since they were close to the overall that seems unlikely so I am calling that out as wrong.

Frank Bullitt

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1083102431997652993

Sounds like the art of the deal isn't going too well...

everlast75

And the pressure on Senior just gets heavier...



https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/1083074510830649344?s=19

jooksavage

Gintonious wrote: »

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1083102431997652993

Sounds like the art of the deal isn't going too well...

Trump is playing this BADLY. Its very hard to sell this as a Democrat shutdown when he's the one pounding on tables and walking away in a sulk.

Headshot

jooksavage wrote: »

Trump is playing this BADLY. Its very hard to sell this as a Democrat shutdown when he's the one pounding on tables and walking away in a sulk.

Add to the fact he said he would take responsible for the shutdown and wouldnt blame the Democrats.....

ricero

Time to declare this as a national emergency and bypass the bitter democrats. The Donald mandate was to build a wall and by god he will do it I feel.

Gbear

ricero wrote: »

Time to declare this as a national emergency and bypass the bitter democrats. The Donald mandate was to build a wall and by god he will do it I feel.

I see you're a fan of totalitarianism.

ricero

ricero wrote: »

Time to declare this as a national emergency and bypass the bitter democrats. The Donald mandate was to build a wall and by god he will do it I feel.

If he couldn't do it when the Republicans held all branches of government I doubt he will do it now.

ricero

Gbear wrote: »

I see you're a fan of totalitarianism.

On issues of national security I feel it can be valid considering the context

pixelburp

ricero wrote: »

Time to declare this as a national emergency and bypass the bitter democrats. The Donald mandate was to build a wall and by god he will do it I feel.

Despite all evidence to the contrary that it's either needed or sensible? Even Fox have pointed out that he vast majority of suspect terrorists are caught at airports, or indeed that it's a technology where, already applied at the border, is defeated by tshirt cannons and tunnels?

Horse manure. There was 2 years of clear republican majority in both houses yet they couldn't do it, even when a simple majority could have. Blame then Democrats? Give over.

A wall is ludicruous.

duploelabs

ricero wrote: »

On issues of national security I feel it can be valid considering the context

Can you specify the details of said issue?

aloyisious

The info in the posts about registered membership defections from the GOP to the Dems being due to them energised surely means they will be energised enough to get out and vote. I see mention that the defectors are younger voters.

Walking away from the GOP, registering as a Dem and then NOT voting for the Dem candidate would be almost the same as staying in the GOP and not voting for it's candidate, defeating the whole point of leaving the GOP. The only difference is the GOP membership numbers would not change much, which it would claim as evidence the voter was not disenchanted with it.


I was wondering about the registering of voters in the parties when it comes to national politics and get it now as being about choosing the candidates for the party one is in. So if I get it right, during the initial months of the candidature race in each party, the party membership has a say in the candidate for the party, even if the machine ends up pumping for one candidate.

duploelabs

spacecoyote wrote: »

It appears that Rosenstein is planning to leave once the new AG is appointed.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/09/rod-rosenstein-deputy-attorney-general-to-leave-justice-department/2522785002/

Could be implications for the Mueller probe depending on the new AG

It appears he won't leave until the report is produced

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/politics/Rod-Rosenstein-Departing-Justice-Dept-New-AG-504098111.html

mcmoustache

ricero wrote: »

On issues of national security I feel it can be valid considering the context

Why do you believe Trump over the professionals? Even by now, most of his supporters know that he's full of shít but they like something about him that they may not want to reveal but you've somehow managed to take what he is saying at face value. How do you manage that?

BabyCheeses

ricero wrote: »

Time to declare this as a national emergency and bypass the bitter democrats. The Donald mandate was to build a wall and by god he will do it I feel.

The man himself has already replaced wall with a fence.


He also said Mexico would pay for it and look how that went. I'm sure whatever the result is you will tell us it was the plan all along and it's great.

TomOnBoard

Ahhhh.... Almost 3 weeks away, and so little has changed. Great to see that the world order is so well maintained here...

Seriously folks, EVERYTHING leading up to the Mid-terms led to that milestone being the 'end of the beginning'... The last 3 weeks is clearly pointing to the 'beginning of the end'...

It's over! The great 'anti- Washington' experiment that entailed a clown being enthroned by a significant wedge of the people, (largely comprising disaffected and previously largely dis-enfranchised populations in the so-called 'rust belt' ) is a couple of U-bends away from everlasting tenancy in the sewage of History.

As in all such pyrric victories, it won't happen cleanly.. It'll be MadMax for a few weeks or months while the various narcissistic powers fight this out!

But make no mistake (as the Yanks keep telling us)... Trump has fiiiinnnnnaaallllyyy met his match!

She may not present herself as well as she should... But her name is Nanci(y)... And basically, Trump has never met her like and had to deal with it EVER in his life before...

26000 Elephants

ricero wrote: »

On issues of national security I feel it can be valid considering the context

You have consistently cheer-led the disintegration of Democracy in the US, so I guess this isn't a big leap for you.

Christy42

Interestingly enough the biggest threat to US border security at the moment is the TSA "blue flu" which is a result of the shutdown. I feel the fact that this barely brought up shows what a political football immigration is.

Immigration should be way down on the US' list of priorities right now (healthcare, education, climate change, trade, political lobbying and campaign donations) but as ever it is easier to blame foreigners than actually look at their problems.

everlast75

More interesting, than political debate.

I hope the Mods have no issue with this.

I discovered film footage on Twitter. It is uncanny how it played out - almost prophetic!

https://twitter.com/_AlexHirsch/status/1083140191362048000

everlast75

oscarBravo wrote: »

Hang on.

The "Official Secure The Border Fund"? Which links to his re-election campaign fundraising website?

So it's neither "official" (in any meaningful sense relating to the office of the presidency), nor is it for actual border security (except in the sense of funding the election campaign of someone who manufactures a border security crisis for his own political advantage).

I shouldn't be capable of surprise anymore, but the only thing more galling than this display of naked, cynical grifting is the fact that his supporters will lap it up.

Lawrence O'Donnell covered this story and believed that this tweet was sent because Trump did not like being called out on what he was up to..


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1083207607412760576

Penn

ricero wrote: »

On issues of national security I feel it can be valid considering the context

I saw others elsewhere point this out, but it's an important point to note:

If this is a national security crisis... why didn't Trump declare a national emergency? If it's such a huge immediate problem, why isn't he using executive powers to do it?

Trump was asked yesterday twice at what stage will he declare it a national emergency. His response both times was not in the context of national security, his response both times was political. That he may declare it a national emergency if the Democrats don't agree to fund to the wall. That he may use his powers to declare a national emergency if he can't work out a deal with the Democrats.

If it was truly an issue of national security, and considering how long it would still take for the wall to even begin construction, never mind how long it would take to actually build the thing (as well as the fact there are numerous landowners along the border who have and would continue to challenge the construction of such a wall on their properties or challenge the use of eminent domain across their land), there would be absolutely no time to waste. But it's not an issue of national security, at least not to the point where an official national emergency could reasonably be called (or wouldn't be challenged in the courts). Border security must be increased, absolutely. But as the Dems and the experts all agree, the Wall is not the solution to that.

After all, in Trump's own words...
https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1083169537263054849

pixelburp

If Trump was serious about border security - if anyone was serious about border security and not just swept up in a personality cult - then the conversation wouldn't be about an idiotic boondoggle wall. It'd be about improving, and making better use of, resources for border agents; better inter-department, and US-Mexico cooperation to help tackle the cayotes and smugglers operating in the area(s); improving the current processing of illegal migrants so they can be dealt quicker (while maintaining their human rights). Or any number of other on-the-ground initiatives...

Nope, Trump wants to spend $25+ billion (and as it's a goverment project you can guarantee that cost is on the minimum side) on a goddamn wall. Across one of the largest land borders in the world. And couldn't manage while he literally had the government in his pocket over the last two days.

Even the British didn't try that across our tiny Ireland-N.Ireland border because ... it's a ludicrously impractical idea, out of a cartoon.

Leroy42

As I read on twitter yesterday, the GOP need to be really careful letting Trump call a National Emergency on such dubious base.

There is no doubt that at some point there will be a Dem POTUS, and this sets a dangerous precedent that any POTUS simply calls a NE when they don't get there way. As such, why stop at the border issue.

Universal state provided healthcare. Access to all healthcare facilities regardless of cover level. Gun control. 1st time a school shooting happens call a NE to ban all sales, ammunition.

Abortion. Pass a NE to force all states to pass full access.

jooksavage

everlast75 wrote: »

More interesting, than political debate.

I hope the Mods have no issue with this.

I discovered film footage on Twitter. It is uncanny how it played out - almost prophetic!

https://twitter.com/_AlexHirsch/status/1083140191362048000

No offense intended but I had to check this on Snopes... It's f***ing real!

Brian?

pixelburp wrote: »

If Trump was serious about border security - if anyone was serious about border security and not just swept up in a personality cult - then the conversation wouldn't be about an idiotic boondoggle wall. It'd be about improving, and making better use of, resources for border agents; better inter-department, and US-Mexico cooperation to help tackle the cayotes and smugglers operating in the area(s); improving the current processing of illegal migrants so they can be dealt quicker (while maintaining their human rights). Or any number of other on-the-ground initiatives...

Nope, Trump wants to spend $25+ billion (and as it's a goverment project you can guarantee that cost is on the minimum side) on a goddamn wall. Across one of the largest land borders in the world. And couldn't manage while he literally had the government in his pocket over the last two days.

Even the British didn't try that across our tiny Ireland-N.Ireland border because ... it's a ludicrously impractical idea, out of a cartoon.

If anyone was serious about stopping illegal immigrants entering the US through the southern border, they would go after the systemic issues that drive it. But that's the hard stuff, it's much easier to shout about building a wall.

The biggest issue to me is the acceptance that illegal immigrants are needed to keep costs low in certain industries. How many Californian fruit farmers are prosecuted for hiring illegals? I'm guessing zero, but i am open to correction. How many meat packing companies or restaurant chains are prosecuted? That's before we even get to the gardeners and hospitality staff.

The answer is always to punch down. Who's to blame for illegal immigration? Immigrants. Definitely not the farmers paying them $5 an hour to pick fruit.

The other big issue is the standard of living in central America. What is the US doing to help them? Historically funding right wing guerillia groups to topple democratically elected governments certainly hasn't helped. Or propping up military dictators.I would say the US is morally obligated to help stabilise central America and drive economic growth. They helped break it, they need to help fix it. But that's a whole other debate.

Finally, Mexico needs to become a functional first world country. I genuinely have no idea on that one.