Trump?

[Kirk Gallaway]

Thanks, Douglas

That's a really good article. The typical Trump supporters in Middle America admire the "Super Wealthy" but hate professionals. In some cases they were brought with friends who were professionals and maybe didn't live as plentiful a life, but they were fine with it, because their needs were taken care of. Since the global recession, these same professionals have carried on with the same lifestyle, even a better lifestyle because of increased seniority, and many of these people have lost their jobs or found they could no longer make the living they had been accustom to with the lower wages that now exist. There were a couple of facts I might dispute. Silicon Valley is not at all in favor of Trump. The only real notable that is  is Peter Thiel.

The Trump appointments are very discouraging. The only meeting I have been at all encouraged by was Trump's meeting with Obama. He finally appeared humbled, and started to realize that this is for real and an enormous responsibility. In their meeting, Obama made no reference to the campaign and was earnestly trying to inform him for the good of the country and Trump at least looked like he realized that. He was to meet with Obama for a brief time and it lasted for an hour and half. And considering all the people who have met him since, I would have liked it if Obama had talked to him for 6 hours. Trump at least came out of it with a realization that he wants to keep certain provisions of the ACA. and that's the only thing he's really softened on, except that wall with Mexico can be a fence in certain parts.

If his opposition can meet him with good intentions, I think that's the best way he can be approached. If you're an opposition leader with a solid constituency, It's a little like dealing with a child, you don't want to get on his bad side early because millions of people could be affected by his policies. It's almost like that spiteful little kid in an old episode of the Twilight Zone who found he had great psychic power to destroy his enemies, who was at the end, brought under control by a kind women psychologist who told him he had great powers that could be used for the benefit of everybody and shouldn't be used specifically against anybody.

Another thing I don't agree with her about is that Trump is this ideologue that she seems to think he is. Remember he once came out for a single payer system. He's now in way over his head but I do think he really wants to be  a popular President. I don't really think it's his intention  to double cross and screw the people who gave him the election. But the people he's meeting with are definitely guiding him in that direction. His entire program to help them was just a jingoistic "We make terrible trade deals, I'm going to make great trade deals". When he finds that that would only marginally help at best. With all the deficit spending going on in his first term, ( The impartial CBO estimates 5 trillion in his first term) he's not going to be able to add any  job training or retooling programs. These people are not going to want to reelect him.

 

Edited November 20, 2016 by Kirk Gallaway

[Cliff Varnell]

8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Joe - agree.

as for George Bush his name should be on the chalkboard, definitely.

 

I take the tackboard very seriously, so I'm not quick to populate it.

But given George H. W. Bush's connections to the two guys already on it, I have to agree.

W. Averell Harriman (Skull & Bones 1913)

McGeorge Bundy (Skull & Bones 1940)

George HW Bush (Skull & Bones 1948)

All worthy of on-going study in regards to the JFK murder case.

 

[Joe Bauer]

Quote

 

I just read the interview transcript Doug.

As frightening as the author's analysis and dire predictions of a Trump presidency sound, her academic credentials and long time studied observations force you to seriously consider their more than possible occurrence. 

I think that tens of millions of Americans already sense and feel this dark apprehension about Trump on their own ( without being able to articulate it as well as the author)   hence feeling truly sick about our future under this popular vote losing/electoral college winning demagogue.

[Ron Ecker]

The sky is falling! The world is coming to an end!

Come on, people, he's going to be your president, like it or not. And he's not even in office yet. Suppose we wait and see how he does. Then let me make a suggestion. Vote his butt out in 2020.

If he wins again in 2020, then we're really in a heap of trouble, right? Or maybe, just maybe, he did well enough to get re-elected.

I for one don't have a crystal ball. But I don't have an iPhone or a Twitter account either. Maybe I need to get up to speed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Yeah, everybody chill and watch this SNL skit... Alec Baldwin as Trump. It's hilarious!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUWSLlz0Fdo&feature=youtu.be

[Paul Brancato]

That was great thanks Sandy.

[Ron Ecker]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Yeah, everybody chill and watch this SNL skit... Alec Baldwin as Trump. It's hilarious!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUWSLlz0Fdo&feature=youtu.be

Thanks for reminding me that SNL hasn't been funny in years. (Okay, the impeachment line with Pence was good.) I kept asking myself while watching the video if SNL would have been that mercilessly "funny" if Hillary had won. No, got to milk Alec while you've got him. 

The last time I remember laughing out loud at SNL was decades ago, when Dan Ackroyd played Nixon in the Oval Office, moving a lamp around on his desk in order to record what everyone was saying. That was priceless.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Sandy:

Of course Krugman was going to say that about Comey.  Utterly predictable.

Krugman was part of that Democratic Establishment that pushed HRC on us. If you recall, he ganged up on Sanders and his economic plan and ran  a very unfair article about it in the NYT.  He was pushing HRC throughout.  I have little doubt he would have gotten a job in her administration.

So now, like the others, starting with Podesta, going through HRC and now him, he falls in line and instead of saying, "Mea culpa, I should not have done that to Sanders."  Or "HRC ran a pretty stupid campaign, considering she had all the advantages and I was wrong not to say anything."  He takes the easy way out and blames it on Comey.

I can't really blame  him, since that is  human nature for most people.  To take the easy way out and not admit your own errors.

But the more I look at this, the more I see just how bad HRC's campaign really was.  Christian Parenti has just written a nice column about it at Huffpo. Her campaign, I predict, will become a negative template for what not to do in the future.  It was that bad.

Edited November 21, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

10 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Sandy:

Of course Krugman was going to say that about Comey.  Utterly predictable.

 

Corey Lewandowski said the same thing -- it was Comey.

Late deciders broke heavily for Trump -- that was the Comey Effect, not the Bradley Effect.

[Cliff Varnell]

48 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

Corey Lewandowski said the same thing -- it was Comey.

Late deciders broke heavily for Trump -- that was the Comey Effect, not the Bradley Effect.

Another analysis from USA Today

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/11/07/analysis-comey-trump-clinton-fbi-president-election/93415018/

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

On November 19, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Corey Lewandowski said the same thing -- it was Comey.

 

 

Quote

Another analysis from USA Today

CV is becoming pretty desperate so he now posts sources that have no evidentiaryvalue in hopes no one will  notice.

Corey L was not even in the Trump camp at the time.  The total content of his speech in England was that the Comey announcement gave Trump a spring in his step.  That is what I call penetrating analysis.  But what do you expect from the combination of the C boys.

The article he posted above was written before the election, so there was no analysis of what happened to the vote. More Varnellian emptiness.

If you go to Parenti's article you will see that the HRC campaign was so bad they actually turned out TRUMP VOTERS!  This is because they spent so much more money on TV ads than they did GOTV effort even though they had tons more money than Trump did. This is how bad Podesta and Mook were.  Also, the figures on the last days visits to the Rust Belt are also revealing.( Although this is from a different source.)  Trump had well over a hundred campaign stops in the area, HRC had about 87.  The Trump campaign had better analytics, and even though they had less money, they used their time and cash more tactically.

Here is the Parenti article, everyone should read it:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-hubris-of-the-clinton-ground-game_us_5831cebce4b099512f835e78

 

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

57 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

CV is becoming pretty desperate so he now posts sources that have no evidentiaryvalue in hopes no one will  notice.

Hilarious coming from James DiEugenio, whose entire argument rests on one outlier poll that significantly missed Clinton's 2+ million popular vote win.

Quote

Corey L was not even in the Trump camp at the time.

Factually incorrect.

The Trump campaign never stopped paying Lewandowski, even while he was collecting checks from CNN.

Lewandowski saw what every one else who was paying attention saw (that lets you off the hook, Jim) -- Comey's announcement changed the race fundamentally, and the late deciding voters went Trump in a landslide.

Quote

The total content of his speech in England was that the Comey announcement gave Trump a spring in his step.  That is what I call penetrating analysis.  But what do you expect from the combination of the C boys.

Factually incorrect.

<quote on>

LONDON ― Donald Trump’s former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski credited FBI Director James Comey with giving Trump a “spring in his step” that helped him defeat Hillary Clinton in last week’s presidential election.

Speaking at the Oxford Union during a trip to the U.K. Wednesday evening, Lewandowski told Americans protesting the election result that they ought to do so “respectfully” and accept that Clinton lost. 

“With 11 days to go in this election cycle, something amazing happened. The FBI director, James Comey, came out on a Friday and said they may be reopening the investigation into ‘crooked’ Hillary Clinton’s emails,” Lewandowski said.

“What that did,” he went on, “was remind people that there are two different rules in Washington ― those of the elites, for the privileged, and those for everybody else.”

<quote off>

Quote

The article he posted above was written before the election, so there was no analysis of what happened to the vote. More Varnellian emptiness.

Accurately foreshadowed a fundamentally changed election.

Quote

If you go to Parenti's article you will see that the HRC campaign was so bad they actually turned out TRUMP VOTERS!  This is because they spent so much more money on TV ads than they did GOTV effort even though they had tons more money than Trump did. This is how bad Podesta and Mook were.  Also, the figures on the last days visits to the Rust Belt are also revealing.( Although this is from a different source.)  Trump had well over a hundred campaign stops in the area, HRC had about 87.  The Trump campaign had better analytics, and even though they had less money, they used their time and cash more tactically.

Here is the Parenti article, everyone should read it:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-hubris-of-the-clinton-ground-game_us_5831cebce4b099512f835e78

Clinton will end up with a nearly 2% popular vote advantage, and Kris Kobach-inspired voter suppression robbed her of hundreds of thousands of votes in the swing states.

Great article by a real mensch, Greg Palast.

http://www.gregpalast.com/heres-now-personal-note-greg-palast/

<quote on>

No way around it, this is one frightening moment.

Decades of progress created with sweat and determination face destruction.  Within the next six months, we may see the Voting Rights Act repealed—and civil rights set back 50 years; the entirety of our environmental protection laws burnt in a coal pit; police cruelty made our urban policy; the Education Department closed to give billionaires a tax holiday; and a howling anti-Semite as White House Senior Counselor.

But the horror we face is countered by this one hard and hopeful fact:  Donald Trump did NOT win this election.

Trump not only lost the popular vote by millions — he did not legitimately win the swing states of the Electoral College.

Michigan, Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, Ohio:  every one was stolen through sophisticated, and sickeningly racist vote suppression tactics.

If you saw my report for Democracy Now! on election morning, it revealed that Ohio GOP officials turned off anti-hacking software on voting machines, forced Black voters to wait hours in line (while whites had no wait).

And, crucially, I confirmed that purged tens of thousands of minority voters on fake accusations they’d voted twice.  I first exposed this bogus double-voter blacklist called Crosscheck, in Rolling Stone. It’s the sick excrescence crafted by Kris Kobach, the Trump transition team's maven who also created the Muslim-tracker software he’s bringing to the Trump administration.

<quote off>

Voter suppression takes many forms.

Here's another great article by Greg Palast, a real journalist.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/40246-focus-the-election-was-stolen-heres-how

 

Edited November 21, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Trump had well over a hundred campaign stops in the area, HRC had about 87.  The Trump campaign had better analytics, and even though they had less money, they used their time and cash more tactically.

 

In a campaign where they lost the vote by 2% and engaged in a vicious voter suppression campaign.

Goes to show you don't have to be a fascist to be a fascism apologist.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters

Will an anti-voter-fraud program designed by one of Trump's advisers deny tens of thousands their right to vote in November?

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890

Crosscheck in action:

Trump victory margin in Michigan:	13,107
Michigan Crosscheck purge list:	449,922
Trump victory margin in Arizona:	85,257
Arizona Crosscheck purge list:	270,824
Trump victory margin in North Carolina:	177,008
North Carolina Crosscheck purge list:	589,393

[John Crites]

Tomorrow is the anniversary of when the seeds of fascism began to grow in this country. When I think of the successful cover up of the JFK assassination, with the government going to every length to cover up the truth; even change the locations of the wounds years after the first (warren) report, and how the mainstream media was complicit - then and in this present time. Except for the many patriots 53 years ago and now, who did and are doing what they can to bring out the truth, nothing happened. JFK was obviously killed in a coup, and nothing happened. And the killers of JFK got clean away. That's why I truly believe nothing will happen to AgentOrange and his cabinet. My opinion; this will be the most corrupt administration of all time, and nothing will happen. The media already is beginning to accept this fascist as legitimate. The seeds of fascism have grown and have flourished.

The rise of Trump and the JFK Assassination are similar to me when one thinks of the role of the mainstream media, how this crazy man now being accepted as  normal,  and the un punished crimes I feel are soon to come.