Immigration isn’t the key for electoral win come next year polling seems to be pointing to….
Just like last year?
Healthcare could be the Democrats card to out ‘trump’ Donald Trump and Republicans…
A majority of people polled in four major battleground states would not vote for a president who supports many of the policies being pursued by the Trump administration, according to a new survey.
The poll, conducted on behalf of pro-ObamaCare group Protect Our Care, found voters in Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin would not consider voting for a presidential candidate who supports policies including eliminating protections for people with pre-existing conditions, cutting funding for Medicare or letting insurance companies stop covering the costs of prescription drugs.
Democrats won the House in 2018 running on health care and they are looking to recreate their success heading into the 2020 elections.
They think President Trump is vulnerable on health care and are looking to highlight the administration’s track record.
The survey, conducted by Democratic polling firm Public Policy Polling, showed 52 percent of respondents said they trust Democrats more on health care than Trump.
The poll also found that 72 percent of respondents would not vote for a candidate who supports health plans that would eliminate health care protections for people with pre-existing conditions, and 77 percent said they would not vote for a candidate who supported plans that would let insurance companies stop covering the costs of prescription drugs.
Democrats say those policies are a prime example of the Trump administration’s commitment to sabotage a functioning health care system…..
image…time.com
New Thread for June 25 is here….
Morning….
Update on the Nikki Haley for VP discussion…
President Trump on Wednesday ruled out the possibility of former U.N. ambassador Nikki Haley joining his 2020 reelection ticket, saying he will stick with Vice President Mike Pence as his running mate.
“I love Nikki. She’s endorsed me. She’s my friend. She’s a part of my campaign. But Mike has been a great vice president. He’s a hundred percent,” Trump said during a phone interview with Fox Business Network.
The president said there are other roles for Haley to play on his campaign and beyond, saying, “There’s places for Nikki and Nikki’s future is good.”…
More…
Even if Trump dumps Pence (which I tbink is unlikely, but more likely from this President than previous ones) I don’t think he will give Haley a spot on ticket.
He has said as much Scott, yes….
Haley is the only one that would make sense politically.
And I think it should be considered a given that having Haley as his VP would get him more votes at this point.
Donald Trump seldom does what makes sense politically…
I don’t think he really likes Nikki and would be greatly surprised if he dumped the loyal lapdog Pence for her.
I don’t think he very much likes Pence either.
Is there anybody on the planet he truly likes besides himself and Ivanka?
It’s been so long since a President dumped his VP it’s hard to argue doing so would gain votes.
Where are the “Pence loyalists” going to go?
He never would have won without those votes and without Pence. Now, they have been consumed.
Whether marginal or not, it would gain him more votes to run with a younger female from a racial minority background.
But he is probably being told by “pollsters” that he is winning huge anyway and has no concerns.
Last time was 1976 (Nelson Rockefeller was Gerald Ford’s VP, but Bob Dole became his running mate) — a special case since neither Gerald Ford nor Nelson Rockefeller had previously run in a general election for Pres. & VP.
Before that was 75 years ago, when FDR chose Harry Truman for his 1944 running-mate while Henry A. Wallace was his (elected) Vice President.
Another special case was in 1940, when FDR’s two-term Vice President John Nance Garner (1933-41) opposed FDR’s seeking a third term and ran instead against Roosevelt for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Henry Wallace was picked to be FDR’s running mate in 1940.
In 1900, William McKinley couldn’t run again with VP Garret Hobart for the simple reason that Hobart had died in his first term. (Theodore Roosevelt was McKinley’s running-mate in 1900.)
¶ All the other 20th and 21st century Presidents ran with the sitting Vice President when there was one (i.e. when the President himself had not arisen mid-term from the Vice-Presidency, and thus left the Vice-Presidency vacant.)
1908-12 Wm H. Taft-James Sherman
1912-16 Wilson-Thomas Marshall
1928-32 Hoover-Charles Curtis
1932-36 FDR-James N. Garner
1952-56 Eisenhower-Nixon
1968-72 Nixon-Agnew
1976-80 Carter-Mondale
1980-84 Reagan-GHW Bush
1988-92 GHW Bush-Dan Quayle
1992-96 WJ Clinton-Al Gore
2000-04 GW Bush-Richard Cheney
2008-12 Obama-Biden
¶ [However between 1804 (when the 12th Amendment made true running-mates possible) and 1896, different running-mates were about as common as not in the relatively-rare cases when a sitting President won renomination and sought re-election. In fact, only two Presidents ran with their original running-mate in that period: James Monroe-Daniel Tompkins, 1820-24 and Martin Van Buren-Richard Johnson, 1836-40. Some original Vice Presidents couldn’t run again because like Garret Hobart they had died in their first term.
[ Lincoln ran with Hannibal Hamlin in 1860 and with Andrew Johnson in 1864. Grant ran with Schuyler Colfax in 1868 and Henry Wilson in 1872. Benjamin Harrison ran with Levi Morton in 1888 and Whitelaw Reid in 1892. ]
Presidential son Eric Trump claims a waitress spat on him.
Anti Trump Republican Bill Kristol came up with a good defense for the waitress,
“ He’s not my type.”
Interesting that reports say “he claims a waitress spat at him,” and the Secret Service released her.
I am sure that lots of service staff have spit in other areas when it comes to the Trumps.
At least a hooker didn’t pee on him.
This story is getting more coverage than the latest Trump rape accusations.
The rape accusation had less coverage than Biden placing his hands on the woman’s shoulder.
It’s because Republicans don’t care if Trump raped someone.
That is if the woman was worthy of Trump raping her of course.
Republicans know their leader has his standards!
Firstly, let me just state that I think Trump has a lot from his past that he wishes to hide and by his own admission he has (or weirdly joked about) committing sexual assault.
As for this specific allegation, has anybody watched or became familiar with the interviews this week of the accuser on CNN? She was interviewed multiple times on CNN and some clips have gone viral.
Does she seem credible?
How would her allegation compare with that made by Juanita Broaddrick against Bill Clinton?
Here are some of my thoughts on the matter.
Of course none of us were there and of course all victims of assault should immediately report the crime to law enforcement.
What Ms. Kelly describes is clearly a rape and of course is horrific. However, she is refusing to say in interviews that it was a rape and despite being told that the Mayor of New York City is saying that he will officially use city law enforcement to investigate her claim, she is saying no, she has no interest.
She told Anderson Cooper that she does not believe she was raped because she considers the image of rape to be “sexy” and that women fantasize about it.
That’s incredibly inappropriate for anyone to suggest.
Anderson Cooper was so taken aback by those comments he immediately tried to go to a commercial break while stumbling over his words and Ms. Kelly then smiled at him and said something like, “you are a fascinating man, do you know that?” The clip is online.
Now, apparently it turns out that the narrative she told about the attack including the exact location is nearly identical to an episode of Law and Order.
I have zero desire to defend Trump on treating women inappropriately, but had these exact allegations been made against Bill Clinton by this particular woman, I know that no Democrats would be saying she was credible, and very few Republicans would find her so either after all this.
Whether she’s credible or not when someone is accused of rape if the response is “she’s not my type” it leads one to believe there is a type the person would rape.
No Republicans have said that is a terrible response–they have instead pointed out –as CG dutifully has–the dubious credibility of this particular (the 19th? 20th? ) accuser.
I don’t recall Clinton ever responding to accusations of assault by atating that the accuser was not his type. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
Of course the “not my type” remark is horrible, but he’s said that exact thing before. That’s Trump.
And plenty of Clinton defenders such as James Carville specifically scoffed off Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, etc, by saying “he would never have any interest in them.”
The bottom line is that these current allegations were aired while Trump is in office, while NBC News actively prevented the Juanita Broaddrick allegations from airing until after Clinton was out of the White House.
Trump is being sued by something like 14 women for assault.
Some are likely telling the truth and some likely aren’t.
Since this is all public, I suggest lie detector tests all around.
Hey CG?
You have ANY idea what 3 Ring Circus this woman would be subjected to if the NYOD took on this case as a serious felony ?
Class A Felonies in NY Stare have no statue of limitation…
A serious investigation would involve NYC Police Detectives showing up at the White House to question Trump…
The Secret Sevice could his him
But if he sets foot in NY State?
Technically the NYC could stop his motorcade at JFK and DEMAND to question him..
Technically?
under NYS law the agents could be detained for denying access to a suspect…
There is NO law stopping Trump from being charged with a past felony in the state…
none of the above is gonna happen …
but?
a charge of rape by the woman would put her under a blistering attack by Trump and his legal team and worst from supporters …
one of the prime reasons women do NOT REPORT rapes is the substancail abuse they suffer pursuing a criminal case….
CG’s response boiled down–I don’t want to defend Trump but….CLINTON!!!
So very very Republican
After watching this particular woman make her accusation, something seems off all around.
I doubt anyone who would have watched the interviews would not have the same impression.
And if her exact story was from an episode of Law and Order (I’ve not watched the show), that makes it look even worse for her.
More credible than Broderick, although I wouldn’t be surprised if Clinton was guilty too
I would be very curious to hear how specifically Carroll is more credible than Broaddrick.
It seems very clearly to be the reverse.
For one thing, Ms. Carroll says she still has the dress in the back of her closet, never wore it again, but is unwilling to give it to investigators for DNA testing, just in case some might be found.
Despite being told that there is *no* statue of limitations preventing her from going after Donald Trump criminally, she acted surprised by that and said she has no interest.
If Trump did this, she should cooperate with law enforcement.
It is also likely that if this occurred in the years she claimed, the department store would at least have had security camera footage showing either of them in the store.
Another topic, eluded to by Scott, is regarding “white nationalist” embracing.
Did Bill Clinton ever do that?
Putting aside his early Arkansas political solicitation of Orval Faubus, he sure said a lot of questionable things about Barack Obama and his supporters around the time of the 2008 South Carolina primary, did he not?
Although, I suppose it was his wife that year who openly proclaimed herself the “candidate of hard working, white Americans.”
Jesus you’re desperate. How sad.
Broadrick initially denied that Clinton assaulted her. Furthermore, what Carroll told friends at the time about the assault is consistent with what
Others have charged and what Trump bragged about.
Well there have been so many of these accusations
Zreebs. The Republicans must be tired of rushing to defend their “Great White Hope.”
But it sure is disappointing that people would attack this woman’s credibility and then invoke Bill Clinton as a deflection.
SAD.
After all, I have never met a Republican who wasn’t eager to believe any negative news about either of the Clintons, and, of course who weren’t also appalled when the Clintons attacked the credibility of an accuser.
But to then use that same type of accusation and the Clinton deflection to attack the credibility of the latest Trump victim is hypocritical at best. Especially coming from someone who claims to oppose Trump for moral reasons.
you noticed that, eh Z?
somehow Democrats seem to get MUCH more attention when they have an issue…
BIG or small…
Whitewashing the Bill Clinton episodes of course accomplishes nothing but a display of hypocrisy.
In the past, I have linked to articles where years later, liberal journalists admit that yes, Bill Clinton probably was a rapist, but they were willing to make their peace with it, because they liked what he did as President.
I am sure that anybody who posts here has likely seen this clip from this week, which is why nobody is willing to say that they actually believe her claim without question, but just in case, here is the exchange I was referring to:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/06/25/stunned_anderson_cooper_cuts_to_commercial_when_trump_accuser_e_jean_carroll_calls_rape_sexy.html
Rape is not “sexy.” If she believes that, she needs a lot of help.
Well if Bill Clinton runs for 0 President again we can discuss his moral failings.
Trump is President now and overwhelmingly supported by your party.
I’m not ever voting for Trump.
If Bill Clinton were running for office, you would vote for him without hesitation over any Republican.
There’s the difference.
Yes, because despite his moral failings he is not a racist white nationalist enabler the way Trump–and the party blindly supports him–is.
Now I’m done talking about Bill Fucking Clinton.
What Mickey Mouse/Donald Duck/ Ghost of Poppy Bush silliness will you cast your vote for next year instead of a serious candidate who can defeat Trump?
Rape is not a “moral failing.”
It is a crime.
And your party in 2019 is OK with it–given the accuser is their bigoted hero’s “type”
I am responsible for myself Scott. I have never been and never will be ok with Donald Trump, regardless of which party he runs under.
You however have made it clear that you will excuse any Democrat for anything and castigate any Republican for everything.
You see the world in red and blue glasses. I suppose that is your right but I think it’s unfortunate.
Eric is such an idiot I don’t think hed get it.
Yeah both he and Donald Jr..
Trump played up an old Republican favorite today– the conservative victim card. He claimed if he were a nice liberal Democrat” he would have 5 times as many followers on social media.
Such a fantastic example of Republican “free enterprise” to bitch and moan that private companies are rigged against you rather than starting you own.
Amazing that someone who claims to oppose Trump has spent the better part of his work day defending his alleged sexual assault.
And then claim that others see everything through a party prism when they have never voted for a Democrat for Federal or State office.
I laughed out loud at that one.
I was particularly amused at the Law & Order story line speculation (another right wing fantasy). Two problems with that, our rape victim told her story to people who have corroborated her version of the attack when it happened, and I believe this incident predated Law & Order. So maybe, just maybe, the writers “ripped” the story line from our victims experience.
Finally, since dinner in Boston awaits and I need to go, anyone who votes third party or writes in a name next year is casting a vote for Trump.
That’s illogical in many ways.
The Constitution was likely taught when Keith was a student and he should know better about the voting rights we actually have.
If you guys can’t win Illinois without me, you have more problems than you can ever hope to fix.
I view throwaway votes like the one CG will cast next year as inconsequential. He’s basically choosing to sit out the most vital ekection in our lifetimes.
Which is his choice. But not one I’d want to defend in my old age.
Yes Scott it is illogical to throw a vote away in the most consequential election of our lifetimes.
You can either be on the right side of history or not. Scary that with all that is going on our friend doesn’t see that.
Interesting debate tonight. It was good to see so many candidates for President who could speak in complete sentences and haven’t sexually molested anyone. Progress.
Agreed Keith. And CG’s “independent” take on tonight’s Democratic debate basically mirrors what Trump supporting Republicans would say.
I’m not so sure that Corey will vote for a third party candidate. While he makes it clear he dislikes Trump, he obviously shares most of Trump’s core values.
I think his main concern with Trump and for that matter Moore is that they hurt the GOP brand – which has cost and will continue to cost GOP votes. And of course, Trump will succeed in permanently changing the GOP as we know it, but basically, he agrees with him on everything that would determine how he would vote (global warming, abortion, Jeruselem, judges (including those who admit to raping in their yearbook), tax cuts without spending cuts, removal of healthcare to the poor, Iran) and would prefer that over four years of a Democrat. He indicated that one of his favorite politicians is Lyndsey Graham – who is clearly Trump’s biggest and most flamoyant supporter. Okay, Corey is against rape- very nice. Corey would like us to believe that even though he never voted for a Democrat with a D next to their name on the ballot, he is actually bi-partisan. And he thinks that some of us actually believe him.
temp’s in Europe reach above 100 degree’s…
Debate post coming later….
Hot Damn!
the Washington Post is breaking a story about US Government Asylum people coming down AGAINST orders from the President to change asylum policy!….
if this is true?
We are in for a shit storm n a Federal Court and the media!
James, we’re burning through your expensive, laboriously-crafted Open Threads as if tomorrow will never come. Only 24 hours, but at least 52 comments already !! ; – )
Good Morning People….
Yea DSD!…..
The place seems to be back in stride….
Warming up for the 2020 sprint to November….
I’m always hoping for more people here to joy our group….
The hits have begun to climb since the rebirth of this place…
Now 75 comments on this Open Thread (I thought James had started a new open thread but this is the one that apppears closest to the top on the home page..
New Thread with be forthcoming….
Another Republican who voted opposite his conscience partying it up in Mexico…
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7188119/Former-Republican-congressman-filmed-slipping-cash-dancers-briefs.html?ito=rss-flipboard
But does Corey consider these pictures to be credible?
Morning People….
Supreme’s will review Trump canceling Dreamers program…
Post forthcoming…..
Another poll drops….
Maine….
1….Biden
2….Warren
post coming later
Wither Sarah Palin?
One thing that has always fascinated me is why the former Republican VP candidate has not been appointed to any position in the Trump Administration.
Sure she’s incompetent but ,come on, this is an Administration were such seems that be a virtue rather than a vice.
I once thought they might make her Secretary Of the Interior where her “drill baby drill” mantra would accord with fawning embrace that Republicans have for the fossil fuel crowd.
Or maybe an Ambassadorship,maybe Burundi or the Maldives?
Really it does seem did that there has never been a hint even that she has been considered for anything.
Quite an insult actually.
Thrown in the dirty pile?
Morning….
This weeks list of candidates who have some realistic chance of winning the Democratic nomination (in no order):Biden, Harris,Sanders, Warren, Buttigieg, Booker and Klobuchar
I have dropped Beto ORourke at this time.I really don’t see him going anywhere presently.
Klobuchar is hanging on ,mainly as a backup as an establishment fallback to Biden if he collapses.
Klobuchar did well at the debate – not enough to reach double digits, but my guess is she will poll a couple of points higher. I agree she has an outside chance, and would be a much better mainstream choice than Biden.
I agree that Beto did poorly at the debate anc it is hard to think of a reason to vote for him. I don’t see him as having a realistic chance anymore either.
I think that Castro did well enough to say that he might have s long shot chance. He will have to be able to speak better on issues unrelated to immigration, but his strong fundraising since the debate can’t be ignored.
I think that at the first debate, even the no-hopers John Delaney and Mike Ryan showed that they could do at least the minimum that a Democratic president should do. Tulsi Gabbard adn Jay Insslee, who also have no hope, were even able to make a case for themselves.
But the second debate positively disqualified Eric Swalwell and Marianne Williamson: they just cuoldn’t do the job. Jay Hickenlooper (like fellow Governor Jay Inslee) has the bare minimum of qualifications, but would be very hard to sell as anything except VP. Andrew Yang has some interesting ideas that he just didn’t have enough time to explain. Bill de Blasio’s performance indicated that he probably can do more good (The NY Post notwithstanding) in his present job. (No Mayor of New York has ever won the Presidency and I don’t think any has won a major-party nomination, despite recent tries by John Lindsay, Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg). And I agree with the Establishment’s suggestion that red-state candidates such as Michael Bennet would be far more effective challenging incumbent Republican U.S. Senators.
Morning People….
New York Times says Trump may settle for the equivalent of a nuclear freeze in North Korea,tacitly conceding that it is now a nuclear power.
Something Bolton and the boys said would never happen.
If such be true?What will Lindsay Graham and the Warhawks do?
Good Morning All….
More on Trump failed Foreign Policy later…
Millions lined the streets of New York on Sunday to wave rainbow flags, celebrate the movement toward LGBTQ equality and renew calls for action in what organizers billed as the largest gay pride celebration in history…
More…
I have no idea what’s up…
But this place is about 50% above the numbers it was running coming out of the beginning of the year….
YES!
This IS gonna be a big July 4th story that I think isn’t really….
Trump and his wish for tanks for his Military parade….
….
True to form, our current president threw this vision of America into sharp relief, removing any shades of gray in which what remains of our national dignity might take refuge. We—a putative liberal democracy with military might never before seen in the history of the world—will stage a full-on military parade featuring tanks, to show just how tough we are. But tanks are heavy, you see, and the streets of DC were not exactly designed to accommodate them. Trump seems aware of this to the extent he is aware of any inconvenient information: temporarily, in passing, until he can gin up a different story he’ll tell enough times that he starts to believe it himself. Then it becomes God’s own truth….
More…
VP Pence has been summoned back to the White House to talk to his boss instead of his scheduled trip to New Hampshire….
There is NO info on why….
Stay tuned….
Media is VERY tuned up on the Pence bring back….
And we know that the career military and civilian staff at the Department of Defense have repeatedly and extensively reiterated their technical problems with sending tanks down Pennsylvania Avenue (as opposed to the Champs-Elysées or Red Square).
But we already know that Donald Trump know more about military affairs than the generals, more about intelligence than the DNI, FBI or CIA and more about foreign and international affairs than the State Department.
Morning All….
A militaristic Fourth in D.C., the Declaration on display in Boston, and your Warren theme memes
By Teresa Hanafin, [Boston] Globe Staff
…All I wish on this Fourth of July holiday weekend is that Trump doesn’t embarrass us any more than he already has with his co-opting of the DC celebration for partisan political purposes and a grandiose exercise in self-flattery.
Blowing up what has always been a nonpartisan event for ordinary Americans, Trump set up a special VIP viewing section in front of the Lincoln Memorial and distributed tickets to the Republican National Committee, but not the Democratic National Committee. He also gave a bloc of VIP tickets to his campaign organization and to big-money donors, essentially using the celebration as a major fundraiser for his reelection campaign.
As Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post put it, nothing says Fourth of July like preferential treatment for rich toadies.
And then there are the tanks. And the armored vehicles. And the fighter jets. (Tinpot Trump demanded that the service commanders of each branch stand beside him during the flyovers, although CNN is reporting that some commanders, uncomfortable at being used as political props, won’t attend.)
This vainglorious show of US military might, compensation for a deceitful failure to serve, is simply not what we do. Everybody knows we have the biggest hammer in the world. We have never felt the need to brag about it.
Retired four-star Army General Stanley McChrystal suggested that Trump could have honored US values of citizenship and service by recognizing say, Peace Corps volunteers.
“Tanks, planes, they are things,” he said. “They are not the sinew of the nation.”
What is? Democracy. The rule of law. Freedom. Justice. Integrity. Civility. And, in stark contrast to Trump’s display of military muscle, it’s also the Founding Fathers’ grand experiment in civilian self-rule.
And then there’s the price tag. The White House refuses to provide taxpayers with cost estimates. All we know is that the National Park Service, which oversees the National Mall and the monuments, is being forced to transfer $2.5 million to Trump’s kingly Quinceañero, money that’s supposed to be used to maintain and improve national parks across the country. But that’s just a fraction of what the celebration will cost — an event that in previous years cost just $2 million.
Narcissism, divisiveness, reckless spending of public money, no transparency, last-minute chaos … sounds like the entire Trump reign, no?
Me the president instead of We the People. Politics instead of patriotism. Ego instead of egalitarianism. The cult of personality rather than the promise of the collective.
A new poll shows that only 45 percent of US men and women are “extremely proud” to be Americans. (What a shock.) So what to do? Celebrate with your families and friends. Embrace and encourage the good in your communities. And remember the true promise and glory of America….
The Trump 4th July thing ain’t boo big deal for me….
He’s the Commander-in-Chief of the Military….
He wants to show off?
They’ll do it….
The media is making a big deal about something that might get washed out with thunderstorms…
What worries me more is the politicization of a patriotic evemt (we’ll see and hear how apolitical Trump can make his speech.
If it is just another Trump rally at exorbitant government (i.r. taxpayer) expense, then it should be investigated by the Federal Election Commission (fat chance) and by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) for violations of the Hatch Act and misdirection of Federal resources.
And what will they do?
Yes…
It’s just ANOTHER entertainment show…
he saw the French do it…
He’ll manage to get the same…
We got another almost 2 years of this bull shit if the guy gets voted out…
If NOT?
We’re screwed….
New thread in the AM DSD….
Morning All….
Based on your love of all things military this doesn’t surprise me.
Maybe it won’t rain?
You and Trump enjoy the show.
I’ll be watching reruns of the Three Stooges.
i’m NOT about Trump’s sidewalk act at all…
But the guy has sucked the media into giving him MORE airtime at the exspence of the Nation…
Lee Iacocca has passed away.
Iacocca ,an Auto Executive, who was featured in tv advertisements back in the 80s ,was touted as a presidential candidate in the late 80s and briefly began organizing a campaign.
He was sort of a forerunner to non political types like Ross Perot and Donald Trump.It was unusual back in those days though for presidential candidates to come directly from the business world with no previous experience.Nowadays, however, these types openly muse about campaigns.
This cycle ,Howard Schultz tried to get something going ,but ,so far ,that has gone nowhere.
In the post Trump era it will be interesting to see if this trend of non political, wealthy businesspeople making or at least flirting with presidential bids continues.
Or has the controversial Trump poisoned the well for future aspirants?
I saw that….
Mr. Chrysler…..
Lido….
If I recall Walter Mondale considered Iacocca for VP in his doomed 1984 campaign. I don’t remember that he was ever an active member of either party but I could be wrong.
I promise new thread later….