The Democratic Party civil war continues….
The actions’s of the parties Lefties against moderates COULD erase gains their party made in the US House last year…
Some Democrats continue ‘eating their own’ in the short game obvious to a long term goal of getting a majority across Congress and and the White House…
She felt satisfied with a job well done.
Then she looked at Twitter.
The Democrat saw liberals lashing out at moderates like herself for approving $4.6 billion in emergency aid for migrants at the Southern border — a deal they said did little to rein in the Trump administration’s immigration policies.
Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) accused lawmakers like [ Rep. Abigail ]Spanberger [Dem] of being part of a “Child Abuse Caucus.” The chief of staff for Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said their vote would “enable a racist system.” On Facebook, Spanberger was labeled “too late” and “clueless.”
She was stunned. It was the first time the freshman congresswoman could not make sense of what was happening.
Reflecting on the late June episode, Spanberger said she learned a hard lesson she did not anticipate in 2018, when she unseated Republican Dave Brat and helped Democrats win the House majority: Sometimes your biggest foes will be in your own party.
“That week showed me that for some people, ideology matters more than putting food in the mouth of a child,” she said. “And that was stunning to me.”
In the eight months that Spanberger has served in Congress, she has been a lawmaker in the middle. She comes from a historically Republican district that just five years ago replaced House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R) with someone more conservative. But she won office last year thanks in large part to left-leaning groups like the Liberal Women of Chesterfield County.
Still, Spanberger beat Brat by just 2 points in a year when Democrats were motivated to send a message to President Trump. Republicans are already targeting the district in preparation for the 2020 race.
As she steers through the political divisions within her swing district, Spanberger is also trying to navigate conflicts inside her own party…..
image…House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) last month greets Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) and one of Spanberger’s young constituents, who told Pelosi she was going to be a member of Congress. (Mary F. Calvert/Reuters)
New Open Thread IS HERE….
Trumps administration has the solution to a possible economic slowdown…
Another tax cut.
Making the rich richer?
Sure that’s the solution!
A recession IS coming…
Trump has NO coherent plan to deal with it….
The next Democrat will have to bail things out….AGAIN…(ref. Obama/Bush II)
Reveal of the day…..
Elizabeth Warren was a registered Republican back in the day….
Susan Sarandon passed that out at a Bernie Sanders rally….
Ah?
Bernie Sanders isn’t a Democrat….
This isn’t news. Warren has claimed to have remained a Republican into the 1990s, though I cannot imagine why. She should explain why she was comfortable with the Party of Reagan and remained in it considering her views. Just like Trump should explain why he was a Democrat for as long as he was and as late as post-election 2012 was saying that Republicans were too “maniacally” conservative and that Hillary Clinton should be President.
Those who want Democrats to be firmly aligned with a particular set of beliefs or ideology are of course fine with Bernie Sanders.
This IS news ti me and has too be to most of her supporters…
It shouldn’t change their supporting her though….
Trump was a business man…
His party affiliation depended on what support he needed from the politicians …
I’m sure his supporters don’t care about his past party either…
If it was news to you,it shows how little you know about politics.
Warren made no secret of her once being a Republican.Ive read that many places.
Further, it is no big deal.Reagan was aDemocrat for many years.
I don’t think it will have Any effect on her supporters.
Elizabeth Warren has explained the primary reason that she became a Democrat. You just missed it for whatever reason. She was doing a study on bankruptcy and she fully expected to find that it was deadbeats that were using bankruptcy laws to game the system, but instead found that most bankruptcies occurred because of illness, people losing their job, or divorce – and these bankruptcies destroyed families.
People change parties for far less valid reasons. Your hero Ronald Reagan credited his wife Nancy for changing his views and who convinced him to follow astrology and support conservative politics.
And yours truly was once a fierce Catholic defender – until I eventually realized the folly of believing in “original sin” and being redeemed by God’s alleged Son whom God allegedly allowed to be tortured because God loves me. So does the fact that I was once a fierce Catholic defender make you less convinced in what I really believe?
Oh, Reagan described it far differently than that, in books, columns, and countless speeches, many, many times.
Ronald Reagan Called Union Membership ‘One Of The Most Elemental Human Rights’…..Link…
Then came PATCO…
Yes. My comment about Nancy was an oversimplification. Of course there were other reasons why Ronald Reagan followed astrology and became a Republican.
The reason I posted was your implication that there was something weird about Warren’s conversion to becoming a Democrat. I have no doubt that Ronald Reagan genuinely changed his beliefs, and I guess I don’t see how any serious person – whether you believe what Warren now believes or not – could doubt that her current passion is real. And she had that passion well before she considered running for the Senate.
Warren is a hell of a lot more genuine than you are. I believe that you genuinely hate Trump, but the truth is that he has captured the hearts of Republicans every bit as much as Reagan did. Republicans greatly admire that he says publicly what they believe privately. Not sure whether Trump believes everything he says (I suspect not), but your ongoing and continued effort to try to tie Trump to being a Democrat (even though you have to know by now that most Democrats loath him) shows that you are either disingenuous or a fool.
Good to hear from you Zreebs.
Hang around.
You add a lot to the conversations here.
Thanks James and Jack. One of my employees recently resigned and I am overloaded with work. So there will likely be some weeks that I am unable to post.
Morning people….
Any drop in is appreciated Z…..
Yeah that Trump is a Democrat routine is old.
If one really believes that ,he is implicitly conceding that Republicans are the biggest damn idiots on the planet having essentially turned their party over to a Democrat.
I don’t think your description was an oversimplification Zreebs, it was accurate. Right after Ronnie started dating Nancy he went from campaigning for Helen Douglas against Nixon for the Senate to a become Republican. No wonder why he called her mommy. It happened in the span of two years, and she took credit for the conversion.
Calling Nancy mommy is better than calling your wife mother.
He used to say, “I didn’t leave the Democratic Party, it left me.” More like not wanting Nancy to leave.
Trump is holding a rambling disjointed presser on the White House lawn that will provide the media with several days of stories….
The guy REALLY HATES Barack Obama , who has mentioned ALL thru his comments negatively….
Trumps hate of Obama is really a general reflection of most Republicans.
Indeed, as is now becoming clear, the so-called “Tea Party,” which was alledged to be a reaction to government spending and the deficit, has been shown to be a sham,
The “ Tea Party” adherents are Trumps biggest supporters ,as he presides over the biggest deficits and the most spending in history.They couldn’t care less.
No, it’s now plain that what was really animating these “good people who care about their country” was nothing more than an all encompassing hatred of the Black President.Thats all it was.
So when Trump lambastes Obama he provokes lusty cheers from this crowd aka the “base” of the Republican Party.
but you would now exclude Joe Walsh, of course from that blanket condemnation, right?
And me obviously, not that I ever claimed to be a part of the Tea Party.
I don’t know what Trump said today about Obama. I am sure it was beneath the dignity of his current office.
But clearly we can all believe that there are people who are well within their right to dislike Barack Obama and his Presidency that are not in the least bit motivated by racial bias. Can’t we?
After all, even the Democrats here often have bad things to say about African-American political figures.
The market is up 271 points….
Sure…but we now see that the Tea Party’s rationale for existing was fraudulent.
And since they “spontaneously “ formed with a couple of months of Obama’s elections …
Plus some of the Tea Party organizations were even headed by persons with racist type backgrounds.
Yes, I believe their motivating factor was a deep seated hatred and anger over the election of the first Black President.
Do I think that Trumps general rhetoric is specifically aimed at these type people.Absolutely.
Are these type people a major part of the Republican “base?”
Yes they are.
Is everybody who opposed Obama a “Tea Partier “ or a racist?Obviously not…I never said they were.
It may not have been fraudalent then, but the people have proven themselves to be hypocrites now by overlooking the things they were upset about in the first place, just because they think the other side is worse.
This is another example of something that can be criticized enough as it is without using crazy logic to overstate it.
Or maybe they never believed it to begin with…
And there is just as much reason to believe that as to believe that they ever believed it.
In my view the “Tea Party” as nothing more than a gaggle pissed off that aBlack Guy had been elected President.
Funny that such is defined as “crazy logic” from one who still hints that Donald Trump is still a “secret Democrat.”
You want to continue along those lines, you’re in no position to criticize almost any other “theory” as to contemporary politics,
You may know “Tea Partiers” better than me and maybe they are different in SC than they are in Chicagoland (though I note the folks down there were instrumental in electing a minority woman as Governor and an African-American to the U.S. Senate), but even among the somewhat goofy people that I came across, I did not detect racism in their opposition to Obama policies. Of course, like anyone else who excuses Trump, they look the other way as it relates to Trump’s appeals to white nationalism, which proved effective in gaining the support of many voters who were not in the Tea Party movement and could care less about those issues.
But basically I am left with wondering how racist they can really be if they applauded the appointment of Tim Scott and heartily supported him?
I think the Tea Party Crowd and the Alt-Right crowd, which traffics far more in bigotry, are very different groups and should not be confused.
They have all been consumed under Trump’s umbrella now though.
I don’t.
Good to hear from ya Z….
We missed ya…
Hope all is Good….
Yes Zreebs, I remember at least two interviews with Nancy Reagan where she essentially took credit for turning Ronnie to the “dark side” (my term not hers). She was far more conservative than he ever was, Reagan always struck me as a live and let live guy. I also think all those years working for GE as their spokesman was a tremendous influence and source of monied contacts for him, and they were all Republicans too. Tough for him to stay a Democrat.
But Nancy met him at the right time, right as his acting career went in the shitter. She talked about helping to guide his career, I am sure they both saw it as more profitable for him to be a Republican.
I stumbled upon a “Tea Party” protest in Feb. 2009. It was a few dozen people in downtown St. Louis. The event was organized by Dana Loesch–then a local radio host, later a spokeswoman for the NRA.
It was billed as a protest “against deficit spending”. So I asked why so many people were carrying signs with pictures of aborted fetuses and signs asking where Obama’s borth certificate was.
She got fluateted and said these people were “also” concerned about debt.
Uh huh.
So I asked if they protested while the deficit exploded during Bush’s presidency–which had ended a mere few weeks before. She said she had.
Uh huh
I’ve heard that ancedotal example before. I am sure any event in a somewhat large city will attract various people who are not necessarily there for the actual cause.
There are different kinds of right-wing groups just as there are different kinds of left-wing groups and you can hear examples of extremism anywhere and that should not be used to paint with too broad a brush.
Also, I never knew Obama had a “borth certificate.”
For more on the lunacy of the Tea Party see the recent bestseller “American Carnage” and former Republican House Speaker John Boehners view of many of the Tea Partiers who were sent to Congress in 2010.
Boehners most biting criticism is reserved for Mark Meadows of NC ,the leader of the so called “freedom caucus.”Boehner describes how Meadows literally got on his knees and begged forgiveness after participating in one of the first Dump Boehner movements.
It’s a good read and is destined in my view to be the ultimate account of what happened to the Republican Party from the inauguration of Obama to the inauguration of Trump.
Tim Alberta,the author, is no left winger either ,having formerly written for National Review.His work, nevertheless, is a devastating commentary on how the actions of prominent Republicans paved the way for the Trump takeover and how the party literally “stood around “ as the carnival barker bullied and insulted his way to leadership of a now drastically different GOP and the acute spinelessness of the so called “leadership”thereof.
I want to read that book one day but I have to get through the latest version of “The Almanac of American Politics” which arrived two weeks ago.
Again, there’s plenty of ground to say that people associated with the Tea Party might be hypocritical during the age of Trump, but that’s a long way from alleging that the Tea Party began with racist intent.
you Won’t like it.
Despite your loathing of Trump, you remain an apologist for the Republican Party .
There are no apologies in this book and almost the entire Republican Party comes out of it looking very bad indeed.
Oh please. Apologist my..whatever
Yeah whatever…
I’m not being critical really.Just noting a fact.
You remain a Republican, why wouldn’t you try to defend your party ?Its just increasingly difficult because your party has been subsumed in some weird semi cultlike alter ego of this carnival barker Donald Trump.
Its odd that you seemingly get perturbed when this is pointed out.
I remain a conservative. I don’t know what defines “Republican” to you, other than the condition of not being a Democrat.
Besides, you hardly can criticize me on this. You voted without a second of hesitation for pro-Trump Republicans (unlike me since I have not) and you are open about being chummy with pro-Trump Republicans.
Due to Trump, I resigned an official party post to which I had been appointed and served for years. I went to great lengths to be removed from any sort of Republican Party “list.” I even removed all vestiges of the GOP elephant (not attached to campaign memorabilia for political figures who did not vote for Trump) from my home.
I’ve criticized everyone associated who capitulated to Trump in real time and since. I have called them “Vichy Republicans” and all sorts of things like that.
You can be forgiven for not being a regular reader of my blog, but believe me, if I wrote a book it would be quite harsh.
I’m probably going to even pull a Democrat ballot when I vote in the upcoming March primary (hoping I do not spontaneously catch on fire.)
(That is unless Joe Walsh is running on the Republican side and I have been slated as a delegate, which means I would have to vote for myself.)
Once again , why do you feel the need to engage in these periodic recitations Of matters that are irrelevant to the bottom line….
Once again, I’m not being critical per se.You say you are a “conservative “(although the actual meaning of that term seems in some dispute at this time as most Republicans believe Donald Trump to be the epitome of a”conservative “ and I presume you don’t subscribe to such).
I will readily admit there are few in the Democratic Party that would fit that term as you use it.
Accordingly,the only place you will find any candidates of like minded qualities is the Republican Party.
And when you return there in the post Trump era as we all know you will ,we can look at all this as a minor aberration and all get a good laugh at this period of time when you claimed you were no longer a Republican..
It’s become somewhat of a game really.I say you are, you say you aren’t.
Meaningless.
A Republican you will always be .(once again not being critical,although you insist on taking it as some kind of personal insult).
As for me,I’m friends with lots of people and ,of course, my personal relationships have nothing to do with any of this and is nothing more that an obfuscatory tactic that you are well known for using .
You are confusing then “Republican” with “Republican apologist.” The latter term does not remotely apply to me as it relates you Trump, but you simply are someone who has felt the need for at least 50 years to state publicly how horrible all Republicans are. Thus, for you, it has nothing to do with Trump.
Yet, when you let your guard down a bit, you admit you are friendly with them in real life.
So, it feels like performance art/pro-wrestling shtick.
And I don’t know where I’m “returning” in the post-Trump era. I don’t know what’s going to happen. I can just choose to be optimistic, but as you are aware, none of us even know how much time we have left.
Yes I hate all Republicans.You hate Democrats…woohoo (silly)
Nothing you’ve said changes anything..
You remain aRepublican,as anyone who reads the posts here would note .
And yes, you often defend Republicans ,individually ,as well as Republican viewpoints.
And sure you will return as a full fledged Republican when Trump is out of the scene and you will support other Republicans who were rabid Trump supporters.
As for the sophomorish ,well we don’t know if we will even be here.
Yeah that always a good line,gee. There’s nothing left to discuss…
Apocalypse Now!!!
Suppose Donald Trump were to announce tomorrow that he was not running for reelection.
Are you seriously saying that you “don’t know” if you would be involved in supporting one of what I would imagine be a very large field of aspiring candidates for the Republican nomination?
Of course you would and we all know it.
Because of course…you are a Republican.
To you, “conservative” and “Republican” are one in the same. That’s your mindset for 50 years plus and I cannot change that.
Yes, I will defend traditional Republican viewpoints. I believe in them and always have. Why wouldn’t I? That has nothing to do with Trump.
The prediction you make is that one day I will support those who were once rabid Trump defenders… I think you have no basis to predict that. Nobody knows what the future holds. I certainly do not foresee that for myself. I hope that one day Trump is denounced in retrospect by those who once supported him.
Again, this is purely hypocritical coming from you as you were happy in 2018 to vote, in present time, for those on your ballot who were rabid Trump supporters.
I have not done that. If there was anyone on my ballot who was a rabid Trump supporter, I doubt I would have voted for them regardless of opposition.
So, we know what you have already done. You don’t know what I might do in the future.
You certainly also should realize though that from 2015 until the present I have offered no apologies or equivocations for Donald Trump in anyway nor have I excused those who have embraced him. (That does not mean that I will not push back when I think specific criticism is factually incorrect or over the top such as james’ “ICE Centers= Auschwitz” attempt today… I believe those lines of attack only serve Trump’s benefit.)
Yes, I would be very happy if Trump were to quit the race. In a large primary field, you probably realize I would be backing the most anti-Trumpist option.
You are pulling a james today and trying to change the terms of the discussion. I think you should be held to higher standards than james.
I have not taken issue with the fact that I am a conservative and wish to identify with the Republican Party over the Democrat Party as I have in the past.
You claimed though that I would dislike Alberta’s book because I am a “Republican apologist” as it relates to Trump.
That is simply ridiculous. There is probably nothing in Alberta’s book that I do not basically already know from having followed politics closely and nothing that would upset me beyond where I have already been upset and just as critical of those involved myself.
Yes,everyone here knows I’m aTrump supporter.
Don’t you ever give up on these absurd” what aboutisms “of yours?
But at lest you are conceding that you remain a Republican and you “defend” (apologize) various “traditional Republican viewpoints.”
Interestingly, you note that you don’t support “rabid” Trump supporters implying that you support “non rabid” Trump supporters.( apparently you of course dissect their degree of “rabidity”).
Ah this be all great fun!
Yeah, you aren’t a Trump supporter. You are just a supporter of Trump supporters.
That inoculates you I suppose.
Well now you’ve gone from essentially denying you were any longer a Republican and delineating all the steps you had taken to disassociate from that party,
To now admitting yes, I’m a Republican and I will defend its “traditional principles .”
So if I had said you were a Republican “Defender ” rather than “ apologist” you would presumably have been alright with that?
Amusing.
And again, at no point that you have “known” me have I ever denied being a supporter of traditional Republican Party values.
That isn’t what you said to get me to disagree with you. You went in another direction and very much like james realized you were off on an island on something that could not be backed up, (i.e. Republican apologist on the specific topic of Trump) so you started to throw everything else up against the wall.
I guess he taught you well.
For the record, I am unaware of anybody I voted for in 2016 and 2018 who also voted for Trump. I cannot say for certain though in low profile races where I knew very little about the candidates, but nobody I voted for said anything in praise of him publicly and as it related to the highest profile races (U.S. Senate, Governor, Congress in 2016, and State Comptroller), every single Republican nominee I voted for in those races openly refused to vote for Donald Trump.
This is different than the votes that jack happily cast in 2018 statewide for pro-Trump Republicans. I understand that he believed they would be better public servants than the Democrats in those, so he did the right thing if that is what he believed, but he also has to own up to it and not be hypocritical on the matter.
I did not bother to vote in a local 2017 election where (friends and associates of mine) who did vote for Trump were running unopposed.
Let’s wrap this up.
1. Never denied being a Republican
2. Take tremendous issue with claim that I am Republican apologist in regards to Trump.
3. Republican defender? Sure, as it relates to 1854-2016, absolutely for the most part, and on the issues today where the party is better than the Democrats, yes on that too.
4. None of that has anything to do with Trump or apologizing for Trump or defending those who apologize for Trump.
I said you were an Republican Apologist and specifically noted that you “loathed Trump(see my post@3:12.)
I guess you now consider Trump and the Republican Party as synonymous.
At no time in this discussion have I intimated in any way that you supported Trump.
How am I being hypocritical when I admitted it?
So, why would I “not like” the Alberta book?
Did you think I went to bed with a stuffed Reince Priebus doll?
What’s going to upset me that I do not already know?
If you don’ want to be hypocritical own up then to the fact that you think Republicans are sometimes better than Democrats, and their support of Donald Trump does not change that for you.
So, if it’s ok for you, it should be ok for me too (and everyone else)., even though I have yet to actually cast a vote for a pro-Trump Republican.
Once agin as I’ve stated numerous times in this discussion…
I was not being critical.
You seem to get all worked up at being called aRepublican and aRepublican apologist.
I’m aDemocratic apologist at times.
What’s the big deal?
Sure I have Republican friends,So?
Hell, if we lived close to each other we might be friends although you’ve never mentioned being friends with any Democrats.Actually we probably are not that far apart on some issues.
You know you really should understand that there is more to life than politics.Youre obsessed with this stuff.
I specifically said that I voted for for Molly Spearman for Supt. of Education because the Democratic candidate was a kook.So?Any idiot knows that in S.C. if she hadn’t said she supported Trump she wouldn’t have been nominated.You do too.Interestingly, my so called “admission” came in response tom one of your many shrill accusations that I would “never” support aRepublican.
I probably will again.Once again ,so?
I still don’t understand why you get so worked up at being called a Republican and spend all this time delineating how you have taken all sorts of steps to disassociate from them.(see your post @3:31)
Or aRepublcan apologist for that matter.
You often seem to though.
Oh well that’s your thing.
Have a good rest of the day.
Most of my friends these days tend to be non-political or Democrats.
The post in question was not meant in a non-critical way. We simply have very different definitions of “apologist.” I still don’t understand why I would reflexively dislike the book you are reading.
I hope you have a nice evening as well.
I don’t doubt that Spearman was better than the “kook” nominated by Democrats (and you have admitted voting for some Republicans before, so I knew that years ago.
But that standard has to be extended, While I don’t live in Kentucky, if I did, why wouldn’t I vote for McConnell over a far-left Democrat with kooky ideas? Yes, McConnell has to publicly defend Trump at times but any idiot knows he has no choice if he wants to be nominated or keep his job…
I would.fully expect you to vote for McConnell, a fellow Republican.
However,it was you, not me, that said you would never vote for a”rabid” Trump supporter.
Unlike Ms. Spearman ,who merely made a remark that she supported Trump, McConnell is his floor leader in the Senate and has backed him on almost every issue.
I guess it depends on ones definition of “rabid?”
Once again I will point out it was You who made all these statements about You never supporting anyone who supports Trump.
Mitch McConnell certainly qualifies.
You are arguing with yourself.
Me?I would fully expect you, a Republican, to support a fellow Republican.
Morning…..
Trump’s presser was almost off the hook…..
I’ll have a post on it in a little while….
Interestingly , the two Republicans that come out looking the best are recently departed Party member Cong.Justin Amash and former House Speaker John Boehner.
Indeed, Boehners critique of the extreme Right Wing types that increasingly dominate the House Republican Caucus make my criticisms look comparatively mild.
Amash comes in for praise for sticking to his philosophical guns as the so called “Tea Partiers” abandoned any pretense of believing all that “stuff” they supposedly were there for in favor of cult like adoration of the person of Donald Trump.
Not having read the book, I don’t know if Jeb Bush is covered or not.
He certainly stood up to Trump earlier than all the other candidates did, never agreed to support him, and got out of the race at the appropriate time (and even in effect went easy on his main political obstacle in SC hoping that he would be able to eventually emerge as the anti-Trump alternative.)
I don’t know if Romney was covered, but not sure how he would look bad. He put himself out there in a very public way to try to stop Trump and to get Republicans to vote strategically (which the last three remaining non-Trump candidates could never get together to do.)
I would say that both were treated as casualties in the Republican Civil War(the subtitle of the book) and not of any particular relevance to the present party.
Boehner would be a natural target for Trump theses days….
Cubs win!
Last night, 12-11 on 14 hits
Today, 1-0 on 2 hits
Talk about diversity
Mets have also…
NY GiAnts play tonight…..
I get to switch between BOTH teams tonight!
jack doesn’t believe in watching primary debates.
I don’t believe in watching pre-season football.
I don’t believe in watching that either.
Then again, I rarely watch tv at all.
David Koch is dead. In the words of our First Lady’s jacket–I really don’t care, do u?
Morning….
The Democratic sweepstakes contestant field loses another one….Expect more below single digit people to drop out soon
…
“Rep. Seth Moulton (D-MA), a Harvard-educated Marine veteran who struggled to gain traction in a crowded Democratic presidential field, announced Friday that he would leave the campaign, making him the third candidate to depart the race this week,” the Washington Post reports.
Moulton said that he would instead seek reelection….
Politicalwire….
I think many people will still have compassion for anyone who passes away, regardless of political differences.
In the case of David Koch, he happened to donate millions of dollars over many years to cancer research, educational funds, prison reform, and the arts, in addition to using his free speech as an American to be involved politically. I know that I certainly had very different views than he on his liberal/Libertarian positions on social issues such as abortion and drugs, but I still think it is unfortunate that he passed away at age 79, He did more good thru charity in his life than any of us will likely ever do combined.
He also refused to support Donald Trump in 2016, so perhaps Donald and Melania will join Scott in shrugging off his death, but I will wish that he rests in peace.
Go ahead and mourn David Koch.
I’ll save my tears for the burning Amazon rain forest that greedy bastards like him have worked to destroy through their funding of climate change deniers.
Fuck him
The Age of Trump suits you well.
Trump and David Koch could notvhave agreed more on climate change being a “hoax”.
Nuce try though.
When you can’t breathe remember that David Koch helped bring that about.
I’ll save any breath I would have spent to wish him “RIP”–to the 8 people who read this blog.
And that’s all I have to say about that.
My favorite remembrance of David Koch was when he essentially bought the VP nomination of the Libertarian Party in 1980.
Koch literally bankrolled the Libertarian campaign of Ed Clark.It became sort of a minor issue in the campaign.With Koch’s money the LP was able to get on the ballot in most states and run commercials on the three major networks(cable was in its infancy then and most homes only received CBS,NBC and ABC) .
The LP ticket received 1.1% of the popular vote which was its best showing ,percentagewise, until 2016 when Gary Johnson won over three percent.
Koch shortly thereafter abandoned the LP ,while retaining many of his Libertarian views , and became with his brother major supporters of Republican candidates .
When asked why he was supporting certain Republican candidates who took distinctly non libertarian positions he would often sort of incongruously reply,”that’s his problem.”
Global Warming might eventually cause the death (either directly or indirectly) of billions of people, but many conservatives don’t care because they will likely be long dead before it happens. And this is far more important than donating money to have an arts building with Koch in its name.
And they want to make their money now….Screw their kids and grandkids
Morning People….
Morning……
Morning….
In other “people I have I met who may be President” news, the new Presidential nominee of the Prohibition Party is apparently former Politics1 commenter Phil Collins.
Phil Collins and Joe Walsh running for President.
No jacket required and life’s been good.
They are dropping like flies….
Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI) announced he was resigning from Congress after being elected to his fifth term in 2018, Politico reports.
He will leave Congress at the end of September.
Politicalwire…
Some context may be needed here.
He has a soon to be born baby with a heart condition.
He already has a ton of children with his wife Rachel (fellow alum of MTV’s The Real World).
Hopefully their child sees better health.
Being able to quit your job to take care of a sick child is sonething the vast majority of Americans cannot do.
I didn’t know the child part,…
Good for him in his choice ..
Hopefully things will improve
There may be truth to that and plenty to discuss in regards to best way to deal with those situations, but it also true that being a Member of Congress is a fairly rare occupation where someone has to typically reside much of the time in a city far away from where their family lives.
A new Monmouth Poll shows that Joe Biden’s support has collapsed and he is now in a three way tie with Sanders and Warren at around 20% support .
Two months ago Biden enjoyed a solid lead but has lost 13 points in this poll.
There will be other polls of course where Bidens support may be more solid.The point though is that despite the blatant cheerleading you read here?
This remains a very fluid race.It is far from over and the “inevitability “ of Bidens nomination is slowly fading with the reality that no votes have been cast yet and won’t for five months or so.
That is an eternity in politics.
I saw that….
I’ll do a post on it….
Right now i’d label it a outlier…
We need more….
I do remember another poll like this a few weeks ago…
All the others have Biden with at least a 8 to 10 lead….
Of course the race will tighten…
Hillary barely won Iowa ?
Really?
A few weeks ago you essentially declared Biden the nominee!
He STILL leads by ur own admission Jack
He does ,in the aggregate of polls, and may very well end up the nominee.
The point is this is still a very fluid race.
Update …..
The Monmouth poll ?
Less than 300 registered Democrats….
A MOE of 5.7 % points….
This isn’t a serious poll...
Post later tonight
Yet Nate Silvers 538 rates Monmouth A+ ,it’s highest rating.
I stated there will be other polls with other results.
We all know of James’s unabashed hero worship of Silver.Any criticism of him here is usually met with all sorts of negative comments from James.
Here, however,Silvers opinion is not “ serious .”
The message is clear…Any poll that disagrees with James’s narrative of the race is not “serious”.Oh and the Hell with Nate Silver!What the Hell does he know!
Hilarious!
We must insist on nothing less than the Gold Standard.
i have posted polling update every two days or so…
I have also posted up Warren recently…
I may favor Biden…
But i do not exclude others
BTW?
EVERYBODY here has acknowledged Biden’s lead
Nate Silver
Is Warren still gradually moving up in polls? Very likely, yes.
Is Biden gradually moving down? Quite possibly but not as clear.
Is Sanders on a bit of an upward trajectory? Maybe, but even less clear.
Have there been any sudden shifts in the past ~1-2 weeks? Pretty doubtful….
Twitter…
Harry Enten….
Some thoughts on the Dem race following Monmouth’s poll. I’ll be the boring guy who says it could be right (Monmouth/Patrick Murray are great), but the average still has Biden clearly up. No doubt Warren’s at ~20% though.
He, he, he….
CNN and MSNBC…. BOTH discuss the poll…
The talking heads repeat my view that the poll is simply too small ….
But we ALL agree Warren has gained…
Gillum is on CNN as a contributor ..
Interesting
Morning….
New Thread later….
Actually i do NOT think as highly of Silver as i have in the past…
i have questioned his Sanders leaning a few months ago…
He has also questioned this poll as an outlier because of its small sampling size…
It plays well for the horse race narrative the media so loves…