Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Captain Obvious · 03-10-2018 8:00pm

Crikey, Saunders is just a straight up liar. She has not an ounce of honesty about her. She's as bad as Trump with his petty attacks to people who challenge him.

Captain Obvious · 03-10-2018 8:02pm

spacecoyote wrote: »

So I'm a bit confused by it. Is he saying that the dems are hypocrites because they said things when Clinton was up being investigated, or is he implying Fordis lying & doing it for the money?

i think his point was that democrats were happy to insult Clinton accusers, by calling them money grabbing trailer trash, but are treating Ford completely differently. I think his audience was probably too young to get the reference. The interviewer did.

Itssoeasy · 03-10-2018 8:05pm

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Crikey, Saunders is just a straight up liar. She has not an ounce of honesty about her. She's as bad as Trump with his petty attacks to people who challenge him.

What did she say in the daily barely monthly press briefing now ? Is it worth my while watching it or will I just raise my blood pressure ?

RIGOLO · 03-10-2018 8:07pm

Duck Soup wrote: »

Was just listening to the Huckabee Sanders press briefing. She denied again and again and again that Trump was mocking Dr Ford during his rally speech last night in Mississippi.

I'd say it's unbelievable what this administration is doing, but it's not. It's predictable and disheartening. But for me, this is the lowest point yet for American national discourse. Mocking, stupid, hate-laced and pandering.

If Kavanaugh gets the nod for the Supreme Court, I hope it creates a blue tidal wave that washes away Republican control in Congress. After that, with time no object, a Democrat majority can launch inquiry after inquiry into Kavanaugh's background, accusations and public misstatements.

You know. Like the Republicans did with Benghazi. Good for the goose and all that.

There is NO sign of a BLUE Wave.
FiveThirtyEight just put out an update on one of the key Congress seats ,and
its a far tighter race than many would have thought. Theres low single digits between he two candidates. This would be a major upset, for the GOP to win NJ.

Two other recent surveys — one by Vox Populi Communications and one by Stockton University — also showed the race within the low single digits.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-really-could-lose-that-new-jersey-senate-seat/

Whats more interesting is the number of UNDECIDED DEMOCRATS.
Yep after 600 days of the presidency and with all the events that have taken place, there is a significant portion of registered Democrats undecided.

Translate that across the nation, and then factor in the number of people who will lie on the poll, as they will say Democrat but actually vote GOP, (and this is one thing that upset the pollsters in 2016) thats another 1-2% swing. Theres zero evidence of a blue wave, I think all the left have is Hope.

MadYaker · 03-10-2018 8:13pm

There is plenty of evidence, your post basically just details how you’re ignoring it all, because of supposedly unregistered democrats and people lying to the polls. Did you just make that up or what?

ancapailldorcha · 03-10-2018 8:16pm

No more name calling please. Post deleted.

Professor Moriarty · 03-10-2018 8:18pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

There is NO sign of a BLUE Wave.
FiveThirtyEight just put out an update on one of the key Congress seats ,and
its a far tighter race than many would have thought. Theres low single digits between he two candidates. This would be a major upset, for the GOP to win NJ.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-really-could-lose-that-new-jersey-senate-seat/

Whats more interesting is the number of UNDECIDED DEMOCRATS.
Yep after 600 days of the presidency and with all the events that have taken place, there is a significant portion of registered Democrats undecided.

Translate that across the nation, and then factor in the number of people who will lie on the poll, as they will say Democrat but actually vote GOP, (and this is one thing that upset the pollsters in 2016) thats another 1-2% swing. Theres zero evidence of a blue wave, I think all the left have is Hope.

Yeah. Now let's look at reality.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/

This is an interesting poll of polls. It includes Rasmussen which is to be take with a pinch of salt. Even with that skewed poll, Dems have an 8%+ lead nationwide. In May 2017, the gap was 4%. What is also interesting is that the GOP percentage has flatlined since then. If that were to translate into votes next month...

UsedToWait · 03-10-2018 8:19pm

MadYaker wrote: »

There is plenty of evidence, your post basically just details how you’re ignoring it all, because of supposedly unregistered democrats and people losing to the polls. Did you just make that up or what?

If you venture in to r/theDonald, you'll see all the above talking points laid out for dissemination on sites like this.

Personally, I reckon not engaging with these weird repeater transmitter posters is the only way to starve them of the attention they clearly crave.

Water John · 03-10-2018 8:20pm

I suggest Rigolo goes to see The Trump Prophecy a story of Mark Taylor and his visions.
Basically Trump is The Chosen One by God.

Taylor has made other claims, which he calls “prophetic words”, including that Trump will serve two terms, the landmark supreme court ruling on abortion in the Roe v Wade case will be overturned, and that next month’s midterm elections will result in a “red tsunami”, strengthening Republican control of both houses of Congress.

Barack Obama will be charged with treason and Trump will authorise the arrest of “thousands of corrupt officials, many of whom are part of a massive satanic paedophile ring”. Trump will also force the release of cures for cancer and Alzheimer’s that are currently being withheld by the pharmaceutical industry.

Now that we have all the nonsense and whataboutery out of the way lets get back to he's bellitling of a sexual abuse victim and the real story of where his wealth came from. A millionaire at the age of 8. The self made man.

Duck Soup · 03-10-2018 8:25pm

Itssoeasy wrote: »

What did she say in the daily barely monthly press briefing now ? Is it worth my while watching it or will I just raise my blood pressure ?

Repeated questions from various journalists about Trump's disgusting display at the Mississippi rally. Did she think mocking a sexual violence victim was appropriate? In light of his tone at the rally, did Trump still find Dr Ford a credible and compelling witness? Etc, etc.

Repeatedly Sanders said (a) it wasn't mocking, (b) the President was just stating facts (c) I'll tell you what's disgusting - them Democrats.

Absolutely vile stuff, doubled down on.

Professor Moriarty · 03-10-2018 8:25pm

Water John wrote: »

I suggest Rigolo goes to see The Trump Prophecy a story of Mark Taylor and his visions.
Basically Trump is The Chosen One by God.

Taylor has made other claims, which he calls “prophetic words”, including that Trump will serve two terms, the landmark supreme court ruling on abortion in the Roe v Wade case will be overturned, and that next month’s midterm elections will result in a “red tsunami”, strengthening Republican control of both houses of Congress.

Barack Obama will be charged with treason and Trump will authorise the arrest of “thousands of corrupt officials, many of whom are part of a massive satanic paedophile ring”. Trump will also force the release of cures for cancer and Alzheimer’s that are currently being withheld by the pharmaceutical industry.

Now that we have all the nonsense and whataboutery out of the way lets get back to he's bellitling of a sexual abuse victim and the real story of where his wealth came from. A millionaire at the age of 8. The self made man.

That's a bit harsh. Daddy only gave him 413,000,000 dollars. Sure you'd spend that down the pub.

everlast75 · 03-10-2018 8:25pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

There is NO sign of a BLUE Wave.
FiveThirtyEight just put out an update on one of the key Congress seats ,and
its a far tighter race than many would have thought. Theres low single digits between he two candidates. This would be a major upset, for the GOP to win NJ.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-really-could-lose-that-new-jersey-senate-seat/

Whats more interesting is the number of UNDECIDED DEMOCRATS.
Yep after 600 days of the presidency and with all the events that have taken place, there is a significant portion of registered Democrats undecided.

Translate that across the nation, and then factor in the number of people who will lie on the poll, as they will say Democrat but actually vote GOP, (and this is one thing that upset the pollsters in 2016) thats another 1-2% swing. Theres zero evidence of a blue wave, I think all the left have is Hope.

Any comment on the NYT article which exposes Trump's claim to be a self made billionaire a sham?

Still getting pocket money from his dad at 50?

Had to be bailed out by his dad countless times to save his businesses from going under - including a casino? I mean, who screws up on making money from a casino?

Getting 200k a year since he was 3?

Or what about his defrauding the IRS?

Or defrauding those that bought into his scam that they would be made rich through qualifying through Trump University?

Explain away. I'm listening

Thargor · 03-10-2018 8:28pm

Captain Obvious wrote: »

He said it alright. The video is here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDJRTo8m9to

Apparently it's a quote from a political analyst who said it about an accusation against Clinton. It's not clear from the video what he was referring to but I think he was actually referring to double standards in how the dems treat accusations as opposed to referring to Ford.

Im confused about what any of that means tbh, what is the context? Why did the audience gasp? What/who does the $100 refer to?

Itssoeasy · 03-10-2018 8:31pm

Duck Soup wrote: »

Repeated questions from various journalists about Trump's disgusting display at the Mississippi rally. Did she think mocking a sexual violence victim was appropriate? In light of his tone at the rally, did Trump still find Dr Ford a credible and compelling witness? Etc, etc.

Repeatedly Sanders said (a) it wasn't mocking, (b) the President was just stating facts (c) I'll tell you what's disgusting - them Democrats.

Absolutely vile stuff, doubled down on.

So par for the course then ? Yeah I'll leave it off thanks.

TomOnBoard · 03-10-2018 8:38pm

Duck Soup wrote: »

Repeated questions from various journalists about Trump's disgusting display at the Mississippi rally. Did she think mocking a sexual violence victim was appropriate? In light of his tone at the rally, did Trump still find Dr Ford a credible and compelling witness? Etc, etc.

Repeatedly Sanders said (a) it wasn't mocking, (b) the President was just stating facts (c) I'll tell you what's disgusting - them Democrats.

Absolutely vile stuff, doubled down on.

As Trump sinks to new lows, so does Sanders in lock-step with him. Her rare podium appearances have become an amalgam of the type of propaganda historically trotted out by such notorius apologists as Joseph Goebbels, Lord HawHaw and Comical Ali. While Trump's vileness at that rally was disgusting, it becomes more execrable when a woman is used as a mouthpiece to try to further degrade and demean another woman who is a sexual assault victim, whose testimony was stated after the hearing as credible and compelling even by Trump himself.

everlast75 · 03-10-2018 10:15pm

Is it "possible" they may not have the numbers to endorse Kavanaugh?

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1047536952730427404?s=19

Itssoeasy · 03-10-2018 10:32pm

"I want to do it right" says Senator Graham. Haha yeah right.

SimonTemplar · 03-10-2018 10:33pm

The parallels Tapper draws in the first two minutes between the laughter at the Trump rally and Dr. Ford's testimony highlights how repugnant the whole moment was:

As I said before, Trump is putting on a show. His demeanor in that clip seems more like a standup comedian than a politician, never mind the US President.

everlast75 · 03-10-2018 10:38pm

Wow.

When you start to lose the base....

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1047601450057170945?s=19

Duck Soup · 03-10-2018 10:44pm

RIGOLO wrote: »

There is NO sign of a BLUE Wave.

I didn't say there is sign of a blue wave, I said I hope there is a blue wave.

Hopefully you read the articles you link to with greater accuracy than you read posts here.

aloyisious · 03-10-2018 10:54pm

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I meant it's mad only Ford knows it was him who sexually assaulted her. I understand forgetting details but I didn't think others would not be able to say that he assaulted them. Swetnick walked back from her implication that he was present during the rape to he was 'at the party' where she was raped.

Point being, we've had what 5 or 6 accusations about assaults but only one has a memory of him assaulting her.

Well, when you on the way to the toilet and are instead pushed into a bedroom by a boy, then onto a bed there by the same boy who then gets on top of you, then tries to remove your clothes and when you object he puts his hand over your mouth to silence you [all done face to face] I'd say there's more than a chance that the image of that boy's face would be burned into your memory.

Look on the bright side by examining the possible extended part of the story and that is that the boy was saved from extending his sexual assault of the girl to actual rape by the other boy present jumping on top of them both which gave her the chance to get off the bed and exit both the room and the house fast. The other boy's actions saved the boy from serious criminal charges and left him available to take up a position as a judge after completing law school and available to be nominated by the president to an even more senior position as a judge. I'd suggest in that extended version of the storyline that boy 1 is well in hock to boy 2.

TomOnBoard · 03-10-2018 11:13pm

everlast75 wrote: »

Is it "possible" they may not have the numbers to endorse Kavanaugh?

Very possible, I'd say. After Trump's performance feeding the base last night, Flake, Collins and Murkowski may have problems on the Rep side. However, watch the 2 Dems (West Virginia and North Dakota) who are both up for re-election in Rep strongholds- one or both may break the other way.

So, if 48 Reps + 2 Dems vote for Kav, and 45 Dems + 2 Independents + 3 Reps vote against, Pence would come in with a casting vote winning the confirmation... That would allow the Senators to wash their hands of the decision, allowing spin to place any negative backlash coming up to the mid-terms squarely on the White House, but not directly onto Trump.

Machiavellian or what?

Manic Moran · 04-10-2018 12:16am

Nody wrote: »

Remember how NAFTA was "the worst deal in 30 years" yet Trump's new NAFTA deal is the best thing ever? Well as always with Trump the superlatives he gives to things tend to fall flat to reality and the reality of his new deal as analyzed by the major banks etc. is a big thumbs down. From a summary on CNBC of Merill Lynch's review of the new deal (you know, actual facts over claims):

If there is a big thumbs down, i’m not seeing it in the CNBC link, which says only that the dairy deal deoesn’t provide a huge a boost to US dairy trade as might have been implied, (but apparently it is still bigger than it would have been under TPP,see link below) So, at best, for the dairy deal, it’s a small thumbs up, not a big thumbs down. For example, it does not address the matter of the increase of automobile production requirement in the US, or an increase in the minimum wage in the production of automobiles in all three countries to a figure which reduces the attractiveness of transferring work over the border. If that is a thumb up o thumb down, your link does not say.

Besides, if HuffPo is to be believed, these are agreements which Obama did most of the negotiation for. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-obama-trade-deal_us_5bb292b9e4b00fe9f4f99ec7
So, either the current deal is better than people are giving credit for, or it was just a lousy situation all around and that was about all anyone was going to get.

As for Trump mocking Ford, he’s an asshole, simple enough. I don’t think even Rigolo would object to that.

SimonTemplar · 04-10-2018 1:30am

It's getting pretty bad for Kavanagh and his supporters:

650+ law professors (and counting) believe Brett Kavanaugh lacks the judicial temperament to be approved to the Supreme Court. Read their letter explaining why.

https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/1047612028515491840

aloyisious · 04-10-2018 1:46am

CNN have interviewed Judge Kavanaugh's college room-mate whom Judge Kavanaugh stated had a difference with a third college student. This room-mate stated that the FBI never contacted him during it's background check on Judge Kavanaugh. He was also the student who carried the third college-boy's bed outside the college building. The incident was mentioned during the committee hearings of the judge when the judge referred to a difference between his two college mates. It seems the college mate interviewed has a different understanding of the judge's interfacing with one of the girls named during the hearing into the judge's behaviour, that the judge's treatment of the girl was disrespectful. He also made it clear that alcohol was consumed by both him and the judge during their college days together while they were accommodated in the same room.

TomOnBoard · 04-10-2018 1:58am

SimonTemplar wrote: »

It's getting pretty bad for Kavanagh and his supporters:

650+ law professors (and counting) believe Brett Kavanaugh lacks the judicial temperament.....

650+ law professors putting their names to this letter is indeed a big thing. However, that assumes that Senators are actually listening, and want to do what is right as distinct from what is politically expedient. I don't get any sense that the facts matter any more. The FBI 'investigation' that was teased out by the 3 Republicans now appears to be closed down ahead of the initially proposed timetable, as a document is being presented for Senators to read starting at 08:30 ET tomorrow. It is also being reported that the 'investigation' has been extremely narrowly scoped, and that a range of possibly relevant ppl havent even been contacted by the FBI. While the document is being provided only to the 100 Senators and 8 staffers, in a closed room, in groups, it will not be published. If they start reading it at 08:30, I'd say we can expect the selective leaking to start around 08:40.

A vote will be scheduled for Friday, according to current reporting.

Rjd2 · 04-10-2018 3:10am

https://twitter.com/desiderioDC/status/1047658960872984576

Even if you think Kav is innocent, if Sasse votes yes after that it reflects incredibly poorly on him,it would come across as someone trying to milk both sides and I'd hope anti Kav and Pro Kav would tell him to **** off.

He is popular enough to get away with voting no on Kav though and long term he is one of the few frontline Republicans that I could see have a chance of becoming president one day (unlike Flake], so I won't totally dismiss this as empty grand standing as some are online. He also probably has the sense to realise that the female he was alluding to Barrett would keep the base happy (they wanted her in the first place ffs) and do all the GOP bidding anyhow.

Its concerning for the GOP though, he was one of I think 8 or so Republicans who were not absolute certs on Kav, but was assumed he'd be easier to deal with than someone like Collins.

Trump probably will just nominate Judge Pirro now.

RIGOLO · 04-10-2018 6:09am

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yeah. Now let's look at reality.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/

This is an interesting poll of polls. It includes Rasmussen which is to be take with a pinch of salt. Even with that skewed poll, Dems have an 8%+ lead nationwide. In May 2017, the gap was 4%. What is also interesting is that the GOP percentage has flatlined since then. If that were to translate into votes next month...

If you were familiar with the History of the Generic Ballott, you would know just how much salt to add... add ALOT of SALT to the GENERIC BALLOTT.

From a historical perspective Democrats have frequently lead hte Gneric ballot and gone on to lose seats.

From a statistical standpoint , theres even more grounds for dismissing the Generic ballot.
Fivethirtyeight have REGULARLY done pieces over the last 15 years about just how mis-leading it can be and how it does NOT reflect what will happen especially come mid-term polling day.

The Bias of the Generic Ballot: It’s Complicated
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-bias-of-the-generic-ballot-its-complicated/

Plus if you understood the makeup of the Generic Ballot you would understand how it does not transfer directly to results on polling day.

The Generic Ballott more closely reflects a national POPULAR VOTE ballot, and I assume we are all familiar with the concept that wining the POPULAR VOTE count does not automatically win you the election .

Among the flaws of the Generic Ballot that work against Democrats, are
Democrats tend to live in more concentrated areas, urban areas, denser population.
Democrats dont have the same record of turn out as GOP.
Democrats have more candidates who win with very large margins
Republicans are more spread out

These are covered further in the Washington Post article, its circa 2013, but the title is appropos...
Democrats lead the generic ballot by 8. That’s not enough to win the majority
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2013/10/22/democrats-lead-the-generic-ballot-by-8-thats-not-enough-to-win-the-majority/?utm_term=.f07604616129.

Add all of the above to the extreme polarity, the large number of undecided and the momentum being with the GOP and its not looking good for the Democrats.
Id hope they would have learned from the Presidential election 2016, that winning the popular vote (akin to generic ballott vote) does not bring home the bacon.

Igotadose · 04-10-2018 7:05am

Anddddd... as predicted the investigation's a sham.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409824-fords-lawyers-profoundly-disappointed-in-fbis-kavanaugh-investigation

"
"An FBI supplemental background investigation that did not include an interview of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford — nor the witnesses who corroborate her testimony — cannot be called an investigation. We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth," Ford's counsel said in a statement."

So, no interviews with anyone involved in on of the alleged events. None.

Rhineshark · 04-10-2018 7:44am

Yep, no signs of a blue wave, nothing for Repubs to be worried about. Honest guv. (Hey, I'm absolutely okay with Trump's own lies sinking him because he's brainwashed his base into uncritical adoration).

Regarding the "investigation", yep it was complete bull. Didn't even interview Ford, let alone Swetnick.

Swetnick had multiple other witnesses per her statement. Guess how many interviewed?

They demanded corroboration (ignoring the corroboration already out there) while refusing to allow the FBI to ask any questions of anyone who might corroborate it.

Land of the free, home of the brave right there.

Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Comments