http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/12/opinions/tru...nley/index.html

 

When Russian appeasement under Trump blows up, we should refer back to this naive opinion piece.

 

 

So, here's an article by the page run by the President's special advisor suggesting I should be shot.

 

What are standards for anyway?

What are standards for anyway?

Apparently the line they're coming using there also references a 1930s era play written to celebrate Hitler coming to power.

 

Now please tell me again why I should give them a chance.

John Kasich signed a ban on abortion in Ohio after 20 weeks, with almost no exceptions

 

And he was supposedly the moderate. They're all fanatics.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/13/opinions/cab...nion/index.html

 

The potential danger of too many CEO's without government experience running agencies (some they even want to destroy).

Edited December 14, 20169 yr by caulfield12

How Clinton lost Michigan — and blew the election

 

Michigan operatives relay stories like one about an older woman in Flint who showed up at a Clinton campaign office, asking for a lawn sign and offering to canvass, being told these were not “scientifically” significant ways of increasing the vote, and leaving, never to return. A crew of building trade workers showed up at another office looking to canvass, but, confused after being told there was no literature to hand out like in most campaigns, also left and never looked back.

 

 

The pure arrogance of this campaign was just unreal.

How Clinton lost Michigan — and blew the election

 

 

 

 

The pure arrogance of this campaign was just unreal.

 

Gee, I wonder why young people stayed home. It's like they took the exact opposite approach to what Obama did in '08.

How Clinton lost Michigan — and blew the election

 

 

 

 

The pure arrogance of this campaign was just unreal.

Geez, that sounds worse than their 2008 campaign. And they had this sophisticated ground operation but absorbed NONE of the lessons Obama's campaigns learned.

Even though there's plenty of bulls*** to put some of the blame on (Comey's bulls*** letter arguably being the thing that put Trump over the top), there's still plenty of things Democrats need to figure out internally. And nobody who was associated with Clinton 2008 or 2016 at the top levels should ever be allowed to run a campaign again.

 

 

Really not remotely shocked by this. Republicans have been openly praising Putin for about 4 years now at CPAC and other places like that.

Even though there's plenty of bulls*** to put some of the blame on (Comey's bulls*** letter arguably being the thing that put Trump over the top), there's still plenty of things Democrats need to figure out internally. And nobody who was associated with Clinton 2008 or 2016 at the top levels should ever be allowed to run a campaign again.

 

SS do you really think people changed their vote because of Comey's letter? Sure, maybe a few but a majority of people knew who they were going to vote for before it.

 

Clinton's campaign wasn't all comprehensively bad, campaigns just get a lot more harsh criticism when their strategy isn't good enough to win. She actually turned out almost as many total votes as Obama did in 2012, definitely more than Bush or Bill Clinton either time. It's like a football game, you can still look and see where the losing team did a lot of things right. They just never had a handle on white Midwestern voters for reasons that have been discussed ad nauseam.

SS do you really think people changed their vote because of Comey's letter? Sure, maybe a few but a majority of people knew who they were going to vote for before it.

 

Both independent and internal analysis found that the first letter, 11 days before the election, collapsed her support but that she largely recovered from that. The second letter saying "oops, turns out that thing that was really obviously nothing? it was nothing after all!", released the Friday before the election, boosted Trump's numbers. Together, it was likely enough to put him over the edge and give him the narrow victories he needed to win the electoral college.

 

It's not about whether it changed someone's mind and they decided to go from voting for Clinton to voting for Trump, it's about reducing the likelihood of marginal Clinton voters from turning out and boosting the likelihood of marginal Trump voters to turn out.

 

Now you can also put forth an argument that a better-run campaign from Clinton won't have been as vulnerable to this last-minute bulls***, but Comey's letter still changed the coverage of the campaign for the last two weeks back to EMAILS EMAILS EMAILS!!!

A slightly different take on this topic.

A slightly different take on this topic.

My dad was talking to me about this on Thanksgiving. Obamacare actually does have problems that need to be addressed, but Dems pretended it wasn't a thing. Granted, yes they did actually have tactical reasons for doing this (Republican-led states blocking Medicare expansion then letting people blame the Dems when premiums go up, the ACA having fixable problems but the GOP in Congress refusing to ever cooperate for any reason, etc.). That political dynamic is flipped now. Republicans are talking about keeping the parts everyone likes (the parts that cost money) and scrapping everything else (the part that pays for the parts everyone likes). They are realizing they can't really do that and it'll break it worse if they did, but they can't blame the Democrats since they control the entire government now.

My dad was talking to me about this on Thanksgiving. Obamacare actually does have problems that need to be addressed, but Dems pretended it wasn't a thing. Granted, yes they did actually have tactical reasons for doing this (Republican-led states blocking Medicare expansion then letting people blame the Dems when premiums go up, the ACA having fixable problems but the GOP in Congress refusing to ever cooperate for any reason, etc.). That political dynamic is flipped now. Republicans are talking about keeping the parts everyone likes (the parts that cost money) and scrapping everything else (the part that pays for the parts everyone likes). They are realizing they can't really do that and it'll break it worse if they did, but they can't blame the Democrats since they control the entire government now.

 

I don't think they pretended it wasn't a thing, they did not have votes to improve it and the opposition was talking about complete repeal so they had to defend it on the merits.

 

Their complete cowardice in defending it though was embarrassing as now we finally get the tales of who it helped after years of just unopposed republicanthink that it was a disaster.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obamacare-report...-173051792.html

 

ObamaCare, it turns out...is working much better than most people perceived (or were lead to believe) and is projected to save $2.6 trillion over a ten year period now. 13% cost savings, etc.

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/14/opinions/wha...aimo/index.html

What tech execs SHOULD tell Trump

 

 

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/michael-moor...-172111956.html

Michael Moore..."Trump's gonna get us all killed"

Edited December 14, 20169 yr by caulfield12

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...before-election

 

Isn't this essentially accusing Trump of treason?

What's going to be really interesting is if an even more damning report on the hacks comes out before Obama leaves office.

 

On one hand, it could add to the further troubles already going on with the transfer of power, de-legitimizing Trump and causing him to act even more erratically and confrontational.

 

On the other, can Obama really afford to "just let it go" when someone like this is unprecedented, at least going back to Watergate, and the Constitution sure never conceived of defending against cyberattacks/foreign direct intervention into US elections (to steer them to a specific outcome more favorable to Russia).

Edited December 15, 20169 yr by caulfield12

What's going to be really interesting is if an even more damning report on the hacks comes out before Obama leaves office.

 

On one hand, it could add to the further troubles already going on with the transfer of power, de-legitimizing Trump and causing him to act even more erratically and confrontational.

 

On the other, can Obama really afford to "just let it go" when someone like this is unprecedented, at least going back to Watergate, and the Constitution sure never conceived of defending against cyberattacks/foreign direct intervention into US elections (to steer them to a specific outcome more favorable to Russia).

1. There will be more that comes out.

2. The Republicans in Congress have already proven they will not care. Mitch McConnell was willing to look the other way during the election. They are already refusing to investigate despite 5 years of "Benghazi!" that conveniently ended this month. Rich people will not have to pay for healthcare for poor people and that is far more important.

3. It won't matter if he's "Delegimized", the GOP will be fully in power and the country is built around the assumption that's the way things should be.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-roo...before-election

 

Isn't this essentially accusing Trump of treason?

 

Meh, just light treason.

So today was the big tech meet-up with Trump. Facebook, Telsa, Apple, IBM...etc

 

Twitter was invited....then bounced because Twitter wouldn't create a #CrookedHillary hashflag during the campaign.

 

The President elect is a 6 year old, in case you didn't know.

 

They denied it, said their meeting room table wasn't large enough.

What's going to be really interesting is if an even more damning report on the hacks comes out before Obama leaves office.

 

On one hand, it could add to the further troubles already going on with the transfer of power, de-legitimizing Trump and causing him to act even more erratically and confrontational.

 

On the other, can Obama really afford to "just let it go" when someone like this is unprecedented, at least going back to Watergate, and the Constitution sure never conceived of defending against cyberattacks/foreign direct intervention into US elections (to steer them to a specific outcome more favorable to Russia).

 

The NYT times article already said this is exactly what the Obama admin did.

The NYT times article already said this is exactly what the Obama admin did.

 

But didn't they JUST ask for a new/updated report that's supposed to come out before January 20th?

 

I did read that NY Times article. Between Comey and the Obama administration actions, it's easy to see why the Clintons will be pretty bitter for the remainder of their lives.

 

As an aside, it's got to be jarring for all those aides like Huma Abedin to go from the top of the world to wondering what they are going to do for the rest of their lives, although I'd guess the Clintons will give here a role in the foundation's work, something. A number of long-time trusted aides like Neera Tanden were hung out to dry by wikileaks/Russian hacks of DNC/Podesta. God knows what Anthony Weiner can do...he should probably move out of NY or to another country and reinvent himself.

 

http://theweek.com/speedreads/667301/clint...abedin-election

Guess Ms. Abedin will do fine. Not sure why she's being blamed more than Robbie Mook, campaign manager.

Edited December 15, 20169 yr by caulfield12