Author Topic: 2024  (Read 56016 times)

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1151 on: February 04, 2024, 10:08:57 PM »
"Wasn't she busted for an extramarital affair recently?"
With Corey Lewandowski?

-------------------------------

Reportedly, allegedly, anonymous sources...

If true, that's really stupid.  She seems very ambitious and this would kill it. Intact family and raising her children is her proudest accomplishment. Known cheater does not balance the ticket with Trump.

If false, this is a really really mean hit piece:. Left wing sites all picked up on it but why is "American Greatness" the source?

https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/28/kristi-noem-shows-why-republicans-cant-have-nice-things/

« Last Edit: February 05, 2024, 05:57:45 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
Re: 2024, Biden wins 96-2 in South Carolina
« Reply #1152 on: February 04, 2024, 10:54:04 PM »
Congratulations to slow, old Joe!  In the first in the nation (really the second in the nation) primary, Biden defeated his two rivals by 96%-2%-2%.  That's gotta feel great!

That's 20 points better than Putin's last reelection race:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Russian_presidential_election

Biden's win is closer to Saddam Hussein's 1995 win with 99.96%:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Iraqi_presidential_referendum

Unbelievable.

O great one, how did you do it?

See BBG post of Matt Taibi.  The key in all 3 cases is keeping opponents off the ballot and keeping voters from voting for alternatives.

Does anyone believe Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar and Pete Buttigieg no longer want to be President, or don't believe they can match wits with Slow Joe and his record?

Democracy for the undemocratic.  And like with Trump, I don't recall seeing Biden debate his challengers - because no one is worthy of being on the stage with him.

Whose job is it to pressure the incumbent and front runner to face his challengers?  The pathetic media and voting public.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile
Fani, the Flame, & the Fallout
« Reply #1153 on: February 06, 2024, 10:01:58 AM »
One would be hard pressed to imagine a more thorough attempt at self-immolation:

FaniGate and the American Way of Scandal

By Charles Lipson - RCP ContributorFebruary 06, 2024

To qualify as a first-rate American political scandal, the escapade should include three juicy elements: sex, money, and the abuse of power.

Fani Willis and Nathan Wade hit the trifecta.

Willis is the District Attorney for Fulton County (Atlanta), Georgia. Her position and use of it against Donald Trump is the power dimension of the story. Willis brought a major criminal case against Trump and multiple associates for attempting to meddle with the state’s vote count in 2020 and the determination of its electors. That case put Willis in the national spotlight, where she is wilting.

The money dimension is intertwined with Willis’ power. She used her wide-ranging authority to hire her dear, dear friend and former mentor, Nathan Wade, to prosecute the case. Her office is paying him generously with taxpayer money.

Willis’ belated admission that she and Wade have a “personal relationship” (wink, wink, nod, nod) raises two insurmountable problems for the prosecutor. The first is that Willis not only hired her friend, but he then seems to have returned the favor by booking lavish vacations for the two of them. (Willis claims, somewhat dubiously, that she split the costs with him.) The second problem is that Willis chose a prosecutor who has zero experience handling complex criminal cases like the one against Trump and his co-defendants. Appointing Wade introduced obvious questions about cronyism.

Most of Nathan Wade’s legal experience has come not as a criminal lawyer but as a municipal judge dealing with speeding tickets and fender benders. Fani Willis could have picked a more experienced criminal attorney by throwing a dart at the membership list of the Georgia State Bar Association.

Instead of throwing that dart, Willis put her “friend” in charge of a complicated, high-profile RICO case (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) that includes the former president of the United States. It’s a wonderful opportunity for Wade to learn on the job – and get paid as he learns.

And he’s been paid very handsomely. Atlanta’s taxpayers have forked over more than $650,000 to his law firm. That sum dwarfs the DA’s payments to the two other experts she hired, one of them a RICO expert. Together, they have received less than $100,000.

The third leg of any first-rate American scandal is S-E-X. Once again, Fani Willis does not disappoint. After she hired her bosom buddy, Nathan, they took an ocean cruise and flew together to the West Coast, all while Wade was still married.

Wade and Willis have been asked repeatedly if they have an amorous association. Until a few days ago, they refused to say anything. Finally, Willis grudgingly admitted the obvious. Well, sort of. She said she and Wade had a “personal relationship,” but she also filed a document with the Georgia Superior Court saying the “salacious” allegations about her and Willis were without “merit.” That’s a classic “non-denial denial.” The old Nixon campaign crowd would be proud.

We learned about the salacious allegations because of Nathan Wade’s nasty divorce from his wife of 26 years. Joycelyn and Nathan Wade have been separated, but she is none too happy with his dalliance, her public humiliation, and the alleged diversion of marital income to pay for Nathan’s trips. She claimed her estranged husband left her nearly penniless while he was spending lavishly and hiding their joint income. To support her claims, Mrs. Wade has publicly disclosed credit card statements that include line items for her husband’s pleasure jaunts with the DA. Neither Wade nor Willis has denied those trips together.

Joycelyn’s exposure of her husband and his paramour was assisted by one of Trump’s RICO co-defendants, Mike Roman, and his attorney, Ashleigh Merchant. Their aims are obvious. They want to expose the prosecution as corrupt, remove Willis and her office from the case, delay the trial, and either get the case thrown out or moved to a friendlier venue than Atlanta. (Wade has some additional troubles because of his bills to Willis’ office. Roman’s attorney claims Wade billed the DA for 24 hours work on a single day in November 2021. He also seems to have begun his work and billing before he was authorized to do so.)

The risks to Willis and Wade mounted when the judge in the divorce case scheduled a session to question them about their relationship, their joint expenditures, and Nathan’s income. To avoid that unpleasantness, Wade reached a preliminary, last-minute settlement with his wife.

The escape from hard questions may only be temporary, however. The judge in the RICO case has set a hearing for Feb. 15 to deal with two related issues. Should Wade, Willis, and Willis’ law firm be thrown off the case for misconduct (or its appearance)? Does their behavior warrant dismissing the case entirely? Roman’s attorney has subpoenaed Wade, Willis, and multiple members of the DA’s office to testify in that hearing.

Although the hearing was prompted by Roman’s attorney, the political controversy revolves around his co-defendant, Donald Trump. The Georgia case poses four problems for the former president. The first is its possible impact on voters in November. Trump is being charged with a grave crime against a constitutional republic: trying to overturn a democratic election. Second, the case forces Trump to devote time and money to defending himself in court when he needs to be devoting it to campaigning. Third, if the RICO case continues, as seems likely, Trump could be incriminated by his co-defendants, some of whom have already pled guilty. They have incentives to lessen their sentences by providing information against Trump, if they have any.

Finally, because the case is being prosecuted in state court, a conviction cannot be erased by a presidential pardon, should Trump retake the White House. And Fani Willis has all but said that a conviction would mean prison time for the former president. Even the Georgia governor, a Republican, cannot help. Only a state board has the power to pardon, and then only after a felon has been convicted and served five years. Preemptive pardons are not allowed. (The law was enacted in the 1930s, when the governor was caught in a cash-for-pardons scheme.) As you can imagine, the state legislature is now under enormous pressure to change that law.

Meanwhile, the legislature is actively pursuing Fani Willis. The state Senate has reestablished a committee to review her conduct, while the state House is considering impeachment hearings. The state bar could also undertake an investigation.

Willis is also vulnerable to felony charges for public corruption, thanks to her hiring Wade and traveling on vacation with him. Willis says she and Wade each paid for themselves. But even if that’s true, Wade only had the money to afford those trips because Willis had showered him with taxpayer funds. She needs to explain why she hired an attorney with no RICO experience to try the most important case ever brought by a Fulton County District Attorney.

Removing Wade and Willis from the case wouldn’t necessarily end it, but it would certainly delay a trial for months as a new prosecutorial team mastered its brief. Since the new team would likely come from a different county, the case would be moved outside the Atlanta area.

What could kill the case entirely are two other misadventures by Willis and her office.

The first  was Willis’ recent rousing speech to black churchgoers. Most of it was predictable and self-serving. The DA said she had done nothing wrong, recited deceptive dollar amounts regarding her payments to outside attorneys, and avoided any mention of her relationship with Nathan Wade. What she did say, however, raises serious difficulties for a fair trial. The attacks on her and Wade, she clearly implied, were based entirely on their race. She pointed out that Wade was the only black among the three outside lawyers she hired. Yet, astoundingly, this black man was the only one being attacked. What other explanation could there be besides racism? She explicitly denied she was “playing the race card” even as she did so, making an impassioned speech all about the racial victimhood that she, Nathan Wade, and her audience experienced.

That speech, like so much of Fani Willis’ behavior, was a Mount Everest of bad judgment. First of all, it defied common sense. Nathan Wade was being scrutinized because he was paid far more than the other attorneys, has no expertise in the relevant legal field, and is apparently sleeping with the woman who hired him. It also opened the door for Trump and his co-defendants to assert that inflammatory racial rhetoric had poisoned the jury pool locally, and perhaps statewide. Defense attorneys could also charge Willis with professional misconduct and petition the courts to transfer the case out of Atlanta on that basis alone. Virtually any other Georgia jurisdiction would be more favorable to Trump and his allies.

The second blunder is equally troubling. Nathan Wade traveled to Washington and billed Willis’ office for eight hours of meetings at the White House. For a local prosecutor to meet privately with Biden aides while prosecuting Biden’s principal political opponent is inexcusable. It certainly gives the appearance of injecting partisan political calculations into what should be unbiased, nonpartisan justice. The American people need to know exactly who attended those meetings, what was said, and whether there were other communications. All that information should be disclosed fully, under oath.

The Biden White House and Fani Willis have a lot at stake here. They have always claimed their prosecutions were entirely free of political taint. It is mere chance, they say, that it took three years to bring the various cases against Trump and that they are culminating as the election approaches. The Department of Justice has repeatedly said the same thing about the other cases against Trump.

That’s the only thing they could say. Acknowledging any political interference would:

Fatally undermine the cases against Trump.
Boost the former president politically.
Damage an already-beleaguered Biden administration.
Erode faith in the Department of Justice.
Violate our nation’s constitutional protections against judicial bias and political prosecutions.
The public is right to be skeptical of their denials. To resolve those doubts, Nathan Wade should testify, under oath, about his meetings at the Biden White House. Did he or Fani Willis hold any other discussions with the White House or Department of Justice, perhaps by phone or email?

You can bet Wade and Willis won’t testify voluntarily. They will claim it would improperly interfere with their prosecution. The Biden administration will undoubtedly resist any effort to pry into their communications.

A cover-up would be inexcusable, whether it is by Willis or the White House. The issue here is fundamental for the unbiased, apolitical administration of justice and for public confidence in that system.

As these questions pile up and the stench ripens, we can see three familiar dimensions of a good, old-fashioned American political scandal: sex, money, and the abuse of power, all exploding during an election year. Get out your popcorn and prepare to wallow in FaniGate.

Charles Lipson is the Peter B. Ritzma Professor of Political Science Emeritus at the University of Chicago, where he founded the Program on International Politics, Economics, and Security. He can be reached at charles.lipson@gmail.com.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2024/02/06/fanigate_and_the_american_way_of_scandal_150439.html?fbclid=IwAR3Is2ALNoBqQgPlUg8NyLt0vGZ6vtOD8fkxd6jpeKoRkP69FGUtR8wYEBs

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile
New NBC Poll Shows Areas of Significant Biden Weakness
« Reply #1154 on: February 06, 2024, 11:07:39 AM »
2nd post. Some specific aspects of this poll is likely inspiring heartburn in Biden circles:

https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2024/02/06/shocking-nbc-polls-shows-why-trump-is-now-expanding-the-map-n4926160

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile
The Donald has Your “Detrimental” Right Here
« Reply #1156 on: February 06, 2024, 08:34:11 PM »

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1474
    • View Profile
Nikki Haley: Second to “None”
« Reply #1157 on: February 06, 2024, 09:54:00 PM »
2nd Post. Haley comes in second in Nevada vote even though Trump WAS NOT on the ballot:

Haley loses to 'none of these candidates' in Nevada GOP primary
The Hill News / by Julia Mueller / February 07, 2024 at 12:12AM

A new state law required a presidential preference primary in Nevada, but the state GOP charged ahead with its long-standing caucus system anyway.

Nikki Haley was projected to lose Nevada’s state-run Republican presidential preference primary, according to Decision Desk HQ, a stunning development that comes despite former President Trump's name not being on the ballot.

Voters were given a choice on the ballot to select a box that said “none of these candidates,” though they couldn't write in a name. That option was projected to win.

The former South Carolina governor was projected to come in second.


No delegates were at stake in Tuesday's primary. Trump's name wasn't on the ballot because he will be taking part in Nevada's GOP-run caucus on Thursday instead. The caucus will award all of the state's 26 delegates to the winner, who is expected to be the former president.

Still, the fact that Haley lost is a major embarrassment for the candidate, who has argued she is the better general election candidate to square off against President Biden, the likely Democratic nominee, but who has struggled to chip away at Trump's support among the Republican base.

A new state law required a presidential preference primary in Nevada, but the state GOP charged ahead with its long-standing caucus system anyway. After opting to take part in the primary, Haley was barred from participating in the caucus.

“Your primary vote doesn’t mean anything. It’s your caucus vote,” Trump told supporters in Las Vegas last month.

The primary-caucus clash has stoked confusion in the Silver State. Though candidates couldn’t participate in both events, election officials have said that registered Republicans can vote in both.

Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo (R) told the Nevada Independent before the votes that he planned to cast a ballot in both races, siding with Trump in the caucuses and voting for the “none” option in the primary.

The “none” option is required on the state-run ballots.

Trump won both Iowa and New Hampshire last month, and he’s polling well ahead of Haley in South Carolina, Haley’s home state and the next state to vote in the Republican lineup with its GOP primary on Feb. 24.

Biden was projected to win Nevada's Democratic primary, which will award delegates, earlier on Tuesday night.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1158 on: February 06, 2024, 10:02:01 PM »
Nikki disappointed me a lot lately

especially with recent opinions on the immigration scam

She could not call it what it was.

She tries way too hard splitting hairs
instead on taking firm conservative positions

I have lost all interest in her.
Time to drop out.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2024, 06:05:31 AM by Crafty_Dog »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Rhonda out
« Reply #1159 on: February 06, 2024, 10:17:10 PM »
the good news McDaniel out as head of DNC

I wonder if Jason Miller would fit the job?

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
SC: Trump 68, Haley 31
« Reply #1160 on: February 07, 2024, 07:57:42 PM »
Morning Consult: SC: Trump 68, Haley 31

Down 37 points in her home state. Doesn't look good for the challenger.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2024, 05:29:25 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Hillary
« Reply #1161 on: February 10, 2024, 01:25:28 PM »
talks to people in the WH "all the time"   :-o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kwb5Lfh51JA

Hill :  I am still here to serve my country if needed.....  :wink:

I can't find the Clinton thread so put here.
too many threads
and the search button not helpful

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1162 on: February 10, 2024, 01:57:32 PM »
Here is fine for that.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1163 on: February 10, 2024, 04:15:40 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
2024 betting odds, am I missing something?
« Reply #1164 on: February 11, 2024, 10:22:34 AM »
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/betting-odds/2024/president/

The news is that Joe Biden the incumbent president is so low, a one in four chance of winning? Trump leading but well under 50% odds.

What surprises me is that Michelle Obama has three times the betting odds of winning the presidency as does vice president Kamala harris. And Obama has greater than 1/3 of Biden's odds who appears to be both the incumbent and the nominee.

Am I missing something?

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1165 on: February 11, 2024, 10:28:10 AM »
If Michelle who I read hated to be First Lady
were to run I can only imagine she would be as protected as Joe.
Only prewritten speeches, rigged interviews, no debates.
Just an immediate coronation.

I suspect she would creamed if really challenged or expected to think and speak on her feet.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1167 on: February 12, 2024, 05:21:50 AM »
Not exactly 2024, but a sound response to the criticisms of Trump on NATO:

NATO appears to be less worried about Trump's remarks than the Dems and the Trump haters. Here is what was said by the head of NATO. "The leader of NATO said he’s not concerned about the U.S. pulling out of the alliance even if former President Donald Trump wins reelection in November.

“I’m confident that the United States will remain a staunch ally” no matter who wins, Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in an interview Wednesday during his dayslong visit to Washington.

The NATO chief is in town to make his pitch that supporting Ukraine and rearming NATO — issues that are inexorably intertwined — helps the U.S. in the Pacific and creates American jobs.

“I worked with former President Trump for the four years he was president,” Stoltenberg told POLITICO, when Trump repeatedly threatened to leave the alliance as he thundered about NATO allies failing to keep up with defense spending pledges.

The NATO chief also pointed to the traditional bipartisan support for NATO in Congress, something he said he witnessed on Tuesday while meeting with Republican and Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Stoltenberg also noted that Trump’s criticism of NATO wasn’t really aimed at the alliance, but at individual countries that have failed to live up to the 2014 pledge to spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense by 2024. “It’s important to listen,” he said, because the criticism from Trump “is not a criticism of NATO not investing enough in NATO.”https://www.politico.com/.../nato-chief-trump-ukraine...

In 2014, three Allies spent 2% of GDP or more on defence; this increased to seven Allies in 2022. Moreover, 2022 was the eighth consecutive year of rising defense spending across European Allies and Canada, amounting to a rise of 2.2% in real terms compared to 2021. One last point, NATO nations still aren't paying their fair share, but they are doing better. Trump's statement which basically pushed back on the idea of "Let Mikey do it." And scared a few nations into waking up. Today more nations are expanding their spending on defense, which was all that Trump wanted. For all of you who believe that Trump will just leave NATO. He can't it is a treaty, and it take a vote of congress to remove ourselves from a treaty....
=====================

The WSJ, never a fan of Trump, sees it differently:

Donald Trump says many provocative things, often intentionally, to rile up opponents and dominate the airwaves. But his comments Saturday that he once told the leader of a NATO ally that he’d invite Vladimir Putin to invade is the reason many Americans won’t vote for him again even against a mentally declining President Biden.

OPINION: POTOMAC WATCH
WSJ Opinion Potomac Watch
The Report on Biden's Classified Document Stash


SUBSCRIBE
Explore Audio Center
Riffing at a rally in South Carolina, Mr. Trump recalled a conversation with an unnamed head of state about how he’d respond if a NATO member that hadn’t spent enough on defense was attacked by Russia. “One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Mr. Trump told the crowd.

“‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” the former President said he replied. ‘“No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”

A charitable interpretation is that this is an extreme version of his boasts that he forced NATO countries in Europe to increase defense spending. There’s no doubt he coaxed more money from allies in his first term.

But this isn’t 2020 any more. Russia has invaded Ukraine, bombed its cities and civilians, mused about using nuclear weapons, and threatened Finland and Sweden for seeking to join NATO. Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty pledges every member of the alliance to aid another treaty member if attacked. The only time it has been invoked was after the 9/11 attacks on America.

Deterrence depends on a combination of force and the will to use it. Mr. Trump’s boasts that he wouldn’t aid an ally will sow doubt in the minds of our allies and might encourage Mr. Putin to think he could get away with another invasion. Mr. Putin has all but said that the Baltic states are rightfully Russia’s.

Mr. Trump’s comments drew rebukes from several governments, and even the typically diplomatic NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg. “Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk,” Mr. Stoltenberg said. “I expect that regardless of who wins the presidential election the U.S. will remain a strong and committed NATO Ally.”

Mr. Trump’s riff also comes in the context of his lobbying against more U.S. military aid for Ukraine. He boasts about his admiration for Mr. Putin, and his bromance with the dictator during their 2018 Helsinki summit was a low point of his Presidency. Mr. Trump now says he’ll end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours, even before he’s inaugurated. The only way to do that is to deny Ukraine more weapons and tell President Volodymyr Zelensky to give Mr. Putin what he wants. The word for that isn’t peace; it’s appeasement.

The U.S. should be having an election debate over the growing dangers to U.S. security and how to counter them. Instead we have an incumbent who has presided over the collapse of U.S. deterrence, and a GOP front-runner who dotes on dictators. No wonder Mr. Putin is looking so confident these days.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2024, 05:43:50 AM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
Re: 2024 - NATO
« Reply #1168 on: February 12, 2024, 06:56:45 AM »
If you are a member state of Nato, your agreement is that you will spend 2% on defense, which collectively adds up to deterrence, and many or most member states are not doing that. Trump is saying he will not defend states that do not pay in their share. From my own years studying business law I ask, which party is not living up to their commitment in this scenario? Which side is letting down the deterrence of the group?

https://www.forces.net/news/world/nato-which-countries-pay-their-share-defence

Let's try it a different way. You don't pay your premium in the years leading up to the fire. will the insurance company be there for you? And vice versa, if you want them to be there for you, what is it that you need to do on your part, Keep up your side of the bargain.

Is a member state in name only a member state?

For all we heard about this last time around, the result of Trump's so-called reckless talk was that more and more member states started paying in more, and enemies attacked less during his time.

In our tenth year of having Trump on the national US Presidential stage, you would think serious people would separate Trump's words from his actions a little better.

He doesn't have to pull us out of NATO.  He is Commander in Chief.  If Belgium is attacked, he can send in roughly the number of troops Belgium would have sent in to help us (and it rounds to zero).

Secondly, what is the worry now that Tucker let Putin show us what a warm, lovable, rationally acting fuzzball he really is?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2024, 07:22:06 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Biden quotes
« Reply #1170 on: February 13, 2024, 03:55:01 PM »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
sobering reminder how Trump is a very mixed bag
« Reply #1171 on: February 14, 2024, 06:44:25 AM »
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/republicans-huge-underperformance-in-oklahoma-raises-alarm-bells/ar-BB1igP0q?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=1a3ad2e3ad624cc6b25dd8e717e92790&ei=20

He is still too busy not controlling his trolls of the LEFT instead of sounding Presidential and winning over the extra few percent he needs.

He is winning : BUT NOT BY A LOT!

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Trump: It is her fault ! Pilip
« Reply #1172 on: February 14, 2024, 09:25:49 AM »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1173 on: February 14, 2024, 01:29:00 PM »


"Pilip, a 47-year-old Nassau County legislator — and a registered Democrat who ran on the Republican line — earned 46.1% of the votes behind Suozzi’s 53.8% with 93% of ballots tallied Tuesday night."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Well she is an Ethopian Jew
« Reply #1174 on: February 14, 2024, 03:04:50 PM »
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazi_Melesa_Pilip

I admit I don't know her but this is most likely but bothered Trump:

Donald Trump
Regarding the multiple indictments facing Donald Trump, Pilip has said: "Trump has to go through his process" and "No one's above the law. We have great candidates right now. Trump is one of them. We'll wait and see. Whoever the nominee is, we'll support him all the way."[57][58]


She does not sound polished.  Was she a manchurian candidate altogether. I would think not since the Dems already had a good candidate. 

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Fanni Willis
« Reply #1175 on: February 15, 2024, 08:08:50 AM »
Good podcast from Kelly Meghan yesterday with 3 people on
including Andrew McCarthy and Michael Knowles.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bombshell-new-details-on-star-crossed-lovers-fani-willis/id1532976305?i=1000645363387

Main point all agree she will likely have to step down today based on Judge decision.
She and her boyfriend may face ethics charges and even criminal charges.

Ironically, what they are alleged to have done is at it's root similar to the RICO charges they are accusing Trump and ~ 18 others of!

Would the case against Trump have to be dropped if she is taken off it.  They say that a new prosecutor would have to be appointed by the Governor to re assess it and then take it up - or decline it!
The case is flimsy to start with so there is a chance it could all be dropped though they thought unlikely.
If I understood the explanation right.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1176 on: February 15, 2024, 08:37:05 AM »
The identity boxes checked off, but the little I heard of Pilip left me underwhelmed.
 

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Lara Trump as co chair RNC/ Trump to control ALL the RNC money
« Reply #1177 on: February 16, 2024, 04:15:43 AM »
First the WP article about McDaniel and Trump:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/inside-trump-s-ouster-of-ronna-mcdaniel-as-rnc-chair/ar-BB1in3mS

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_Trump

I question this part from Wikipedia "

"RNC co-chair campaign
On February 12, 2024, Lara Trump was endorsed by Donald Trump for the Republican National Committee's co-chair, alongside North Carolina Republican Party leader Michael Whatley for chair.[26][27] Within a week, she declared that if she were to become co-chair, then "every single penny will go to the number one and the only job of the RNC — that is electing Donald J. Trump as president of the United States and saving this country."[28]"

What about Congressional and Senatorial seats?

Obviously her credentials other then being a Trump spokesperson are unclear for this role.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1178 on: February 16, 2024, 07:45:58 AM »
Working from memory:  Back in 1972 my father was the Chair for the State of PA of Dems for Nixon.  In that context he met with Nixon's campaign manager John Connally (former Gov. of TX, was in the car with JFK, former Senator, Secretary of the Treasury)

I remember him telling me "These people are ruthless AND they don't give a fuck about anyone down ticket."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1179 on: February 16, 2024, 08:38:18 AM »
"I remember him telling me "These people are ruthless AND they don't give a fuck about anyone down ticket."

I would guess if a candidate kisses the ring long and hard enough he might get a visit from his highness to the state for a rally and at the rally a 10 second shout out.

Beyond that nothing.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Barr would support Trump in the end
« Reply #1180 on: February 18, 2024, 03:55:25 AM »
https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2024/02/17/bill-barrs-2024-endorsement-reflects-why-trump-is-favored-to-win-n4926527

Pay walled but somewhere I got to read it and the surprise is Barr would vote Trump over Biden.




Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1181 on: February 18, 2024, 07:21:25 AM »
Glad to see it.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
A thoughtful Dem strategy articulated
« Reply #1182 on: February 20, 2024, 09:15:14 AM »


Your questions, answered.
Q: Did you listen to Ezra Klein's recent take on Biden stepping down? What are your thoughts on it?

— John from Bogotá, Colombia

Tangle: I did. And I found it incredibly persuasive.

For those of you who missed it, Klein made the case in a 25-minute podcast monologue that President Biden should step aside and allow the Democratic party to tap his replacement. You can go read or listen to it here. He starts by making the case that Biden has been a good president and that everyone he speaks to who is close to Biden says he is genuinely running the show. I'm not going to get into those arguments here, but it’s what Klein says next that is the most interesting:

Biden is very clearly not the same man he was four years ago, and although he might be able to serve as president, he does not appear to be up for campaigning for president.
Trump is winning right now, and Democrats need an injection of something new to turn the tables.
It is not too late to change course.
Biden needs to realize that his legacy is on the line, and it’d be better for him to concede that it should be someone else and step down now.
Once he does that, Democrats could use the convention to pick a nominee, which would be an incredible spectacle and media bonanza that'd be good for the party.
There is a ton of talent on the Democratic bench behind Biden.
After days of speeches and jockeying for attention, whoever came out as the nominee wouldn't be Biden or Trump, and Democrats could say they listened to the country, and this candidate would immediately be at an advantage.
I think all of this is right. I actually think it is a pretty brilliant reframing of the choices Democrats have. Yes, it is in some ways "anti-democratic" because in this scenario the primaries (where Biden is destroying the other candidates) would be over and the party’s delegates would be the ones choosing. But that blame would mostly fall to Biden for taking so long to step down. And if or when he does, the party has only one option, which is taking it to the convention. On the upside, the delegates picking the next candidate would be representatives from each state, casting votes based on what they hear and see from voters and the candidates. It would have been better to have had a genuinely open primary, but putting alternatives forward at the convention is better than doing nothing at all.

I also think the media spectacle — stealing the attention from Trump and doing something a bit radical to energize the Democratic base — would be very smart. It would be an absolute media blowout, with live speeches from Democrats nationally televised for days on end culminating with a massive reveal of the nominee, followed by all the earned media that nominee would get heading into November. Even better for Democrats is that it'd take weeks or months for the Republican party to gather the opposition research and framing to take the candidate down a notch.

Could it backfire? Definitely, and Klein acknowledges that. But I still think it’s a better option for the party than forcing a second Biden term on unenthusiastic Democratic voters, many of whom will only be casting a ballot to stop Trump.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17984
    • View Profile
Re: A thoughtful Dem strategy articulated
« Reply #1183 on: February 20, 2024, 11:51:43 AM »
Ezra Klein is right about Biden weakness and fooling himself about party and policy strength otherwise, IMHO.  Nate Silver just made that similar point as well.  If Biden can't campaign energetically, it may not matter how he can govern.

From the above:

Klein: "...[Biden] step down now.
Once he does that, Democrats could use the convention to pick a nominee, which would be an incredible spectacle and media bonanza that'd be good for the party."


[Doug]  "incredible spectacle"?  Like how House Republicans looked picking a leader? It isn't going to be a unifying event.

Small problem.  "The convention" is not the people picking anything, and this party, always stressing "democracy" already has a problem with being top down, not 'of the people', in my view.

Klein: "There is a ton of talent on the Democratic bench behind Biden."

[Doug]  What??!!  Newsom is polling way worse than Biden.  Harris is polling worse than Biden.  And look at the 8 stooges on the stage in 2020 (or however many there were).  Is Corey Booker going to step in unvetted? Pete Buttigieg? Amy Klobuchar?  Kamala Harris, already mentioned. Didn't win a single state, not even a delegate.  The Cherokee lady, Elizabeth Warren (75)? Bernie Sanders (83)? The only one who helped herself in the debates was the lady from Hawaii, and didn't she leave the party?

Who am I missing, Hillary Clinton (77)? Bloomberg (82)?  Adam Schiff??

Hakeem Jeffries?  Chuck Schumer?  Who are these leaders with a ton of talent?  They put them in charge of House and Senate. Go ahead, put them on the national ticket for and up or down vote.

Trying to think of a Dem Governor whose state is not a mess, Polis from Colorado?  Again unvetted, not nationally known.  His state is trending down, not up. Another sanctuary city/state being overrun by Dem caused human catastrophes:
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2024/01/31/denver-sanctuary-city-n2634339

Look at their 'rules'.  The running mate has to be a black woman who can never be elevated to President? And that's how we chase the white female suburban voter, much less the black vote.  What a mess.

Are they really going to elevate Michelle Obama who clearly doesn't want it, ahead of Kamala Harris who did nothing wrong (in their view)?  Switch out without having a single voter cast a single vote?  And that's good for the party?  Because she's popular - for staying out of politics and governing.  What's her qualification, better school lunches?

The last strategy I heard (on liberal radio) is elect him first, then step down.  That's still dishonest and undemocratic. But who cares.

No matter who they pick, they run on the Biden record and platform, right?  He's winning all the primaries.  There is no change course.  They think age is the problem - when nearly every major issue is polling against them.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2024, 12:03:19 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1184 on: February 20, 2024, 01:12:44 PM »
"incredible spectacle"


Major click bait for the Prog Pravdas to provide bread & circuses for the plebes until the insiders push Nancy's nephew across the finish line.  Once nominated he greases his way (remember how he foiled Hannity?) on a message of new, young, good looking, blah blah.  The plebes will have their excuse to vote against Bad Orange Man.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1185 on: February 20, 2024, 02:59:31 PM »
"Who am I missing, Hillary Clinton (77)? Bloomberg (82)?  Adam Schiff??"

possibly worth adding Gretchen Whitmer and Kathy Hochul to the list.

very deep bench I read  :roll:

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1186 on: February 20, 2024, 03:06:01 PM »
If the Ides of March take out the Obama's Marionette, then I'm thinking Bryll Cream takes out the Cackling Kommie with the help of his aunt.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 18066
    • View Profile
Trump floating names for VP
« Reply #1187 on: Today at 12:00:01 AM »
Tulsi Gabbard ?

Kristi Noem ?

I am not crazy about either but I don't know who would be good.
Too bad about Pence - he is / was ready to step up but of course that ended on 1/6th.

Pompeo seems the best to me.
He does not check boxes.  (personally I don't care but some do)
Maybe best saved as a SoS... though

Ted Cruz has the chops but not the appeal.

I don't know.

When Reagan picked H Bush he had a great resume then one time President who fell to Clinton.
Same for W picking Cheney though he got us into the Iraq war.
I don't know of anyone now really.

I only know I don't want a Republican version of Harris .......

Some of the names being bandied about do not inspire enough confidence in me.

For me the important thing is we have someone who is ready to step up and take command and keep us all safe and prosperous.
I don't want another Republican version of DEI.
Could Tulsi rise up? Kari Lake?  I am not saying they could not - just that I don't want to find out the hard way.











« Last Edit: Today at 12:08:05 AM by ccp »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 68566
    • View Profile
Re: 2024
« Reply #1188 on: Today at 03:12:21 AM »
Tulsi is cute when she was on Tucker, and for a former Dem has some things we like, but not even close to ready for this level.

Noem is cute and on the whole has been a good MAGA gov of a low population density relatively homogenous state, but I'm not sensing the fire in the belly needed to take on the Woken Dead Progs.

I suspect he is mentioning them as a way of giving them respect and to pander to the women's vote.

Cruz is a very good lawyer and a very good Senator but totally lacks the executive chops-- and would not serve well as a vote getter.

Trump is giving a lot of spotllight to Sen. Tim Scott.   Scott could be a good choice for adding oomph to the wedge that Trump is establishing for the black/POC vote.  Scott's relentless positive patriotism could be a really good counterweight.  His emotional IQ seems to be good.  At the moment my first choice.