The Trump Presidency

[Hawk]

Tom Cotton is digging in what should be an attainable 60-vote DACA compromise bill. He's standing in the way of substantive debate by playing the "amnesty for millions" card.

But fwiw, I think his "morality" is somewhat as an issue, considering that he's willing to go on the Sunday shows and bull**** about the WH meeting (undercutting his colleagues) when there is substantial desire on both sides to see something done. It speaks to his lack of good-faith desire to see something done.

We all know who tanked comprehensive reform last time. They'll do it again if they're given space to. If you care about substantive debate, Tom Cotton and the Freedom Caucus in the House aren't your friends.

Of course he's digging in.

He's posturing.

So is Durbin. And Pelosi and the rest.

But Cotton's bull**** somehow stinks the mostest, his position is inherently wrong, and something about the Freedom Caucus.

Alrighty then.

[Julio3000]

Of course he's digging in.

He's posturing.

So is Durbin. And Pelosi and the rest

But Cotton's bull**** somehow stinks the mostest, his position is inherently wrong, and something about the Freedom Caucus.

Alrighty then.

No ****.

JMO, but yeah, his type of bull**** stinks the most.

Why should we give a pass for saying ****ty things solely because "it's posturing?" If it's objectively untrue (and "amnesty for millions" is), it's ok to point THAT out, right?

[Hawk]

No ****.

JMO, but yeah, his type of bull**** stinks the most.

Why should we give a pass for saying ****ty things solely because "it's posturing?" If it's objectively untrue (and "amnesty for millions" is), it's ok to point THAT out, right?

It's not objectively untrue, or ****ty - it's to be determined, and that's why both sides are playing the extremities.

[Hawk]

I do find it predictably amusing that we're more comfortable meritlessly assailing Cotton's posture, but we're not OK challenging the pretense surrounding the "****hole" comments that Democrats are using in their own pearl clutching, race-baiting posture/charade.

[mqt]

How that'll "work out for them" in certain states would likely be how the voting would already go. Democrats are pretty ****ing united on DACA.

Edit: Accuracy and message notwithstanding.

[thethe]

How that'll "work out for them" in certain states would likely be how the voting would already go. Democrats are pretty ****ing united on DACA.

Edit: Accuracy and message notwithstanding.

There are swing voters in both parties pus independent's. Those are the people political parties fight over and shutting down the government for illegals will rub a lot of people the wrong way. Both dems and repubs

[mqt]

There are swing voters in both parties pus independent's. Those are the people political parties fight over and shutting down the government for illegals will rub a lot of people the wrong way. Both dems and repubs

Two things:

1) Support for the Dreamers is pretty high across the nation, so supporting them isn't necessarily a bad political move, regardless of one's opinions on the kids.

2) There's two sides to the coin. The Dems can say Cotton and his ilk are allowing a shutdown to happen simply because they won't do DACA legislation on its own.

[thethe]

Two things:

1) Support for the Dreamers is pretty high across the nation, so supporting them isn't necessarily a bad political move, regardless of one's opinions on the kids.

2) There's two sides to the coin. The Dems can say Cotton and his ilk are allowing a shutdown to happen simply because they won't do DACA legislation on its own.

The Dems will not come back to the table if Daca is a clean bill and everyone knows that.

[thethe]

http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public...eamers_program

Food for thought. I think the support for the dreamers is overstated.

[thethe]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nation-...ear-in-office/

So here is an example of why polls are intentionally fraudulent so that they may be used by the left to create a narrative. The numbers in this poll look awful for Trump. But, look into the details more.

Question 1: Which of these comes closest to your view of President Donald Trump?

a. I am a strong Trump supporter, period
b. I am a Trump supporter, but to keep my support, he has to deliver what I want
c. I am against Trump now, but could reconsider him if he does a good job
d. I am strongly against Trump, period

Who do they ask this question to? Lets see the split:

Men: 1,039
Women: 1,097

Thats good polling science. I believe women are more likely to vote than men nowadays so this should be presented this way. However, now it gets into the fraud part:

Democrats: 657 (34.34%)
Independents: 735 (38.44%)
Republicans: 520 (27.19%)

Total: 1912

Of course this is a recurring theme throughout the polling which includes the DACA questions. And this is how you get polls that say Hillary is going to win by 10 points and that an overwhelming percentage of Americans support DACA.

[thethe]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/12/trum...-13-years.html

Just standard economic growth we've been told.

[57Brave]

Scott Bixby
‏Verified account @scottbix
Jan 12

A president paying $130,000 in hush money to a porn star

weeks before an election would be an administration-collapsing,

party-decimating scandal at any other time in our nation’s history

but so would have about twenty other things that have happened

in 2018 so far so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Julio3000]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/nation-...ear-in-office/

So here is an example of why polls are intentionally fraudulent so that they may be used by the left to create a narrative. The numbers in this poll look awful for Trump. But, look into the details more.

Question 1: Which of these comes closest to your view of President Donald Trump?

a. I am a strong Trump supporter, period
b. I am a Trump supporter, but to keep my support, he has to deliver what I want
c. I am against Trump now, but could reconsider him if he does a good job
d. I am strongly against Trump, period

Who do they ask this question to? Lets see the split:

Men: 1,039
Women: 1,097

Thats good polling science. I believe women are more likely to vote than men nowadays so this should be presented this way. However, now it gets into the fraud part:

Democrats: 657 (34.34%)
Independents: 735 (38.44%)
Republicans: 520 (27.19%)

Total: 1912

Of course this is a recurring theme throughout the polling which includes the DACA questions. And this is how you get polls that say Hillary is going to win by 10 points and that an overwhelming percentage of Americans support DACA.

Not sure about the relative reliability of this poll, but it looks to me like it oversamples both parties relative to independents. The spread in party ID is pretty consistent with current polling on that issue.

[Julio3000]

It's not objectively untrue, or ****ty - it's to be determined, and that's why both sides are playing the extremities.

"Amnesty for millions" is a significant enough distortion in this context to be reasonably called objectively untrue.

[jpx7]

*insert personal attack on cotton's "morality" in lieu of contributing to substantive policy debate*

Shoes fitting, something something, bro.

[Julio3000]

I do find it predictably amusing that we're more comfortable meritlessly assailing Cotton's posture, but we're not OK challenging the pretense surrounding the "****hole" comments that Democrats are using in their own pearl clutching, race-baiting posture/charade.

No, I'd rather not play the game of calling Democrats out for posturing and gamesmanship while ignoring the rank nativism and outright racism that's in such evidence on the other side of the debate right now.

[jpx7]

I'll try to help make sure it works just fine in MT.

[jpx7]

I do find it predictably amusing that we're more comfortable meritlessly assailing Cotton's posture, but we're not OK challenging the pretense surrounding the "****hole" comments that Democrats are using in their own pearl clutching, race-baiting posture/charade.

The latter is much more viable than the former, so the former merits more assailing. Simple as that.

[thethe]

Not sure about the relative reliability of this poll, but it looks to me like it oversamples both parties relative to independents. The spread in party ID is pretty consistent with current polling on that issue.

Current polling on that issue? Are you using the results of shorty polling to explain this poll?

How can it be justified? You're assuming there are more dems than Rs?

[thethe]

I'll try to help make sure it works just fine in MT.

I know you will. Putting potential voters ahead of current voters for the sake of pushing your radical ideology on the masses.