Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
When you have time, can you expound on this some? I think you are a thoughtful person and am curious why you feel this way.
The Trump Presidency
- Thread starter The Tariff King
- Start date
When you have time, can you expound on this some? I think you are a thoughtful person and am curious why you feel this way.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/p...vania-secretary-of-state-voters-20171011.html
Pedro Cortes, Pennsylvania’s secretary of state, abruptly resigned from office Wednesday, three weeks after his agency came under criticism for a glitch that may have allowed thousands of ineligible immigrants statewide to vote.
....
As secretary of state, Cortes served as the state’s top election official. His departure comes a week after State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, chairman of the House State Government Committee, and 15 of his colleagues sent Cortes a letter “to express our dire concerns” about the disclosure three weeks ago that legal resident noncitizens in Pennsylvania had been offered the chance to register to vote while applying for or renewing drivers’ licenses at PennDot service centers.
....
The Department of State then said it had records of 1,160 canceled voter registrations listing ineligibility as a reason and said the issue was under review.
Schmidt’s office found documentation from 220, either through direct contact or via an attorney, canceling the voter registrations. Of those 220, 44 voted in one election and 46 voted in more than one election. All of the 317 registrations have been canceled.
Schmidt said his staff traced the problem for 168 of the 220 documented cases to PennDot centers, where they produced immigration documents to show they were in this country legally and eligible for a driver’s license.
Later in the process, the applicants were asked to check a box on an electronic kiosk if they also wanted to register to vote. That is part of “Motor Voter,” a federal law passed that has been in effect since 1995 to encourage voter registration.
Pedro Cortes, Pennsylvania’s secretary of state, abruptly resigned from office Wednesday, three weeks after his agency came under criticism for a glitch that may have allowed thousands of ineligible immigrants statewide to vote.
....
As secretary of state, Cortes served as the state’s top election official. His departure comes a week after State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, chairman of the House State Government Committee, and 15 of his colleagues sent Cortes a letter “to express our dire concerns” about the disclosure three weeks ago that legal resident noncitizens in Pennsylvania had been offered the chance to register to vote while applying for or renewing drivers’ licenses at PennDot service centers.
....
The Department of State then said it had records of 1,160 canceled voter registrations listing ineligibility as a reason and said the issue was under review.
Schmidt’s office found documentation from 220, either through direct contact or via an attorney, canceling the voter registrations. Of those 220, 44 voted in one election and 46 voted in more than one election. All of the 317 registrations have been canceled.
Schmidt said his staff traced the problem for 168 of the 220 documented cases to PennDot centers, where they produced immigration documents to show they were in this country legally and eligible for a driver’s license.
Later in the process, the applicants were asked to check a box on an electronic kiosk if they also wanted to register to vote. That is part of “Motor Voter,” a federal law passed that has been in effect since 1995 to encourage voter registration.
57Brave
Well-known member
I noted mid summer or so the prevalence of military in the White House and compared it to Nixon's final years.
A book I had read, can't remember title or author opined that Alexander Haig was no accident. The military the writer wrote took over the everyday operation of the White House as a safeguard against an unhinged President.
In the neither here nor there context that Watergate was in fact a military coup having more to do with a military operation the Indian Ocean that Nixon broke a deal/agreement with the Generals than a third rate burglary. Here nor there
Haig stayed on after Nixon resignation, replaced by Donald Rumsfeld in fact, and was later Sec of State for Reagan until Reagan was shot. Haig famously ran to microphones proclaiming he was in charge. When in fact VP George HW Bush took offense beginning the quick demise of Haig's stature.
Today we have General Kelly as Chief of Staff and General Mattis holding the traditionally civilian position of Sec of Defence.
Hmm
I think that post was centered around an article from Greenwald about this odd arrangement -- however, here we are with talk in high circles of invoking the 25th amendment
Holly O'ReillyVerified account @AynRandPaulRyan
GOP source says Kelly and Mattis discuss what to do if Trump lunges for the nuclear football.
Let that sink in.
A book I had read, can't remember title or author opined that Alexander Haig was no accident. The military the writer wrote took over the everyday operation of the White House as a safeguard against an unhinged President.
In the neither here nor there context that Watergate was in fact a military coup having more to do with a military operation the Indian Ocean that Nixon broke a deal/agreement with the Generals than a third rate burglary. Here nor there
Haig stayed on after Nixon resignation, replaced by Donald Rumsfeld in fact, and was later Sec of State for Reagan until Reagan was shot. Haig famously ran to microphones proclaiming he was in charge. When in fact VP George HW Bush took offense beginning the quick demise of Haig's stature.
Today we have General Kelly as Chief of Staff and General Mattis holding the traditionally civilian position of Sec of Defence.
Hmm
I think that post was centered around an article from Greenwald about this odd arrangement -- however, here we are with talk in high circles of invoking the 25th amendment
Holly O'ReillyVerified account @AynRandPaulRyan
GOP source says Kelly and Mattis discuss what to do if Trump lunges for the nuclear football.
Let that sink in.
Julio3000
<B>A Chip Off the Old Rock</B>
Others far more thoughtful than I have written about it, but I'll try. I'm going to string a few instances together and try to clarify my thoughts about it later.
Let's start with birtherism. Do you think that there was not a racist angle in trying to present the first black President as "the other," as something foreign (African, even) and illegitimate? How about demanding to see Obama's academic transcripts? What's the implication there? That he didn't truly earn his achievements--Columbia, Harvard Law Review, professorship--but was awarded them because of his race? How else are we to understand the sentiment that this man is not one of us, and has not truly earned his apparent achievements. If we were talking about Donald Trump, the answer would be family wealth and privilege. Since we're talking about Barack Obama, what's the only obvious answer?
So, next is Trump's presidential announcement and the prevalence of the border wall in his platform. So, his formulation is that Mexico is not sending "you," i.e. his hard-working, law-abiding white audience, but "murderers and rapists." Now, you can make a case for stricter immigration controls without being blatantly racist, but that's not the path that he chose. He cast it as an invasion of scary brown people across the Southern border, eliding the fact that that type of illegal immigration was on a downward trend, that immigrants as a whole commit fewer crimes than the population as a whole, and completely ignoring illegal immigration from Europe, visa overstays, etc. It was a message that was clearly calibrated to appeal to a certain segment of the population, and it was just about his only substantive bit of policy for the majority of his campaign. Look, I know who the immigration hardliners are in my community. The Venn diagram that plots them with racist cranks and neoconfederates is pretty much just a circle. Is this a coincidence?
The EO banning travel from overwhelmingly Muslim nations. Say what you want, but this is very much of a piece with the above. Fear of the non-white other.
How about his thoughts on the NFL protests? The players who choose to kneel in silent, non-violent protest are sons-of-bitches who should be fired. Does the fact that they are overwhelmingly black and his supporters are overwhelmingly white not rate a raised eyebrow at all?
Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, how about the fact that a hundred flavors of white nationalists, white supremacists, and those of that ilk went all in for Trump? Not for Ted Cruz. Not for Marco Rubio, not for John Kasich. For Donald Trump.
Trump has posted memes that originated on white supremacist bulletin boards. DJT Jr did so multiple times during the campaign. Do you think that was all purely accidental? Hell, I know you read the BuzzFeed piece about Milo and Breitbart... in light of that, is there any way to deny that those people were being intentionally courted? What's their central belief if not white grievance?
There have been numerous studies that show a higher level of support for Trump among people with retrograde attitudes towards race. At what point is it OK to just say that it is not a coincidence?
This specific one feels somewhat easy to explain...
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
It's almost as unlikely as the KKK endorsing Obama.......
White nationalists are going to vote Republican regardless of who the candidate is. Just like the extreme left will vote Democrat regardless of who the candidate is. White nationalists went hard for Trump because he is an anti establishment candidate. These same people would have gone all in for Ron Paul but that doesn't make Paul bad in any way.
White nationalists are going to vote Republican regardless of who the candidate is. Just like the extreme left will vote Democrat regardless of who the candidate is. White nationalists went hard for Trump because he is an anti establishment candidate. These same people would have gone all in for Ron Paul but that doesn't make Paul bad in any way.
Hmm. Didn’t the extreme left either vote for Jill Stein or Bernie voters sat out while some voted for trump?
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...nt-in-u-s-unexpectedly-surges-to-13-year-high
Consumer Sentiment in U.S. Unexpectedly Surges to 13-Year High
U.S. consumer sentiment unexpectedly surged to a 13-year high as Americans’ perceptions of the economy and their own finances rebounded following several major hurricanes, a University of Michigan survey showed Friday.
The jump in sentiment, which was greater than any analyst had projected, may reflect several trends: falling gasoline prices following a hurricane-related spike; repeated record highs for the stock market; a 16-year low in unemployment; and post-storm recovery efforts driving a rebound in economic growth.
The advance in the main gauge spanned age and income subgroups as well as partisan views, according to the report. Almost six out of every 10 consumers thought the economy had recently improved in early October, the university said.
Consumer Sentiment in U.S. Unexpectedly Surges to 13-Year High
U.S. consumer sentiment unexpectedly surged to a 13-year high as Americans’ perceptions of the economy and their own finances rebounded following several major hurricanes, a University of Michigan survey showed Friday.
The jump in sentiment, which was greater than any analyst had projected, may reflect several trends: falling gasoline prices following a hurricane-related spike; repeated record highs for the stock market; a 16-year low in unemployment; and post-storm recovery efforts driving a rebound in economic growth.
The advance in the main gauge spanned age and income subgroups as well as partisan views, according to the report. Almost six out of every 10 consumers thought the economy had recently improved in early October, the university said.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/13/us-stocks-earnings-season-wall-street.html
Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq hit record highs as Wall Street bets on a strong earnings season
U.S. stocks reached record highs on Friday as investors bet on another strong earnings season.
The S&P 500 rose 0.15 percent and hit an all-time intraday high, with information technology leading advancers. The Nasdaq composite also hit a record, advancing 0.3 percent. The Dow Jones industrial average traded 48 points higher, with American Express contributing the most to the gains.
"We've had three good quarters in a row for earnings, if you go back to the fourth quarter of 2016," said Ernie Cecilia, CIO at Bryn Mawr Trust. "Last quarter, we also saw an improvement in revenue growth as it moved ahead of its long-term trend, which is a positive."
Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq hit record highs as Wall Street bets on a strong earnings season
U.S. stocks reached record highs on Friday as investors bet on another strong earnings season.
The S&P 500 rose 0.15 percent and hit an all-time intraday high, with information technology leading advancers. The Nasdaq composite also hit a record, advancing 0.3 percent. The Dow Jones industrial average traded 48 points higher, with American Express contributing the most to the gains.
"We've had three good quarters in a row for earnings, if you go back to the fourth quarter of 2016," said Ernie Cecilia, CIO at Bryn Mawr Trust. "Last quarter, we also saw an improvement in revenue growth as it moved ahead of its long-term trend, which is a positive."
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
https://ca.news.yahoo.com/president-trump-decertify-iran-nuclear-deal-major-shift-153411407.html
President Trump to decertify Iran nuclear deal in major shift in U.S. policy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump will strike a blow against the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement in defiance of international support for it on Friday, choosing not to certify that Tehran is complying with the deal in a major reversal of U.S. policy.
Trump will make the announcement in a speech at 12:45 p.m. EDT (1645 GMT) that will detail a more confrontational approach to Iran over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and its financial and military support for extremist groups in the Middle East, U.s. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told reporters.
Trump will also give the U.S. Treasury Department broad authority to impose economic sanctions against people and entities in the Iranian military, the Iran Revolutionary Guard, in response to what Washington calls its efforts to destabilize and undermine its opponents in the Middle East.
President Trump to decertify Iran nuclear deal in major shift in U.S. policy
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump will strike a blow against the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement in defiance of international support for it on Friday, choosing not to certify that Tehran is complying with the deal in a major reversal of U.S. policy.
Trump will make the announcement in a speech at 12:45 p.m. EDT (1645 GMT) that will detail a more confrontational approach to Iran over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs and its financial and military support for extremist groups in the Middle East, U.s. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told reporters.
Trump will also give the U.S. Treasury Department broad authority to impose economic sanctions against people and entities in the Iranian military, the Iran Revolutionary Guard, in response to what Washington calls its efforts to destabilize and undermine its opponents in the Middle East.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/355066-why-the-polls-are-still-wrong
Why the polls are still wrong
The polls that failed to detect the full strength of President Trump on Election Day continue to underestimate the president’s support for the job he is doing, paying way too much attention to the Twitter wars and ignoring the public support for many of the actions is undertaking.
....
The methodology of some of these polls is to poll “all adults” without any qualification as to citizenship or voting intent. A lot of the nonvoters dislike politics and all politicians, and these polls also include them along with undocumented immigrants who are not screened out. Another group of polls has Trump’s approval in the low 40s, and Harvard-Harris Poll, which eliminates all undecideds, has it at 45 percent, similar to Rasmussen.
Generally, the president does best with voters polled online, as opposed to with live operators. He got 46 percent of the electorate in the election and little has changed since then as 90 percent of his voters support him, unchanged over many months.
....
Remember, Americans liked President Obama for his way with words and his calm leadership style. They just opposed many of his policies, so Obama’s numbers gave a false sense of approval. Trump is the mirror opposite. People are put on edge by his words while favoring a lot of the positions he is taking on issues.
When it comes to rank-and-file Republican voters, Trump is the undisputed leader of the Republican Party. No poll I’ve seen puts his support from Republicans at below 80 percent and we at Harvard-Harris have it at 84 percent, which is remarkable, given his knock-down-drag-out fight with some mainstream Republicans.
....
The remarkable thing is that, in response to a president ready to sign their legislation, the Republican leadership is committing hari-kari in failing to pass the very things that won them their elections: opposing Obamacare, enacting tax reform, taking a tougher position on Iran. (Remember when they invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on the Iran deal?)
They are, puzzlingly, walking away from everything they have pledged to their voters, and the revolution they are about to face from those voters is real, much to the benefit of the Democrats at this point. And if the Democrats do cut some more deals with Trump, those deals will boost the Democrats to a major 2018 victory.
Mark Penn is co-director of the Harvard-Harris Poll and was a pollster for Bill Clinton during six years of his presidency.
Why the polls are still wrong
The polls that failed to detect the full strength of President Trump on Election Day continue to underestimate the president’s support for the job he is doing, paying way too much attention to the Twitter wars and ignoring the public support for many of the actions is undertaking.
....
The methodology of some of these polls is to poll “all adults” without any qualification as to citizenship or voting intent. A lot of the nonvoters dislike politics and all politicians, and these polls also include them along with undocumented immigrants who are not screened out. Another group of polls has Trump’s approval in the low 40s, and Harvard-Harris Poll, which eliminates all undecideds, has it at 45 percent, similar to Rasmussen.
Generally, the president does best with voters polled online, as opposed to with live operators. He got 46 percent of the electorate in the election and little has changed since then as 90 percent of his voters support him, unchanged over many months.
....
Remember, Americans liked President Obama for his way with words and his calm leadership style. They just opposed many of his policies, so Obama’s numbers gave a false sense of approval. Trump is the mirror opposite. People are put on edge by his words while favoring a lot of the positions he is taking on issues.
When it comes to rank-and-file Republican voters, Trump is the undisputed leader of the Republican Party. No poll I’ve seen puts his support from Republicans at below 80 percent and we at Harvard-Harris have it at 84 percent, which is remarkable, given his knock-down-drag-out fight with some mainstream Republicans.
....
The remarkable thing is that, in response to a president ready to sign their legislation, the Republican leadership is committing hari-kari in failing to pass the very things that won them their elections: opposing Obamacare, enacting tax reform, taking a tougher position on Iran. (Remember when they invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address Congress on the Iran deal?)
They are, puzzlingly, walking away from everything they have pledged to their voters, and the revolution they are about to face from those voters is real, much to the benefit of the Democrats at this point. And if the Democrats do cut some more deals with Trump, those deals will boost the Democrats to a major 2018 victory.
Mark Penn is co-director of the Harvard-Harris Poll and was a pollster for Bill Clinton during six years of his presidency.