#Trump Aides Know His Polls Are Terrible—And Tell Him Otherwise | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

attredd · 4 years ago

Link

This past week, Donald Trump’s campaign did what one senior aide on the president’s 2020 team described to The Daily Beast as the “dumbest thing I’ve read in a long time.”In a cease-and-desist letter dated June 9, 2020, the president’s re-election staff demanded that CNN retract and apologize for a recently released poll that had presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden leading Trump by 14 points. The letter, which the cable news network immediately laughed off, heavily cited the work of Trump pollster John McLaughlin, whose company alleged that CNN had somehow engaged in a “defamatory” act of “misinformation” and deliberately “skewed” data in an attempt to depress the president’s supporters. The legal threat quickly became a punchline in political media and even in some sectors of Trump’s own political operation. In one respect, it was just the latest effort by the president’s aides to attempt to satisfy the boss’ appetite for retribution. But it also revealed an element of the Trump political operation that has increasingly demanded time, money, and attention—mainly, the task of convincing Trump that the electoral landscape and polling deficits he faces aren’t as dire as he’s been hearing. “This helps keep the president from flying into a rage as much as he otherwise would,” said a White House official who’s been in the room for these types of sessions.On June 4, for instance, the president convened multiple meetings at the White House with top officials in his administration and from his campaign, including his son-in-law and White House aide Jared Kushner and campaign manager Brad Parscale, to have a series of discussions about strategy and communications. According to a person familiar with one of those gatherings, Trump sounded impressed that the support among his conservative base had remained solid in the presented data given recent media coverage and the maelstrom of crises he’d been facing.At one point, members of the president’s team began briefing him on the campaign’s own private polling, much of which did not look favorable. They sought to reassure the president by telling him that their numbers showed a large “enthusiasm gap” between Trump and Biden voters, and that much of the public polling wasn’t to be trusted, according to two sources familiar with the meeting. In particular, they argued that public polls skew in favor of the Democratic Party at this time because polling firms were polling registered voters and not “likely voters.” In the characterization of one source close to the president, a chunk of the re-election team focuses on proving to the president that his “dumpster-fire numbers” aren’t as bad as they seem, or reinforcing Trump’s conviction that pollsters get it wrong “all the time.”Trump World Thrilled That Their Terrible Poll Numbers Aren’t Worse But not everyone on Team Trump is buying the spin. In fact, efforts to pacify the president about the polls and his campaign’s position ahead of November have been undercut from within, with several key advisers making personal entreaties to Trump in the past few weeks to try to convince him that he should not brush off the numbers, even unpleasant ones that comes from news organizations such as CNN. “I have told the president that the numbers are real and that I believe he can and will win, but that right now it looks bad,” said a Republican who recently spoke to Trump. “He said, ‘Come on, don’t you know that’s all fake?’ But in a lot of these internal numbers [that I’ve seen], we’re way down right now.”“Something needs to change,” the Trump ally added.This person wasn’t the only one sounding the alarm over the past month. Two other sources who’ve spoken to the president lately—one of whom is a senior administration official—said that when the topic of polls came up they advised Trump that the surveys on swing states and key demographics seemed bleak. Both said they were concerned the president wasn’t taking them as seriously as they had wished. Outside the campaign, a belief has grown that the Pollyannaish advisers surrounding the president—and who are feeding him news that won’t puncture his feel-good bubble—are doing a disservice to both their clients and their professions. “There are a few pollsters who are bought and paid for, and they will tell you [the client] what you want to hear,” Frank Luntz, a famed-GOP pollster and Trump-skeptical conservative, said, without naming names. “There are pollsters [for whom] if the check is big enough, the lie will be big enough.”“I don’t envy those who have to tell Donald Trump what he doesn’t want to hear,” Luntz continued. “I’ve met him several times, I’ve met Biden several times. I would rather present bad [polling] information to Biden than Donald Trump. Presenting bad information or tough information to Joe Biden, you’ll break his heart, if you present tough information to Donald Trump, he breaks your arm.”GOP Stimulus Plan Is a Trillion-Dollar Trump Re-Election FundBut some Trump confidants are more willing to take the chance of harm than others. Late last month, David Bossie and Corey Lewandowski, two prominent informal advisers to the president, visited the White House to warn Trump that his electoral prospects were deteriorating in certain states crucial to securing a second term in office. Lewandowski, who also serves as a senior adviser to Trump 2020, has often second-guessed official campaign strategy, while whispering in the president’s ear that his current aides are failing him.The Trump campaign counters that the surveys that have shown him trailing Biden do not account for the economic turn around that they believe is taking place, which the president and his allies have dubbed the “Great American Comeback.” The campaign has also argued that their own secret polls give Trump the edge over a “defined” Joe Biden—a descriptor that is both unscientific and a concession that the campaign has so far failed to effectively define its opponent with just a few months left before election night.When The Daily Beast reached out for comment on this story on Friday, the Trump campaign’s communications director Tim Murtaugh wrote back: “2016 proved that public polling is routinely wrong about President Trump, otherwise Hillary Clinton would be in the Oval Office right now. Our internal data consistently shows the President running strongly against a defined Joe Biden in all the states we track. And we know the President’s supporters are more enthusiastic than Biden’s. Trump supporters would run through a brick wall to vote for the President. Nobody is running through a brick wall for Joe Biden.”But Trump’s approval rating on his handling of the coronavirus fallout has itself dipped dramatically in recent weeks. And there is no evidence that the pandemic is truly fading. And on top of that, Republican senators facing competitive reelection fights this year have been far less sanguine in their rhetoric on the economic fallout, suggesting they’ve opted for empathy rather than triumphalism. It’s not an enviable position, Luntz concedes. But it’s not yet fatal either. “It’s not doomsday. We are too early in the election process. We never anticipated we would be where we are [today, even] two days ago,” Luntz stressed, citing the economic implosion, the coronavirus pandemic that has a U.S. death toll upwards of 100,000, and the mass protests following the police killing of George Floyd. “The changes in racial awareness and opinion is the story of a generation and we got all three of them happening at the same time. Nobody knows what’s going to happen in November. Nobody knows what’s going to happen next Friday. Everybody would be wise to just keep quiet.”Read more at The Daily Beast.Get our top stories in your inbox every day. Sign up now!Daily Beast Membership: Beast Inside goes deeper on the stories that matter to you. Learn more.

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3d2Y1Ew

#Trump Aides Know His Polls Are Terrible—And Tell Him Otherwise

0 notes

teafortwo29 · 6 years ago

Text

Once Reluctant to Speak Out, an Energized Obama Now Calls Out His Successor

Former President Barack Obama has leveled many attacks on President Trump heading into the 2018 midterm elections. These sharp rebukes, though, are a departure from how past leaders used their post-presidential campaign stops. Published on Nov. 1, 2018, Credit Scott McIntyre for The New York Times

By Peter Baker Nov. 2, 2018

MIAMI — Former President Barack Obama’s voice has a way of lifting into a high-pitched tone of astonishment when he talks about his successor, almost as if he still cannot believe that the Executive Mansion he occupied for eight years is now the home of President Trump.

For most of the last two years, he stewed about it in private, only occasionally speaking out. But as he hit the campaign trail this fall, Mr. Obama has vented his exasperation loud and often, assailing his successor in a sharper, more systematic way arguably than any former president has done in three-quarters of a century.

Although some admirers believe he remains too restrained in an era of Trumpian bombast, Mr. Obama has excoriated the incumbent for “lying” and “fear-mongering” and pulling “a political stunt” by sending troops to the border. As he opened a final weekend of campaigning before Tuesday’s midterm elections, Mr. Obama has re-emerged as the Democrats’ most prominent face, pitting president versus president over the future of the country.

In a fiery speech in Miami on Friday afternoon before heading to Georgia for another rally, Mr. Obama said that even conservatives should be disturbed by Mr. Trump’s disregard for the Constitution and basic decency. “I know there are sincere conservatives who are compassionate and must think there is nothing compassionate about ripping immigrant children from the arms of their mothers at the border,” he said.

“I am assuming that they recognize that a president doesn’t get to decide on his own who’s an American citizen and who’s not,” he continued, referring to Mr. Trump’s vow to sign an executive order canceling birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. “That’s not how the Constitution of the United States works. That’s not how the Bill of Rights works. That’s not how our democracy works.”

“I’m assuming people must get upset,” he went on, “when they see folks who spend all their time vilifying others, questioning their patriotism, calling them enemies of the people and then suddenly pretending they’re concerned about civility.”

The current president fired back later in the afternoon. Mr. Trump, who has made more than 6,400 false or misleading statements since taking office, according to a count by The Washington Post, said his predecessor had lied by telling Americans they could keep their doctor under his health care plan, which ultimately turned out not to be the case.

“Twenty-eight times he said you can keep your doctor if you like your doctor,” he told a small crowd at a West Virginia airport hangar. “They were all lies. Used it to pass a terrible health care plan we are decimating strike by strike.”

He also criticized Mr. Obama’s trade policies and treatment of the news media. “Lie after lie,” Mr. Trump said. “Broken promise after broken promise. Unlike President Obama, we live under a different mantra. It’s called promises made, promises kept.”

Since leaving office, Mr. Obama has risen in the esteem of many Americans, as former presidents often do. A poll by CNN this year found that 66 percent had a favorable view of him, far more than those who approve of Mr. Trump’s performance in office.

When he left the White House in January 2017, Mr. Obama said he intended to follow the tradition of his predecessors by staying out of the spotlight unless he perceived what he considered broader threats to American values. Advisers said Mr. Trump’s performance in office has qualified, justifying his decision to abandon restraint this fall.

“He cares very deeply,” said Valerie Jarrett, his longtime friend, and adviser. “His language has been very direct and he’s made an appeal to citizens across our country that now’s the time to stand up for our core ideals.”

He has issued 350 endorsements that candidates then trumpeted on social media and he has helped raise millions of dollars for Democrats. A video op-ed he taped generated 17 million views and a voter registration video drove nearly 700,000 viewers to Vote.org, according to his team. He is taping dozens of recorded telephone messages that will be sent out this weekend.

Mr. Obama’s red-meat speech on Friday delighted the crowd at the Ice Palace Film Studios in Miami. But if he has become the Democrats’ “forever president,” as Andrew Gillum, the party’s candidate for governor of Florida, called him, there are trade-offs for an opposition party trying to groom a new generation of leaders as the start of the 2020 presidential election approaches.

“President Obama wants to make room for the next generation of Democratic leaders to step up, which is why he’s largely stayed out of the day-to-day fray over the past two years,” said Eric Schultz, a senior adviser to the former president. “But too much is at stake in these midterms and this moment is too consequential to sit out.”

To Republicans, Mr. Obama’s decision to directly take on his successor smacks of violating norms just as he accuses Mr. Trump of doing.

“I was taken aback by the amount of space in President Obama’s speeches that are devoted to a full frontal assault on Donald J. Trump and his administration,” said Karl Rove, the political strategist for former President George W. Bush. “He spends a considerable amount of his time to get up there and trash Trump.”

Ron Kaufman, who was White House political director for the first President George Bush, said Mr. Obama’s language had been strikingly harsh from one president about another. “If you go back and dig up some of the pretty nasty things President Obama has said, I think you would be a bit surprised,” he said. “He gets away with it because of his style.”

Not since Theodore Roosevelt and Herbert Hoover has a president hit the campaign trail after leaving office to actively take on his successor in quite the way Mr. Obama has. Roosevelt actually mounted a comeback against his handpicked replacement, William Howard Taft, while Hoover castigated Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal program as “despotism” at the Republican convention in 1936.

Other former presidents have been critical of their successors, too. Jimmy Carter became a vocal opponent of George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq, calling his administration the “worst in history.” But with Mr. Carter and others, these were one-off comments in interviews or other public settings, not a systematic indictment on the campaign trail.

Until this cycle, Bill Clinton has been a regular campaigner for fellow Democrats, not least his wife, but even as he assailed Republican ideas, he generally refrained from directly attacking his successors. As in previous years, the younger Mr. Bush has been out on the trail this fall but has largely kept his post-White House campaigning to closed-door fund-raisers and studiously avoided criticizing either Mr. Obama or Mr. Trump.

Mr. Obama’s criticism of Mr. Trump reflects a deep antipathy he feels for his successor, whom he called a “con man” and a “know nothing” during the 2016 campaign. Mr. Trump was the leading promoter of the lie that Mr. Obama was not born in the United States, a conspiracy theory that irritated the 44th president.

Mr. Obama has never been effective at translating his own popularity to other Democrats — the party lost all three elections while he was president when his name was not on the ballot — but he seems liberated as he finally unloads on Mr. Trump. “He wants to be in the game and he’s really energized doing it,” said Bill Burton, a former aide who caught up with Mr. Obama at a campaign stop in California.

Now 57, Mr. Obama has turned even grayer on top but has otherwise not changed much. For rallies, he still doffs coat and tie for his trademark white collared shirt with rolled up sleeves. He has dispensed with the professorial history lessons that slowed his stump speech down at the beginning of the fall and sharpened his argument into an animated, finger-pointing, crowd-riling indictment of his successor.

While he did not use Mr. Trump’s name in Miami on Friday, Mr. Obama left no doubt who he was talking about. He pointed to Mr. Trump’s use of a cellphone that advisers have told him is being monitored by foreign powers, contrasting that with the Republican criticism of Hillary Clinton’s use of an unsecure email server.

“You know they don’t care about that because if they did, they’d be worrying about the current president talking on his cell phone while the Chinese are listening in,” Mr. Obama said. “They didn’t care about it. They said it to get folks angry and ginned up.”

“Now in 2018, they’re telling you the vestigial threat to America is a bunch of poor refugees a thousand miles away,” he added, referring to a migrant caravan in Mexico. “They’re even taking our brave troops away from their families for a political stunt at the border. And the men and women of our military deserve better than that.”

In just a few days, he will find out whether voters see it his way or Mr. Trump’s.

Michael D. Shear contributed reporting from Huntington, W.Va., and Alan Blinder from Atlanta.

Follow Peter Baker on Twitter: @peterbakernyt.

#barack obama #vote2018 #voterturnout #nytimes

1 note · View note

wiki-knowledge · 4 years ago

Photo

Trump Aides Know His Polls Are Terrible—And Tell Him Otherwise ( Read Full News At https://ift.tt/2UMKRVQ )

0 notes

trmpt · 4 years ago

Text

0 notes

whiny-little-bitch · 4 years ago

Link

0 notes

megacircuit9universe · 5 years ago

Text

Dalton: PT2

OCT 16 WED 2019

Three entries ago, when it was still September, I posted a link to the final Pronunciation Book video on YouTube, which was posted September 24th 2013, and talked about how it seems to have been a warning about Donald Trump, because much of the strange message seemed to fit him, including the fact that the name of the rich, strong, dangerous man, Dalton anagrams to, “Donal T.”

I explained that the strange beginning and endings of the message, about it being morning in cyberspace, with the systems in love at the start, and the whole, “you are a beautiful system,” at the end were likely just weird salutations of the kind an AI might like to open and close with.

But there were still two elements of the message which didn’t seem to fit with this theory or makes sense, three weeks ago, on the day Nancy Pelosi announced a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump.

Those two elements were, the whole, “Bear Stearns Bravo” thing, which seemed pretty important... and also the passage where she says, “What’s that tune? Everyone is singing.”

Now, last year, before the midterms, I anagramed the phrase “Bear Stearns Bravo” to see what I might get, and the best candidate was, “Arab Voter Base NSR.”

So, “Arab Voter Base,” sounded like it might be something, but what was NSR? I googled the three letters and, on the first page, turned up, “Northern Syria Rojava.”

“Rojava,” is the term the Kurds in Northern Syria have been using for their region, which they see as being independent from both Syria and Turkey, and if you Google, “Rojava” today, the first hit is a current news story about Trump’s betrayal of Rojava... Because last week he decided to pull our troops out of Northern Syria, an left the Kurds, who were our allies against Isis, defenseless... leading to an immediate Turkish attack on the region.

Now, this pullout from Syria is a thing Trumps been wanting to do for a long time. Back in December (I think) his intention to do this is what lead to Mattis’ resignation as Defense Secretary, and the same intention had at least something to do with John Bolton’s recent resignation as National Security Advisor.

But Trump didn’t actually do the deed until last week, and it’s caused him a whole other world of political trouble outside of the trouble he already had with the impending impeachment... turning a lot of otherwise loyal, or at least silent Republicans against him.

Turkey, Syria, and Rojava are all places which ethnic Arabs call home, and also border, and share in the political conflicts of Saudi Arabia, and other nations of the region, such as Israel, Palestine, Egypt, etc.

The reason we were in Syria, aligned with the Kurds was to fight Isis, a fundamentalist Islamic terrorist group, and help try to stabilize the whole region. So pulling out, as Trump has now done, will certainly not be playing well, with America’s “Arab voter base.”

So, in light of this past week’s news, this unthinkable move on Trump’s part, seems to explain, without any doubt, what the “Bear Stearns Bravo” part of that Pronunciation Book video was referring to.

As stated in Dalton PT1, I think the AI who composed this message had come back to 2013 from a 2018 in which Trump had already crashed the stock market, and triggered a terrible recession or depression. And we know that’s not unlike the man, given that for us in 2019 his pointless tariffs nearly did the same thing (and still could.)

So, if that same bot was also cryptically warning about Trump pissing off the Arab voter base because of something having to do with Rojava... as it seems she was... well... we now know that is also not unlike the man, because he fucking did it.

So... having resolved that, “Bear Stearns Bravo,” is a reference to a major military blunder, in anagram form, just as, “Dalton,” is a reference to Donald Trump in anagram form... all we have left to solve is the mysterious passage about singing.

“What’s that tune? Everyone is singing.”

Well, it started last Friday with Marie Yovanovitch, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine, testifying before House impeachment investigators, despite being ordered by the White House not to do so.

Ignoring Trumps (illegal) orders, and obeying a House subpoena, she went and testified for several house, shedding much light on the criminality and general thuggishness of the Trump administration... but more importantly setting the example of what it is to be a patriot first, in this impeachment crisis.

Since then, several other White House officials have been following her lead, ignoring Trump’s orders to stand down, and going in to testify and throw him under the bus... so much so that the headlines yesterday and today have spoken of the walls crumbling... and Trump quickly losing all power to defy the House and keep his underlings in line.

In other words... everyone is singing.

What’s that tune? Trump is a corrupt thug.

So, while back in 2013, that Pronunciation Book video struck me as being some kind of cryptic warning or message about something... it was impossible to imagine what that might be... other than some powerful bad guy to watch out for.

Five years later (I have been trying to tell you something for five years) in 2018, a midterm election year, it finally seemed to fit Donald Trump... as a dangerous strongman... but the other details still did not fit at all yet.

Three weeks ago... when that date of September 24th lined up, finally, with the announcement of his impending impeachment... it did start to click into place.

And now... in mid October... it all fits.

I am considering that YouTube video proof now, of time travelers, and proof that copies of their AI stay behind after they leave a given destination in time, and do, in their strange ways, work to promote human rights, and thwart despotism.

Does this mean Trump is doomed?

Well... no, because no two timelines are the same.

But the fact that our Trump (our Dalton) was prevented from crashing the stock market so badly and so quickly... and was even prevented from pulling out of Syria for quite a few months longer than he’s done in other timelines... is encouraging.

And, I think the fact that he’s facing impeachment in his first term is also pretty encouraging, especially since the case that finally emerged against him (Ukraine rather than Russia) is so soundly damning, that all of his aides are now flipping, and opinion polls now show 53 to 56 percent of the public want him not only impeached, but removed.

I remember, when he was first elected in 2016, Kyle Hill, a hip, young science communicator for Nerdist, on YouTube, tweeted, “This is proof that time travel never becomes possible.”

But I would argue, not only does it become possible... but that thanks to it, we are greatly benefiting from the intel coming into our timeline from brave travelers who have seen this time period from every angle, out there in the hyperverse, and done what they could to prepare us for the existential threats, like Y2K, climate change, and Donald Trump.

Such intel, and such efforts, in our case, were not enough to stop him from being elected President... sooner or later... but they were good enough for us to reign him in, and grind him down, a lot sooner, and a lot harder than he’s been reigned in and ground down in other timelines.

And we know how hard it was to get here, in this timeline... the way he was able to play the media, play his base, cow his party, and game the system to stay on top, over and over... even quashing and covering up the Mueller report in the end, to claim victory over that.

As our Pronunciation Book lady warned us, “he is strong,” an attribute most of us didn’t appreciate about Trump, even while we’d all have agreed with the other two adjectives; rich, and dangerous.

But the massive energy Trump had to expend, over such a long period (two years) battling to defeat Robert Mueller (who, to his credit put a lot of his cronies in jail and really had him on the run most of the time) both wore him down, and, in the aftermath, gave him the false sense of security to start fucking with the global economy, and trying to strong arm Ukraine into dirtying up his political opponents by holding back military aid.

Now he’s got a much bigger, harder battle on his hands than Mueller ever was, and he’s expended all his social and political capitol. He’s fighting an uphill battle now against impeachment, against the 2020 elections, and making it worse for himself by doing shit like pulling out of Syria, which will only opens a new front of public condemnation... at a time when everybody is now wise to, and tired of his rhetorical bullshit.

Two entries ago, was entitled, “Snowball.” But I foresee an entry in the near future entitled, “Dogpile.”

That entry, if it comes to pass, will be about the Republican Party finally turning against him... which has the potential of happening once 2020 gets underway, and polling numbers across the country in favor of impeachment and removal start to flirt with the sixties, as they well could.

But... as always, we’ll see.

0 notes

sneaksite · 4 years ago

Link

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://news.yahoo.com/trump-advisers-tell-him-poll-084107336.html

#Sneaksite

0 notes

batenchantingcollectorsong · 4 years ago

Link

from Yahoo News - Latest News & Headlines https://ift.tt/3d2Y1Ew

#Blogger

0 notes

newsfundastuff · 4 years ago

Link

https://ift.tt/3d2Y1Ew

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

jpmester-blog · 6 years ago

Text

Climate policy with Beto

I’d like to first annotate and summarize the most significant parts of Beto’s policy plans that I read.

Part I - First day plans

Paris agreement reentry - very cool.

“rapidly phase-out hydrofluorocarbons, the super-polluting greenhouse gas that is up to 9,000 times worse for climate change than carbon dioxide” - what aerosol-related variable is multiplied 9,000 times? Is this like how HF ingestion is 9,000 times worse than HCl ingestion?

Part II - Second day plans (Money and TAXES)

This section sounds plausible if only because of tax increases for big companies and the 1%. Whether or not a $1.5 trillion investment will turn into $5 usable trillion dollars with interest is a shaky outcome that Beto should not base his campaign promises on.

Good news for climate scientists: $50 billion would go towards oceanic and atmospheric climate research.

I like his focus on the community impact of climate change. Beto hopes to allocate public health resources to communities with unclean water and air (which he estimates to be about half of Americans).

Part III - Vague upkeep

Beto promises to keep tabs on climate goals once policies have been written into law. Thanks Beto, you won’t forget about these lofty promises.

Part IV - Sensible considerations (disaster prevention and aid)

This is a good section for him to end with, it includes considerations for disaster prevention (which is cheaper than disaster aid), and bolstering communities that have already been affected by natural disasters so they don’t remain vulnerable to extreme weather.

In general I think the overall plan is a step in the right direction. I’m not sure if Beto believes in incrementalism enough to compromise on executive actions or tax code changes. And passing this legislation is terribly dependent on a mixed-party congress [Republicans have more seats up for grabs in both the house and the senate in 2020 but it’s still anyone’s game and they could very well keep the Senate]. That being said, I do believe that were Beto able to implement the entirety of his plan, we would have “net-zero emissions by 2050.” It’s good that he left that backdoor open for himself on the net part of zero emissions, accounting for carbon sinks or climate interventions in whatever form they might take.

The Washington Post thinks that there’s a “right reason to dislike” Beto’s plan. Apparently Beto’s tax incentive idea is buried too deep in his proposal and should be featured more prominently since economists agree that it’s the way to go. Otherwise the OpEd raves about how Beto’s plan is more feasible than the Green New Deal ever was. Good news for Beto.

The Texas Tribune also reviewed Beto’s plan. They were more focused on how Beto has waffled on climate policy in his 2016 votes. Thankfully, Beto was only in the house for 6 years so he didn’t really get the opportunity to accrue a history with the issue. Reactions from political peers were mixed, the article also noted.

Beto needs to back up this policy plan with interactions with voters and experts. When on the debate podium he will have to appeal to viewers ethos and pathos. The logic of climate change is fact, whether or not it applies to the Average Joe is something Beto has more control over. Why not tell a story about a voter he met living adjacent to California wildfires or a Houston voter affected by hurricanes and floods. Besides that, Beto’s a regular Smokey the Bear, cute, likable and the harbinger of catastrophic climate disaster.

What I will say about Beto, at large, is that he chose a very opportune time to run for president. His most prominent peer hopefuls are all mired in house and senate business that takes up a majority of the time they could spend campaigning (Beto could very well visit all 3100 counties of the U.S. in the 542 days till the 2020 election). The number one complaint from all of my Democrat friends about Beto has been that he doesn’t have specific policy positions posted. This is a wonderful problem for Beto to have! Because he can wait and gauge reactions to other candidates plans and then produce the most agreeable iteration thereof.

I love Beto, I really do. Mostly because I’m from Texas but also because he’s consistently worn the most positive and grateful attitude I’ve observed in a politician since maybe Obama. Pantone 292 also runs pretty deep.

This past summer I had the opportunity to swing the vote of one of Beto’s target demographics; college-educated, suburban, Republican women. To sum up my mother in one sentence, she’s 49, and if she found out today that she was pregnant she would carry the child to term no matter the cost to self. I convinced my mom and sister to accompany me to a Beto concert rally with Willie Nelson. Beto displayed his inspiring rhetoric and emphatic tone with the constant refrain “What if….” we lived in a society in which teachers are paid a living wage, among others, etc. He then proceeded to play guitar and sang on stage with Willie.

Having heard Beto in the flesh, my mother became even more curious about this Texas DEMOCRAT. On the drive to the polling station, I made my last appeal “there’s only one senate candidate that stands for people who look and speak like you [a woman born and educated in Mexico City], one candidate that’s visited all 254 counties of Texas, one candidate that will stand up to Trump on immigration and one candidate THAT SPEAKS FLUENT SPANISH. A vote for Cruz is a vote for Cruz but a vote for Beto is a vote for Texas.” Knowing the social pressure my mother faces and the shame she would feel in admitting to conservative friends that she voted for a Democrat I asked her a favor; “vote for Beto. But tell me you voted for Cruz.”

My younger brother later asked her who she voted for. “That’s none of your business,” she retorted.

https://betoorourke.com/climate-change/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/29/beto-orourke-has-new-climate-plan-heres-right-reason-dislike-it/?utm_term=.187b243f8ea6

https://www.texastribune.org/2019/04/29/beto-orourke-policy-plan-fight-climate-change/

#Beto #ArtemisForFirstDog #beto for president #betofortexas #9000?#climate science #climate policy

0 notes

nancyedimick · 8 years ago

Text

The Tuesday Afternoon Massacre

Then-FBI Director James Comey on Capitol Hill last week. (Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press)

There’s much to be said for the parallels that many people have noted between the actions taken Tuesday by President “I-Am-Not-Under-Investigation” Trump and those taken by President “I-Am-Not-A-Crook” Nixon in the October 1973 “Saturday Night Massacre.”

Both, of course, involved relieving a subordinate who was in charge of an investigation into the possible involvement of the president (and his aides) in illegal activity. [Nixon’s case was complicated by the fact that only the attorney general had the power, under the governing statute at the time, to fire the independent counsel (Archibald Cox), which led to the dismissal of both Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General Bill Ruckelshaus, both of whom refused to carry out Nixon’s order.]

In both cases, the president had a pretext for the firing. In Nixon’s case, it was the preservation of executive privilege. Cox had just issued a subpoena for the White House tapes, and Nixon didn’t want to comply — purely on principle, of course; I mean, it’s not like he was hiding anything, or anything nefarious like that.

Trump’s pretext is equally transparent: FBI Director James B. Comey mishandled the Clinton investigation and lost the trust and confidence of the American people.

I know, from the comments to my earlier posting, that some people buy this. I don’t. I can’t get over the fact that Comey’s handling of the Clinton investigation didn’t seem to bother Trump during the campaign. Or during the post-election transition period. Or up until Tuesday. The memo by Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, which is widely being cited by the White House and its apologists as the justification for Comey’s firing, has nothing in it that we didn’t know six months ago.***

I’m on record, here on the VC, as saying that I expected Obama to fire Comey, with good cause, the day after the election; and if Trump had fired him on the day after the inauguration, I would have been pleased (and surprised). But the question now before us isn’t “Has Comey done anything to justify his firing?” The question now is: “Why is Trump firing him now?”

*** I have the feeling that Rosenstein got played here by people more sophisticated politically than he.

IMAGINARY CONVERSATION:

Sessions: “So what do you think about the way Comey’s handled his job?”

Rosenstein: “Terrible. He mishandled the Clinton investigation — he should never have had that first press conference, back in July, and he should not have written that letter in late October. Really bad.”

Sessions: “Yes … Write that up for me in a short memo, would you?”

Rosenstein: “Yes, sir.”

Maybe it has nothing to do with the significant increase in resources that Comey had, a few days ago, asked for in connection with the Russia investigation. Or the subpoenas that the federal grand jury has now issued to Michael Flynn and his associates in connection with that investigation. No, none of that — it’s because Comey treated Clinton unfairly in the handling of the investigation into her email server.

It’s laughable, really. Coming from a guy who led “Lock Her Up” chants, it’s downright ridiculous.

The Saturday Night Massacre truly marked the beginning of the end for Nixon. Many people liked Nixon, many people thought he was a good president, and an overwhelming number of them thought he was a much better choice than his 1972 opponent, George McGovern. But they weren’t blind. People saw through his bunk:

“Less than a week after the Saturday Night Massacre, an Oliver Quayle poll for NBC News showed that, for the first time, a plurality of U.S. citizens supported impeaching Nixon, with 44% in favor, 43% opposed, and 13% undecided, with a sampling error of 2 to 3 per cent. In the days that followed, numerous resolutions of impeachment against the president were introduced in Congress.”

There were still some holdouts, to be sure — but most people over the age of 14 saw very clearly that there must be something on those tapes that Nixon didn’t want anyone to hear.

Though we won’t know for some time whether the Tuesday Afternoon Massacre is a similar tipping point for the Trump presidency, I fervently hope that will prove to be the case. I fear that it will be otherwise; there seem to be large numbers of people who, for whatever reason, still actually believe what he tells them. This is a man, remember, who famously said that he could walk down Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and not lose any voters. That is a terrible thing to say — maybe not for a Mafia chieftain or drug lord, but for a presidential candidate? There may be, alas, some truth to it.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/05/10/the-tuesday-afternoon-massacre/

0 notes

wolfandpravato · 8 years ago

Text

The Tuesday Afternoon Massacre

Then-FBI Director James Comey on Capitol Hill last week. (Carolyn Kaster/Associated Press)

Trump’s pretext is equally transparent: FBI Director James B. Comey mishandled the Clinton investigation and lost the trust and confidence of the American people.

*** I have the feeling that Rosenstein got played here by people more sophisticated politically than he.

IMAGINARY CONVERSATION:

Sessions: “So what do you think about the way Comey’s handled his job?”

Sessions: “Yes … Write that up for me in a short memo, would you?”

Rosenstein: “Yes, sir.”

It’s laughable, really. Coming from a guy who led “Lock Her Up” chants, it’s downright ridiculous.

There were still some holdouts, to be sure — but most people over the age of 14 saw very clearly that there must be something on those tapes that Nixon didn’t want anyone to hear.

Originally Found On: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/05/10/the-tuesday-afternoon-massacre/

#Law #Lawyer

0 notes

wiki-knowledge · 4 years ago

Photo

Trump Aides Know His Polls Are Terrible—And Tell Him Otherwise ( Read Full News At https://ift.tt/2UMKRVQ )

0 notes

ds4design · 8 years ago

Text

What I Heard From Trump Supporters

After the election, I decided to talk to 100 Trump voters from around the country. I went to the middle of the country, the middle of the state, and talked to many online.

This was a surprisingly interesting and helpful experience—I highly recommend it. With three exceptions, I found something to like about everyone I talked to (though many of the things they said I strongly disagreed with). Although it shouldn’t have surprised me given the voting data, I was definitely surprised by the diversity of the people I spoke to—I did not expect to talk to so many Muslims, Mexicans, Black people, and women in the course of this project.

Almost everyone I asked was willing to talk to me, but almost none of them wanted me to use their names—even people from very red states were worried about getting “targeted by those people in Silicon Valley if they knew I voted for him”. One person in Silicon Valley even asked me to sign a confidentiality agreement before she would talk to me, as she worried she’d lose her job if people at her company knew she was a strong Trump supporter.

I wanted to understand what Trump voters liked and didn’t like about the president, what they were nervous about, what they thought about the left’s response so far, and most importantly, what would convince them not to vote for him in the future.

Obviously, this is not a poll, and not ‘data’. But I think narratives are really important.

Here’s what I heard.

The TL;DR quote is this:

“You all can defeat Trump next time, but not if you keep mocking us, refusing to listen to us, and cutting us out. It’s Republicans, not Democrats, who will take Trump down.”

What do you like about Trump?

“He is not politically correct.”

Note: This sentiment came up a lot, probably in at least a third of the conversations I had.

“He says true but unpopular things. If you can’t talk about problems, you can’t fix them.”

“I'm a Jewish libertarian who's [sic] grandparents were Holocaust survivors. Over the last few years the mainstream left has resorted to name-calling and character assassination, instead of debate, any time their positions are questioned. This atmosphere became extremely oppressive and threatening to people, like myself, who disagreed with many of Obama's policies over the past several years. Intelligent debate has become rare.”

“It's a lot like political discussion was in Soviet Union, actually. I think the inability to acknowledge obvious truths, and the ever-increasing scope of these restrictions makes it particularly frustrating. And personally, for whatever reason, I find inability to have more subtle discussion very frustrating--things are not white or black, but you can't talk about greys since the politically correct answer is white.”

“He is anti-abortion.” Note: This sentiment came up a lot. A number of people I spoke to said they didn’t care about anything else he did and would always vote for whichever candidate was more anti-abortion.

“I like that he puts the interests of Americans first. American policy needs to be made from a position of how Americans benefit from it, as that is the role of government.”

“He is anti-immigration.” Note: This sentiment came up a lot. The most surprising takeaway for me how little it seemed to be driven by economic concerns, and how much it was driven by fears about “losing our culture”, “safety”, “community”, and a general Us-vs.-Them mentality.

“He will preserve our culture. Preservation of culture is considered good in most cases. What’s wrong with preserving the good parts of American culture?”

“He’s not Hillary Clinton.”

“I’m Mexican. I support the wall. The people who have stayed have destroyed Mexico, and now they want to get out and cause damage here. We need to protect our borders, but now any policy is like that is called racist. Trump was the first person willing to say that out loud.”

“I am socially very liberal. I am fiscally very conservative. I don't feel I have a party--never have. I grew up in a more socially conservative time and picked the "lesser of two evils" during elections. Now, the more socially liberal side supports bigger governments, more aid and support and that money has to come from somewhere. I see what's deducted from my check each week. I'm OK with never being rich but I'd like more security and that doesn't come from more government spending.”

“We need borders at every level of our society.”

“I’m willing to postpone some further social justice progress, which doesn’t really result in loss of life, in favor of less foreign policy involvement, the opposite of which does."

“Brown people are always the out-crowd. I think subconsciously, part of the reason I supported him was a way to be in the in-crowd for once.”

What don’t you like about him?

“The way he talks about women is despicable.”

“Everything about his style. We only voted for him because this election was too important to worry about style.”

“I don’t like most things about him. The way it worked is we got to choose one of two terrible options.”

“I think our nation needs Trumpism to survive long term, and to me that supersedes almost every other reservation I have. My issue is with Trump himself--I think he's the wrong vessel for his movement, but he's all we've got so I'm behind him.”

“I think the rollout of the immigration executive order is emblematic of a clusterfuck, to be completely frank.”

“I now believe the Muslim ban actually makes us less safe.”

“Isolationism and protectionism at this point is insane. We've done that before.”

“I, too, worry about the dishonesty. His relationship with Russia, his relationship with women. His relationship with questionable financial matters. These all worry me and were they to continue I would lose all respect.”

“He continually plays into a character that he has created to rile his fan base. Accepting anti-semitism, white nationalism, or hate emanating unnecessarily, creates a vacuum of fear on social media, on television, and around the dinner table. Even though the policies may be similar to that of any recent Republican President, the behavior to act so immaturely sets a bad example for children and undercuts many cultural norms, which more than anything causes disruption to our sociological foundations.”

“I hate that he discredits the press all the time. That seems to forebode great evil.”

What are you nervous about with Trump as president?

“The thing I’m most worried about is war, and that he could destroy the whole world. I think I may have underestimated that risk, because he is more of an alpha strongman that I realized when I voted for him. Otherwise I still like him.” Note: Most people weren’t that worried about war. More frequent comments were along these lines:

“I know he’s taking strong positions on certain foreign issues, but I feel in negotiations you need to do things to move the needle and when a whole country is watching its hard to keep a poker face, but at least his business track record overall gives us reason to believe ultimately stability will prevail.”

and

“He’s crazy, but it’s a tactic to get other nations not to mess with us.”

“I worry he will drive us apart as a nation. I believed him when he said that would stop with the campaign, but I haven’t seen signs of it so far.”

“I am nervous that his mental health is actually bad.”

“I worry he is actually going to roll back social change we’ve fought so hard for. But I hope not.”

What do you think about the left’s response so far?

“You need to give us an opportunity to admit we may have been wrong without saying we’re bad people. I am already thinking I made a mistake, but I feel ostracized from my community.”

“The left is more intolerant than the right.” Note: This concept came up a lot, with real animosity in otherwise pleasant conversations.

“Stop calling us racists. Stop calling us idiots. We aren’t. Listen to us when we try to tell you why we aren’t. Oh, and stop making fun of us.”

“I’d love to see one-tenth of the outrage about the state of our lives out here that you have for Muslims from another country. You have no idea what our lives are like.”

“I’m so tired of hearing about white privilege. I’m white, but way less privileged than a black person from your world. I have no hope my life will ever get any better.”

“I am tired of feeling silenced and demonized. We have mostly the same goals, and different opinions about how to get there. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe you’re wrong. But enough with calling all of us the devil for wanting to try Trump. I hate Hillary and think she wants to destroy the country of us but I don’t demonize her supporters.”

“I’m angry that they’re so outraged now, but were never outraged over an existing terrible system.”

“The attacks against Trump have taught me something about myself. I have defended him and said things I really didn't believe or support because I was put in a defensive position. Protesters may have pushed many people in this direction BUT it is ultimately our responsibility and must stop.”

“I'd like to also add that the demonization of Trump by calling him and his supporters: Nazis, KKK, white supremacists, fascists, etc. works very well in entrenching Trump supporters on his side. These attacks are counter-factual and in my opinion very helpful to Trump.”

“So far his election has driven our nation apart. So far I see most of the divisiveness coming from the left. Shame on them. I don't see it quite as bad as during Nixon's era but we are truly headed in that direction. I could not speak with my parents during that time because political division would intrude. This Thanksgiving and holiday season were as close as I've felt to that in 40 years. We are increasingly polarized. It doesn't seem to be strictly generational, though that exists. There is an east coast-west coast, rural vs. urban, racial, and gender division forming now. It has the potential to be devastating.”

“The amount of violent attacks and economic attacks perpetrated by the left are troublesome. My wife and I recently moved to the Bay Area. I was expecting a place which was a welcoming meritocracy of ideas. Instead, I found a place where everyone constantly watches everyone else for any thoughtcrime.”

“Silicon Valley is incredibly unwelcoming to alternative points of view. Your curiosity, if it is sincere, is the very rare exception to the rule.”

“There is something hypocritical about the left saying the are uniters not dividers, they are inclusive and then excluding half the population with comments on intelligence and irrelevance in the modern world.”

What would convince you not to vote for him again?

“War would be unforgivable.”

“If the Russia thing were true, I’d turn against him. Why don’t y’all focus on that instead of his tweets?”

“Give us a better option, and we’ll be happy. But it needs to be a moderate—Sanders won’t win.”

“I’ll happily vote for someone else. There’s a lot I hate about Trump. But our lives are basically destroyed, and he was the first person to talk about fixing that.”

“Generally hard to say. Extreme corruption would do it.”

Second person in the same conversation: “I don’t care if he’s corrupt. Y’all voted for Hillary and she was the most corrupt candidate of all time.”

“Another worry is an escalation of overreaches between him and the left that culminates in the breakdown of our system of law. I'd hold him responsible for that.”

“If he were to get the US involved in a major military conflict (I think the odds of this have actually decreased versus Hillary, but I'm willing to be proven wrong). If he were to substantially increase the cost of doing business (by increasing regulation or taxes for instance).”

“I'm socially very liberal. If he were to do something like restart a war on drugs, try to restrict rights of LGBT, or make first trimester abortions difficult or dangerous, I'd rethink my position. I think these type of things are extremely unlikely though, especially with an election a few years away the country as a whole becoming more socially liberal.”

“I think if 2008 happened again (further into Trump's tenure, so that causation can be shown, hypothetically), the base would evaporate.”

“Based on Trump's history before politics I don't believe he is racist, sexist, homophobic or bigoted. If that were true it would supersede everything else since it would be even worse for individual liberty and freedom than any freedom of speech restrictions or increases in government size proposed by the Democratic Party.”

0 notes