Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: Harm to Ongoing Matter The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: Harm to Ongoing Matter

03-06-2019 , 10:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by master3004
What were the 18-35 numbers in 2018?
Not good enough. Pretty pathetic actually.



03-06-2019 , 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Namath12
Florida voted for the black fellow in 2012
Half African AFRICAN, raised by white mother, who graduated Harvard Law School.
03-06-2019 , 10:31 PM
Oh man
03-06-2019 , 10:39 PM
Wow the mask slipped big time there David.
03-06-2019 , 10:40 PM
Dis gon be gud.gif
03-06-2019 , 10:41 PM
awww jeez rick
03-06-2019 , 10:45 PM
Giuliani Says Lawyers Have Sought Trump Pardons for Their Clients
The discussions acknowledged by Mr. Giuliani demonstrate that, at the very least, some of those under investigation, or their lawyers, believed that it was worthwhile to inquire about whether a pardon was on the table.

Mr. Giuliani, who has been representing Mr. Trump since last spring, said he always insisted to defense lawyers that Mr. Trump would not consider granting pardons until the investigations were long over.

Mr. Giuliani’s account of his stance contrasts with the initial approach taken by the first head of Mr. Trump’s legal team, John Dowd, who had discussions with lawyers for Paul Manafort and Michael T. Flynn in 2017 about pardons.

“I always gave one answer and they always left disappointed,” Mr. Giuliani said.

...

Mr. Cohen told the prosecutors in Manhattan that the pardon discussions happened in the aftermath of searches that the authorities conducted on his residence and office in April 2017. He described to the prosecutors how a lawyer who was considering representing him, Robert J. Costello, spoke with Mr. Giuliani.

Prosecutors have obtained a cryptic email Mr. Costello sent Mr. Cohen assuring him that he had raised some issue of importance with Mr. Giuliani, according to the people briefed on the matter.
03-06-2019 , 10:46 PM




03-06-2019 , 10:49 PM
Hmm. Over/under on number of FLwhite supremicists who held their noses and voted for Obama because he was half white?

Spoiler:
I say 0
03-06-2019 , 10:54 PM
I know nothing matters, but this emoluments thing where Trump squashed an existing plan to relocate the FBI building and would have resulted in a new luxury hotel being built across the street from the Trump Hotel in DC seems pretty solid.
03-06-2019 , 10:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
Half African AFRICAN, raised by white mother, who graduated Harvard Law School.
03-06-2019 , 11:06 PM
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1103314111914491904
03-06-2019 , 11:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1103314111914491904
CTH's episode on their CPAC trip report was hilarious.
03-06-2019 , 11:30 PM
03-06-2019 , 11:40 PM
03-07-2019 , 12:14 AM
David stanning for Mason and setting the bait for us all to scream racism so that Mason can shut the forum down right? No way David really posted that without some devious plan (maybe his parrot hacked his computer)?
03-07-2019 , 12:41 AM
I would like to think that the Politics Forum can engage in civil discussion with anyone, regardless of the quality of their post or the color of their skin screen name.
03-07-2019 , 01:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by whosnext
I would like to think that the Politics Forum can engage in civil discussion with anyone, regardless of the quality of their post or the color of their skin screen name.
I think you might have misunderstood that quote; you're supposed to judge on the quality of posts instead of the color of their screen name :P
03-07-2019 , 01:48 AM


Here's what I don't get: everyone who puts their faith in Trump gets screwed over. Every single time. Doesn't matter if you're a Trump U student or his personal fixer. They all know he's a coman, but they all somehow think Trump is going to back them when **** gets live. And yet there's an endless stream of Michael Cohens who think they can help Trump screw people over and somehow they won't ever get screwed over.
03-07-2019 , 02:23 AM
Sklansky comment an obvious joke cmon.

Also for everyone saying AZ might go blue: not happening. I know we just elected a Dem senator but her opponent was garbage and the mediocre Republican governor got re-elected by a massive margin; Dems didn’t even bother running ads. I guess it’s more in play than past elections but I wouldn’t give it greater than 20% chance to flip and as wheatrich said it would have to be a Biden type.
03-07-2019 , 02:55 AM
How big of a margin do you think the popular vote could get realistically without the Dems winning the presidency? Hillary won by 2.8 million.

And how big does that margin have to get before switching to popular vote is actually talked about in the mainstream? (Knowing full well it will never happen)
03-07-2019 , 03:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tabbaker
How big of a margin do you think the popular vote could get realistically without the Dems winning the presidency? Hillary won by 2.8 million.

And how big does that margin have to get before switching to popular vote is actually talked about in the mainstream? (Knowing full well it will never happen)
Answer to the first Q is it probably could happen up to around 8M (!). 2018 was just over 8 for the house races and Dems only barely would've won a POTUS race extrapolating (this isn't a 100% comparison as some states nothing huge was going on but you get the point). He can lose CA by all the votes again those doesn't matter.

5M or so for dems to actually talk about it even tho lol never happens.

Gonna be a real annoyance simply because rural is only getting more red and well gl getting the senate to change anything like hey maybe it doesn't make any f'ing sense for Wyoming to have 2 senators. (there's a few blue states I'd say this about as well but man we don't need more senators than house reps in states or two dakotas)

Last edited by wheatrich; 03-07-2019 at 03:27 AM.
03-07-2019 , 04:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiggymike
Also for everyone saying AZ might go blue: not happening. I know we just elected a Dem senator but her opponent was garbage and the mediocre Republican governor got re-elected by a massive margin; Dems didn’t even bother running ads. I guess it’s more in play than past elections but I wouldn’t give it greater than 20% chance to flip and as wheatrich said it would have to be a Biden type.
otoh, with a margin of 3.5%, AZ was behind only FL/PA/MI/WA among red states for how close it was (beating GA and NC in being moderately close, then a large gap before you get to OH/TX/IA).
03-07-2019 , 04:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecriture d'adulte
Yeah sorry, I might not have read your post in context.. I just skipped to the end of the thread. My overall point was that 2020 could be a huge turnout surge (~60%+) with one candidate getting over 70 million votes. If that’s the case (which isn’t crazy given house dem candidates almost beat Trumps vote total in the midterms[!!]) you don’t even really have to go state by state. Republicans can’t realistically overcome a 5 point popular vote deficit even with their electoral college advantages. Of course there are reasons why that might be a bad way to look at 2020. Liberal apathy is one of the most powerful forces in American politics and the midterms could be an anomaly with presidential turnout being the standard 55% giving republicans a chance to get lucky again or even win the popular vote out right.

But if I had to bet I would say the dem in 2020 breaks Obama’s total vote count record from 2008 which would make it virtually impossible for Trump to overcome and win reelection.
While it's certainly possible that 2020 will be a huge turnout surge, there's another possibility that I don't think people have talked about enough. What if the turnout in 2018 was really just the people who usually vote every four years coming out in the midterm election cause they were pissed? In other words, did the presidential year voter base actually expand in 2018, or did the presidential year voters just show up in the midterm for a change?

That thought scares me quite a bit, but it's a possibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tabbaker
How big of a margin do you think the popular vote could get realistically without the Dems winning the presidency? Hillary won by 2.8 million.

And how big does that margin have to get before switching to popular vote is actually talked about in the mainstream? (Knowing full well it will never happen)
I don't like to think about this too much, but it could definitely get somewhat significantly bigger than 2016. Basically as turnout due to outrage goes up, it'll go up more in blue states than red and swing states. Thus the Dem runs up even bigger margins in California, New York, Oregon, Washington, etc... The good news is, at some point that also has to translate to putting red states with big urban population centers in play (Florida, Arizona, Texas). So the realistic cap is probably somewhere between 5 million and 10 million.
03-07-2019 , 04:54 AM
Oh and by the way, as for talking about it, the conversation would go something like this:

Dems: Trump lost by six million votes and still won the electoral college. That's ridiculous!

GOP: Dems only "won" by running up a huge margin in California and New York on fraudulent votes by illegal immigrants. If you only count the real votes, he would have won. The electoral college saved us from Dems stealing the election!

Media: Is there any veracity to this claim of fraudulent votes? Let's examine it! This will be a wonderful and vigorous debate!

      
m