What the **** is this?

Trump commission on voter integrity wants the past 10 years of voting records from every state.

Fine-tuning the next round of voter suppression, in case you actually don't know.

New veep chief of staff has already been named and he's excited to get to work

Fair enough.

She's awful, but tbf to her that time slot is absolute garbage. They've never been able to get anyone to stick there for very long. I almost feel sorry for Ari

That's how Trump wins in 2020.

If NBC is having buyer's remorse on Meygan, and all indications seem to point to that, they should give it to her.

And it would still be crap. Give it to joy, or ari, or bring back the awesome Alex Wagner.

The Megyan deal was like picking up a 32 y/o former star with a bad hammy 2 years into a bloated 8-year deal. I think that's worked out maybe once.

I loved Wagner, wish they had never let her go. Joy deserves it, but her show is like the only political show that gets eyeballs on Saturday so I think they want her there (as opposed to round-the-clock Lockup eps all weekend). Ari is outstanding and will be good, but I think the problem is simply that most of the country isn't even home from work yet during that time slot, and those who are are eating dinner, doing homework with kids, etc, and Wolf seems to still have a following as well. They've had more than a few different people in there and no one has been able to make it very long compared to the primetime guys.

buddy, its in human nature to react and step up to those who are cheating the system. this moral mechanism has evolved so our societies arent falling apart by too many people taking advantage of others. everyone has this mechanism in themselves. racism is certainly a factor in america, but its not the same thing as disliking cheaters. there is interplay with loads of factors that guides our perception on cheating, like the image of black gang member welfare recipients that dont care about a job and are wearing gold chains and tattoos and selling drugs, for example, i would bet is something that contributes to stereotypes.

For those who have eagerly been awaiting my opinion of the Russian collusion allegations.

My guess is that Russia would have never risked clueing in an American on the details. However I think there is a pretty good chance that Jared Kushner, who was doing various technical election strategies, may very well had some conversations with a Russian "businessmen" along the lines of the Russian saying to Jared "you ought to send your father in law to Wisconsin a couple of extra times. Don't ask me why".

i think thats somewhat accurate, i dont really think about welfare recipients too much. to the conservatives its very important though, but we are probably more left wing than most ppl. my more general point is that humans dont like cheaters, but the right and the left wing target different groups. if you or someone else doesnt understand the concept then try to zoom in and look at your daily interactions with people where some people try to get away with things that are "clever", im sure you understand.

I actually don't think Trump *personally* colluded unless he's even dumber than we think he is (though the fact that he continues to deny that the Russians interfered at all is worrisome obv). But I will never be convinced that someone from that campaign did not, with or without his express approval. Too much smoke.

You may be right. But maybe not. A highly rational person is more apt to understand a non rational person than a moderately rational person if the highly rational person has made a study of them. To counter John Nash I offer up Tversky and Kahneman.

Except that being able to spout off talking points to the public without any concern for truth or morality is extremely valuable in both the political and corporate spheres.

If I understand where you're going, you're pointing to the ostensible loss suffered by someone whose success is implicitly diminished by the claim that welfare recipients are mostly only mildly culpable for their circumstances. Again, it's not that your reasoning is invalid. It's that very few people actually think like that. Very few people will actually take the claim "Joe's broke, but it wasn't his fault" and abstract from that to "Your comparative comfort is mostly due to chance". Edit: I'm claiming that they won't perceive the loss.

I'm not saying that people wouldn't agree with you if they thought like you. I'm saying that most people don't think like you.

Looks like Greta is gone immediately, replacements will host until Ari comes in full time.

One less Scientologist on the air.

Kinda bummed I can't remember the name of that DC restaurant she was talking about in her promos and now I'll probably never know unless one of you tells me because I'm far too lazy to look.

"George W. Bush planned the Iraq invasion here over meatloaf."

"Harry Truman sat in that booth over there and complained to his aides about the condition of MacArthur's hat."

john f kennedy proposed to jackie o in that booth while richard nixon ate 2 plates of spaghetti and watched them longingly from this booth

"Republicans Slam President Trump for 'Face-Lift' Tweet: 'This Isn't Normal'"

http://time.com/4839060/donald-trump...ezinski-tweet/

Notice again how David attempts to shove some sort of "rationality" spectrum into his analysis of, well, everything. And it goes without saying where on the spectrum David considers himself.

https://twitter.com/RiegerReport/sta...38824484499457


hummmm......................

he's super stressed rn because he knows he's guilty of dirty business with russia and his russian connections are being heavily scrutinized by an all-star team of criminal investigators and prosecutors. that's one explanation for his behavior