Tuco

Yeah, he's not using money to buy influence over the GOP. He's using influence over the GOP to raise money. It's not like he has some broad legislative agenda he is pushing. The great things about PACs, compared to campaigns, is that it is a lot easier to utilize the money for personal usage. For example, Devin Nunes: Nunes is awful, for some many reasons

Money. Any discussion that deals with Notre Dame's (or any other college's) response to Covid needs to have money at the center of the discussion. Notre Dame was not going to be able to charge ~70k per year for telecourses. Tradition is what they sell, and that includes a beautiful campus and a cool football experience. Without it, they'd lose a significant portion of their enrollment. 10%? 30% Who knows. But the math is ugly regardless.

He understand statistics better than psychology.

So, what's the lawyer cabal's opinion on the merits of the case?

Nate seems to think that people answer polling questions based on deeply seated beliefs. They don't. They are just parroting whatever right wing is saying. If right wing media started saying that China is our friend, you'd see huge poll swings that way. Just like you saw with "conservative" opinions on Russia.

It’s an elected position. He won as a Republican. I would be more disturbed if he didn’t acknowledge his bias. And it provides context for the importance to having loyalty to the system over loyalty to a political preference.

The fuck it was.

Yeah, check out their on-line headlines: "Pence on 2020 race:"It ain't over til it's over..and this AIN'T over." "Nev poll worker claims anti-Trump voter fraud, intimidation in sworn statement." "McConnell supports Trump legal fight, says he has a right to request recount." "Trump 'not backing down,' campaign manager says, urging staff to 'have patience' amid legal battles."

I would imagine they have the power to investigate. I doubt they have the power to deny certification (something out of the executive branch) without a new law.

No, they are still afraid of him. It was never the Presidency that gave Trump power ove the Republicans. He can still send out a a critical tweet and significantly hamper many Republican candidate's chance of winning. He could tell his supporters to stay home in the Georgia runoff and deliver the Senate to the Democrats. "The beginning of the fall..." No, we've been in decline for a while. This is just another milestone along the way. This is not America at the top of our game.

When Trump got it, I hoped he would recover because I think it's a bad thing for a sitting President to die in office, even Trump. A sitting Senate Majority Leader don't mean shit.

Particularly since the guy you are siding with just lost the election in the state you are attempting to win. Sure, barely, but he is barely unpopular.

Why is this a surprising question from a black person? If the answer was obvious, there would be a higher black turnout. I think this is a blindspot that many progressives have. I remember I was canvassing in a predominantly black, low income neighborhood with my wife. We knocked on a door. The person who answered said that he doesn't do politics. As we walked away, my wife fumed. But it shouldn't be surprising. Decades go by. Elections go by. Politicians go by. That neighborhood doesn't change. Part of that is due to the stability of the system. If Republicans had their way, social programs would get drastically cut and the neighborhood would suffer. But, the Dems are able to hold the line. It's not easy to explain to the person answering the door how we need his help to hold the line. But that success, such as it is, hides the importance of the elections. Snacks doesn't live in that neighborhood. There are plenty of professional black men who I imagine ask the same question. Yes, I imagine it sucks to have an obvious racist for a President, but does it materially impact him? I don't know.

I've tried this approach. Try to focus on a very narrow, easily provable set of facts. Anything that relies on media reports will not be sufficient. You need original quotes, preferably by Republican sources. The theory is that if I can get them to agree that something out of their echo chamber is false, maybe that will drive enough of a wedge that they will stop listening to the echo chamber. It's like the Miracle Worker, where if I can just teach them to sign W-A-T-E-R, everything else will fall in place. I haven't been successful yet. I've been able to convince them of a single item, but they quickly change the subject. They don't want to examine why they believed the bullshit in the first place. Still, I will continue to try this method on people who are at least trying to appear like they are engaging in a conversation. I've done this approach, mostly on random social media. The idea is that if you get them to show their ass enough, they won't enjoy it, and maybe they will be more reluctant to post bullshit. It does nothing to help change their mind, but at least it can slow down the rate in which they post misinformation. I've had some success in this. This is what I have discovered when challenging them on human rights issues. As long as they can pull out a "both sides" argument, there is no reason to address the basic problem. It's not important whether kids are in cages, causing trauma that will haunt them for the rest of their lives. The only thing that matters is whether the Obama administration also put kids in cages. Because the political point is more important than ending the cruelty. Because the cruelty does not bother them, it only bothers them that it might hurt Trump.

Campaign staffers were quoted as saying, "we're still getting paid, right?"

Folks need to slow their roll. As I understand it, Pfizer just released an interim report that indicated things are going pretty well. Cool. But that report has not had peer review yet and there are still ongoing trials.

Well, those tweets are fucking disgusting, and painfully unsurprising.

1-888-503-3526 It's very cathartic. I had some things I felt I really needed to get off my chest. I feel better now. (Remember, nothing that even hints at threatening.)

I think Parler is awesome. Get all the fucking Trumpsters on one site. Let them swap their fucking casserole recipes and talk about how great segregation was.. Give them two weeks with themselves and their thoughts, and they'll tear themselves to pieces. They are the aggrieved. They are the victims. Once they are separated from their current manufactured oppressor, they will surely create a new one.

I could see it playing out this way: Kushner and Melanie try to get Trump to concede. Donald gets pissed. Don Jr. tells dad that to keep pushing and...sniff...and the people will follow up. Eric agrees, although he may have just been asking for more juice; even he's not sure. Kush realizes he is between Donald and the most idiotic course of action, with Jr and Eric egging him on. That's not a good place to be. Kush must consider the will of the American people and the hierarchy of Donald's will. More rallies! More rallies for everyone! Melanie chases her third xanax with a lovely single malt and diet.

So, when a progressive loses, it’s because they are a progressive. When a moderate loses, it’s because they were associated with progressives? It doesn’t matter that many moderates performed worse than many progressives, it’s still the progressives’ fault. With that kind of logic, who needs logic.

Moderate Dems lost too. Of the 38 "red to blue" candidates the DCCC pushed, one has won and two are in close vote counts. 35 lost. Some of them were progressive. Some of them were moderate. In NE-1, Kate Bolz was a moderate candidate. She is currently in the Neb Unicameral, and voted for a piece of shit abortion bill. She was decently funded. She lost by 22 points, which was 7 points behind Biden. In 2018, a practically unfunded candidate with little campaign staff lost the same district by 21 points. Donna Shalala is a moderate and she lost her election despite being an incumbent. No matter how you cut it, there was a headwind against Democratic candidates. Progressive or Moderate was irrelevant. My guess is there was considerable Trumpster turnout which voted against Dems, while enough of the more traditional Republican split their tickets - Biden + Rs. There may have also been enough independent voters who went Biden+Rs.

For a minute I thought you were talking about the chick who voiced Katara on the Last Airbender.

Don't do it Donald. It's a trap. You've got this thing won. Don't let them scare you out of another four more years. They'll get that House back when they drag you out kicking and screaming...like a man.

Now that it's over, My wife was one of the staffers for the Kara Eastman for Congress. Kara lost by 4 points Tuesday, which is disappointing because 1) she only lost by 2 points in 2018, and 2) NE-2 went Biden, by several. If Kara would have won, we were planning on moving to DC, with my wife working on Capitol Hill. That would have been fucking bad ass. Instead, she is looking for a job, and we plan to move to the Pacific NW soon. That's still going to be pretty bad ass, and less stress. Having a connection to a campaign has been fascinating. The amount of money involved is disgusting, yet they were so bare bones that the shit-dive office they rented hasn't had heat for like two weeks. Kara is great. She's a cool person. Anyone who says all politicians are evil are full of shit, and just perpetuating a low bar. There are good people who run, and it is surprisingly easy to engage with them. The people who worked on the campaign are amazing. It's cliche, but they make me hopeful for the future. The drama I saw with the local and state party was frustrating, but the campaign folks were able to isolate themselves from it. The presence of idiots only blurs the importance if you let it; they can be ignored and worked around. If you have an opportunity to get involved with a political campaign, I highly recommend it. There are good people, and when they lose it's heartbreaking. But it's worth it.