Does Trump Know How To Count?
In his urge to rush toward exciting his religious right base, President* Trump will very soon announce his nomination to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. The two women most mentioned as the possible nominee are both committed to overturning Roe v Wade at some point and making abortion illegal in the United States again. Trump thinks that because this makes his base happy it will help him in the election.
There is a lot of reason though to think that this will backfire on Trump and hurt his chances of re-election.
The most obvious reason is that 65 or 70% of Americans support Roe v Wade and , in general, abortion rights for American women. By nominating someone that the Democrats can credibly refer to as a justice that would end legal abortion , and doing so with a month left in the campaigns, Trump may in fact be hanging an anchor around the necks of not only himself but also numerous Republican senate candidates around the country.
Once Trump announces the nominee in a few days there will be a month for the Democrats to go on tv and for the Lincoln Project and Republican Voters Against Trump to create ads to play in the suburban areas of swing states telling voters that Trump and the republicans want to end legal abortion. The simple fact is 70 is a lot more than 30. If the 70% who want to preserve Roe v Wade are persuaded to make that an issue to vote on on Nov 3, Trump is likely screwed, as is the hope of a Republican senate next year.
Trump has always been much more interested in exciting his MAGA crowd than he has been in being the president of everyone. He continues to do so with his absurd rallies filled with nonsense clowning and lies. He likes those people because they wear the red hats and they laugh at his jokes that appeal to a ten year old's mentality.
Ever since 2017, in general elections, Trump favored candidates have underperformed , either losing to the Democrat or often receiving a lesser percentage of votes in the district or state than in 2016. There was of course the blue wave of 2018. Because he is basically an idiot Trump has always assumed that keeping his 40% (tops) fan base happy would make him a winner in 2020. There is virtually no actual evidence of this but he is dancing with himself who brung him.
Imagine the airwaves flooded in the next month with ads telling the nation's women that they will lose the right to legal abortion. This could gin up anti-Trump turnout that will overwhelm whatever benefit Trump thinks he is gaining by naming a far right anti Roe justice. Because 70 is more than 30.
Tags
Who is online
552 visitors
If he had a brain in his head Trump would have waited until after the election before mentioning replacing Ginsburg. But he is going to do it in a few days, giving the Democrats weeks to campaign on the theme of saving Roe v Wade.
The Dems have consistently shown that they, in general, are terrible campaigners and interrogators. Beating up on Barrett, the likely nominee, will probably backfire on them. There is much more at stake here than the abortion issue.
I suspect the confirmation process will begin next week, with the vote coming after Trump's reelection
Have to agree about them being terrible campaigners, but not interrogators (for the most part).
Yes and no. There IS much more at stake, however many pro-lifers see abortion as the only cause that matters. They can forgive anything else that judge may believe in, as long as the judge is an abortion hating Christian.
Why wait? A judicial nomination underscores Trump's 'Law & Order' campaign.
Democrats want to push the abortion issue. But Trump has been campaigning on crime and lawlessness. And Democrats risk changing the perception of abortion into another example of lawlessness advocated by Democrats.
Trump really has changed the political landscape. The old tried-and-true kneejerk politics can quickly become a minefield.
Let's get this straight, the Biden campaign had made the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic it's #1 issue. The media helped them do just that. Suddenly that has dramatically changed. The Ginsburg vacancy has now altered the election from a referendum on Trump’s performance in a crisis to a discussion about the future of the Court. As the top democrats begin to threaten Senate Republicans and potentially unleash all the nastiness they hurled at Brett Kavanaugh, against a woman, it will be the radicalized Democratic Party in the spotlight and Joe Biden and Donald Trump might just become an after thought.
The vast number of Americans dont have the view of "radical leftists" that you do. I dont know if you know this Vic but many of your views are extremist.
I can see the Lincoln Project rousing voters to protect Roe v Wade without even mentioning the nominees name. They will mention Trump's name and Trump's announcement at one point that he was only going to nominate judges that oppose abortion. Its easy Vic, and I'm sure they are already writing the ads.
The Democrats are not injecting abortion as an issue, your moron president Trump is by trying to confirm an anti abortion judge before the election.
John, anyone who is a normal human being was totally repulsed by the Kavanaugh hearings. People are also upset about all the rioting going on since late May.
I dont know if you know this Vic but many of your views are extremist.
John, this may astonish you, but I bet many feel the same about you.
I can see the Lincoln Project rousing voters to protect Row v Wade without even mentioning the nominees name. They will mention Trump's name and Trump's announcement at one point that he was only going to nominate judges that oppose abortion. Its easy Vic, and I'm sure they are already wring the ads.
John, none of that will happen in a vacuum. Democrats are once again going to go way over the limits of civilized behaviour to stop the nomination. That will be the story and this time they'll be doing it to a woman!
Anyone who is a normal human being is repulsed by Donald Trump. Most Americans don't want the president of the United States to be a total asshole. And fixing that problem will require a new president.
Although Blasey Ford could not prove her allegation, from what I read at the time there is little doubt that Kavanaugh was an entitled punk in high school who took part in disrespecting the girls within his upper class social circle. I would admit though that his being a teenage misogynist jerk is not an automatic disqualifier later in life.
I am not talking about whatever you do or dont consider civilized behavior. I'm talking about Trump foolishly making abortion an issue in this election by nominating an anti abortion justice a few weeks before the election. It is much more likely this will hurt Trump than help him .
That would be an understatement. Her so called "witnesses" countered everything she said and one of her "attorneys" admitted what many suspected:
Enjoy your day
And yet, the FBI was blocked from a thorough investigation of the claim. How is a thorough investigation done when the investigators are not allowed to interview the suspect, or any possible witnesses? And how many days were they given to complete this "investigation"?
Yes but not for the reasons you think.
WTF does that have to do with a SCOTUS pick?
That's pretty funny since the ONLY Senator that went 'way over the limits of civilized behavior' in the Kavanaugh hearings was Lindsey Graham.
Do you think that the nominee's gender should shield her from scrutiny?
"And yet, the FBI was blocked from a thorough investigation of the claim. How is a thorough investigation done when the investigators are not allowed to interview the suspect, or any possible witnesses? And how many days were they given to complete this "investigation"?"
Completely true Ozz. Whiny little bitch Kavanaugh was never vetted. Just rammed through.
There wasn't any witnesses. That was determined. The only thing she had going for her was what four friends "said" she "told" them years after it happened (supposedly). Basically a she said/he said. No material witnesses to the alleged "crime".
Seems to me there was no reason to go any farther than what it did.
Whiny little bitch Kavanaugh, I repeat, was never vetted. His nomination was just rammed through.
No, m'dear. The 200,000 dead people helped them do just that.
Oh I know, we wouldn't have had any dead if only somebody else was president!/ s
The forecast was for 2.2 Million
That's if NOTHING was done. Thankfully, the Governors did taker action to mitigate the virus spread, no thanks to Trump who knew how serious the threat was at least a month before first outbreaks hit. If he had just passed on that information to the Governors that would have saved lives but instead he chose to hide the truth. The facts show an earlier serious response would have saved tens of thousands of American lives. Dishonest Donald has blood on his hands and no amount of twisting, deflecting, whining and moaning from his ass kissing sycophants will wash it away.
Bullshit!
2.2 million if nobody did anything. The only thing keeping us away from that number are the state's governors that stepped up on their own.
How One Model Simulated 2.2 Million U.S. Deaths from COVID-19
C'mon, Vic! You know better than that.
The death rate at the beginning was around 10%. At that rate, we would have five million dead. Those early estimates included a lesser death rate, so two million was not an unreasonable idea.
The death rate has declined even more, so we have had only
TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DEAD
The first two words of your link are:
Since Trump hung STATES out to dry. Governors and Mayors took steps to mitigate the spread of the virus. THEY saved lives.
Trump claimed to set restrictions on March 29 to extend until April 30, yet on April 17 he tweeted 'Liberate' Michigan and Minnesota and Virginia undermining his own Administrations guidelines. He continues to do so to this day.
Which is how our system is supposed to operate. Remember all of the clamor when Trump insinuated that he was going to force states to do something? Not his province. Democrats love to play both sides of the federalism coin to suit their own argument.
Then why did Trump declare a NATIONAL emergency? Federal government has a very distinct role in this emergency, a role that the Trump administration has not only failed to meet, but one that Trump himself has actually undermined.
No it is not, ESPECIALLY after it was designated a National Health Emergency.
Then Trump should have forced states to open? That would have been fine?
Trump should have followed the guidelines documented by his own experts. He didn't then and he still refuses to do so. Trump and the GOP insist that funding be based on fully reopening schools yet only 4 states meet the guidelines to do so.
No more than it was fine for him to demand that 'blue' states reopen while giving 'red' states a pass. We didn't see tweets to 'Liberate Texas' or 'Liberate Florida'.
That is because their respective governors utilized the authority they had. Michigan? Same deal. She was utilizing her authority as governor. The operative language here is "federal guideline." Its a guideline. That's why Trump slowly went away on that deal, and the pundits on the left mocked Trump for it, as I'll admit I did at the time he was leaning on her...which is about all he could do.
Is it your posit that the Governors of Minnesota and Virginia do not have such authority?
Yet Trump and his sycophants have been attacked her ad nauseam for using that authority.
Yes, a guideline allegedly devised by Agencies whose mission is to protect the health of the American people. Guidelines which those same Agencies use to protect their leadership while failing to provide the rank and file with the protection they enjoy. Guidelines which have been conscientiously used by the only 4 states in the US that have reduced their contagion levels to below 1%.
What 'deal' are you talking about? We're talking about Guidelines issued to mitigate a National Health Emergency, not some fantasy Trump 'deal'.
So Trump is mocked. SO WHAT? People are dying and the issue is whether Trump is mocked for the STUPID shit he says? Fuck him.
Trump is STILL attacking Whitmer and he did so in rally in Michigan in early Sept.
Nowhere, in anything I have said, could that have even been inferred. If they want to enforce some rules, I think that's their province, which is why I mention Michigan in the first place. What's good for Florida is also good for Michigan, or any other state.
As to the rest of your comment, I might suggest you take it easy a bit. It appears that you are so hung up on Trump, that the mere mention of the name gets you lathered up.
You focus on the mocking, and not the reason for the same. The reason Trump is being mocked for attempting to force states to open is because he hasn't the constitutional authority. The irony here is that you are blasting Trump for not doing enough, and at the same time supporting the states that rightfully claim that he can't force them to open. It doesn't work that way. Open...don't open...enforce some rules...or don't...all are at the discretion of the respective states...not Trump.
Cuomo and DeBlasio went through their own little tiff concerning state authority to direct New York City, to much the same result as Trump's attempt. And, people are dying, so while we are on it, we might as well say fuck DeBlasio and Murphy. Let's give credit where it's due. Their states account for right at 25% of all covid deaths.
trumpturd hasn't done shit since day one. All states have been left up to their own devices since day one.
See 2.2.6 and 2.2.10........................................
No need, waste of time.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Actually, the litigation in states have specifically claimed that the STATE constitution didn't give those governors the authority. I was open to the possibility that you knew that.
Why?
You didn't mention Trump in your 'operative word' claim and I didn't mention him in my reply to it.
So did you.
I disagree. IMHO, the reason Trump is being mocked is that HIS Administration put out guidelines and and then almost immediately demanded that they be ignored, ignored them himself, and encouraged others around him to do so.
Health experts have rightly scorned and expressed contempt for those actions.
Only someone with a limited imagination would think that was the only failing in Trump's handling of the pandemic.
The irony here is that Trump uses the threat of withholding funding to states because of sanctuary status, anarchist jurisdiction, mail in voting and even to force them to open schools to full time in person classes but you seem to think that he couldn't have done so for following the guidelines set forth by the CDC.
That 'discretion of the respective states' thingy seems to be fluid in Trump world and WHEN he chooses to ignore it looks self serving.
That's bullshit. Cuomo won the 'tiff' about state authority and took responsibility and brought his state through the pandemic. NY is one of only 4 states where the spread is below 1%.
Trump punted on ANY responsibility for anything. IF Trump had done his fucking job, tens of thousands of deaths in Southern and Central states may not have happened. Millions of people need not have become sick or have the specter of life long health repercussions. They had the advantage of weeks to prepare and the gathered knowledge of healthcare professionals from New England who passed on best practices.
It's pretty sad that you name the 2 governors who had the highest initial cases but did the best job of bending the curve.
That is a shit load of people considering Trump says virtually no one.
What are you saying?!
Our Beloved Prophet Speaks The TRUTH.
The only possible conclusion is that TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND is virtually no one.
Let us give thanks that we don't have "many" deaths. That would have to be in the millions...
You mean like Cuoma, Whitless, and the other Democratic Governors that dumped those infected with Covid 19 into retirement and nursing homes that couldn't handle them; exposing those most susceptible to the virus?
Those bastions of stupidity Democratic governors?
Yeah, the Democrats have really saved us./S
Interested in learning more, if you have a link to the case filings, please share them, or even a case citation, case name, etc. As an aside, if that is the case, and if those states are idiotic enough to draft state constitutions that release power to the federal government, that was in their power. Fuckin stupid, but within the respective states' powers.
That's the federal executive's hammer, withholding of funding.
I wasn't focusing on the fact of Trump being mocked, and, in fact, sort of mocked him myself. Which is why I believe you are too hung up on Trump. You apparently stopped reading at the word "mocked." Let's review what I actually said here.
Pretty clear statement, not crying about Trump being mocked, and expressly admitting that I joined in for the stated reason.
And by all means, shower NJ and NY with praises. 25% of all deaths. I'll slow clap for the stellar jobs they did.
Nevermind on my request. I thought you were saying the state constitutions released the power to the feds. You lost me in your comment, as I was discussing the federal government's ability to control the respective states, and asserting that the state's had the authority with regard to the response to Covid. Your response actually supports my position. It's still the state's call.
You didn't post the truth. Or facts.
Based on the rest of you paragraph, I doubt it. You either misunderstand my comment or you intentionally misrepresented it.
READ this again and pay particular attention to what I highlight:
Note there is NOTHING about 'releasing power to the federal government'.
How and when Trump chooses to use that 'hammer' is exactly my point. You failed to address it and instead deflect to 'mocking'.
That's today and the pandemic is still growing. The chart I posted shows where the pandemic is growing and it isn't NY or NJ.
It is a good thing that I know that you did not add the s/ tag.
205,614 dead as of today Vic, with 168,474 dead and counting from the Trump virus....!
Take whatever offense you want, but there is a reason you argue with everyone on here. The comment that you originally responded to concerned interplay between the federal and state government. I'd be a smart ass, like you, but what's the use. Maybe I originally misunderstood your comment, but when you jump federal/state interplay, to wholly intrastate...?
No, seriously interested, and damn sure am now. Seriously, point me int the direction of where you are getting your information. I'd love to read it.
My comment merely points out your misinterpretation. No offense taken or implied.
Actually, the comment that I originally responded to concerned Vic's link.
If you mean YOUR comment:
That more of an abdication than an interplay.
Your comment reflects that you think there is a 'use'.
Where did I do that? Post the comment #.
You mean YES you misunderstood my comment.
Now, multiple GOP state legislatures have sued their Governors because of shutdown orders. Texas, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and California just off the top of my head. If you are sincerely interested in the details, google "GOP sues governor' and thousands of articles will pop up.
Interesting article.
At-risk Senators may think about this and decide that they would be much better off if the vote could be postponed until after the election. At which point the nominee would be under great pressure to withdraw.
This seem very plausible... to the point that an intelligent Trump would not venture out, just to be stymied. But of course "intelligent Trump" is a unicorn...
The death of RGB turned the heat on this election up to 11! So far the only Republican Senators to go on record to wait are Collins and Mukowski. I think they will stick to their guns on this but will be hit back from within their own party as the two front runners for the empty seat have already been approved by the Senators. Also noteworthy is a report saying the Dems have raised $20M for Senate races since the news broke on Justice Ginsburg's death.
They say the Democrats have raised 70 million dollars for their national campaigns since Ginsburgs passing was announced.
The NPR morning report on my way into work said $20, but they may have been low balling it.
We'll need a few days, to get feedback from Republican Senators in uncertain seats. Voting for an "anti-abortion activist who will immediately throw out Roe v Wade" could seem like a very bad idea.
We'll see more when there is an actual nominee, which I just heard would be by the end of the week. Until then the pressure to stall a Senate vote until the election will keep ramping up.
Since overturning Roe is Mitch's fondest wish, we can assume that whoever the nominee is, "anti-abortion activist who will immediately throw out Roe v Wade" will be applicable.
It was $100 million for ActBlue alone.
I don't know what to think about anything you say, Tex.
[removed]
Here's a bit of an interesting take from fivethirtyeight -
I doubt that my opinion carries much weight, for you.
Your pretending to not know that McConnell wants Roe overthrown is not credible.
It will be interesting to see how Lincoln Project Senators vote on Trump's pick - to see if they are genuine in their adhering to their project's principles, or belong to it for no other reason than to keep their seats in the election.
Yes.
Some commentators are saying that Trump’s nominee will be confirmed during his lame-duck period.
That would be the height of hypocrisy... but hey! Republicans!
If Trump is defeated he is a lame duck until January (the 20th?). What if Senators are defeated? Do they also carry on as lame ducks as well? And to the same date?
Dunno. You'd think it would be an easy Google search... but I haven't found the answer.
Oh... duh!
It's in the Constitution. January 3rd.
Found it. It's in the 20th Amendment:
LOL. I posted my reply before looking to see your answer.
I see that some lefties are still praying for the immaculate conception of their prophet. Joseph, and his rise to rule over the hallowed halls of White House...to be shamefully used as placeholder for Harris...
I dont know which is correct. A reporter on MSNBC said the Act Blue organization said 70 million was donated since Ginsburg's death.
" Donors gave $70.6m on Saturday alone , and $6.3m in one hour on Friday , Hill said, beating previous records of $41.6m in one day and $4.3m in one hour."
"ActBlue – a donation-processing site that helps Democratic candidates, committees and organizations raise money – reported more than $95 million raised from the time Ginsburg's death was announced until Sunday morning . "
So the $70 million was just Saturday alone.