Of course, what that does tells me is something else then:
Among the Republicans supporting Trump in the town hall meeting** almost 100% reported to not believe that global warming was taking place. **
We are left then with the logical conclusion that while most of the Trump supporters are ignoramuses, there is indeed a good number of Republicans **that know better **but they have decided to not be leaders, but panderers of ignorants (and they want to keep them that way) regardless if that issue is affecting many now and much more in the future…
But for thinking Americans, those two strong parties should be the Democrats and the Socialists, each serving a useful function in reining in the other’s excesses . . . which the GOP does not in any sense, any more.
Is that surprising? The Pubs get most of the voters with a college education and no more. The Dems get the HS dropouts plus the ones with graduate degrees, and the dropouts are more numerous, bringing down the average. The poor vote Dems because they know Dems are the only party in any way looking out for them, and the really-smart vote Dem because they’re really-smart.
I certainly do not posit that flipping the House is impossible and in some other thread in this forum argued that this strange election brings up the possibility. The reality is that many of those seats are in suburban districts and a Trump incited staying home of college educated Whites, or even flipping sides, could have outsized impacts. OTOH a turning their back on Trump might give a chance to win a different set of districts. Generally House waves occur against an incumbent’s party but these are special times.
Still the reality is the same: the odds of that in this or the next few cycles are still smaller than the risk of the GOP winning a Presidency within that time.
In any case I do not get the sense that there is inaction to try to win those potentially winnable districts and agree that such inaction if it existed would be stupid.
Altercations at the Trump rally in AZ tonight. One protester was apparently sucker punched and stomped as he was being escorted from the rally. Another protester appears to have been manhandled by Corey Lewandowski.
Trump doesn’t want trade wars. He claims he will be less timid in the face of the threat of them from our trading partners. This is just posturing, something that a lot of leaders and candidates around the world do.
If something like this ever actually happened it wouldn’t hurt Apple much, as long as the same incentive structure was forced upon Samsung and other competitors as well.
In the particular case of Apple, they might just build a plant to assemble US models here if Trump gets elected anyway, just to turn all of this exposure into positive, patriotic, PR.
Free trade does the most good for the most people globally, in the long term, yes. But Apple could and would afford a few more dollars labor on an $800 phone if they got squeezed, regardless. And this could conceivably help some of those* here* in the short term. People instinctively understand this, which is why this pitch of Trump’s is such good stump speech material.
Well, about Trump’s campaign, regarding double standards it is enough to say that Joe Arpaio is participating in the Trump Rally in Arizona.
The same Joe Arpaio that is being tried for contempt of court by trying to get around the court ordered remedies to his demonstrated racial profiling of minorities.
Arpaio also investigated the current wife of the judge in his case in order to intimidate him.
And Trump does not see anything wrong with that.
Of course, one wonders too when will the so called liberal media demand that Trump repudiate Arpaio, it is too late IMHO to stop pretending that Trump does not know who he is getting close to. Before, even with less connections that the one seen with Trump and Arapio, the media criticized Obama so much that he even left his former church and repudiated pastor Jeremiah Wright from that church because he had said very controversial ideas in the past.
This thinking American thinks that having ideological parties has been tried over the past fifty years, and it has failed. We’d be better going to back to a situation in which the two parties are big tents with large contingents of truly liberal and conservative Republicans, and actually progressive and conservative Democrats.
This is because the presidential system we have in the US, in contrast to the parliamentary system, requires willingness for parties to compromise. If US parties have strong principles, they won’t compromise, and you get government shutdowns and unfilled judgeships.
It could be that 2016 is a critical election year during which the pendulum returns to the situation of the 1950’s and 1960’s, when observers commonly complained that there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the parties. If Trump is the nominee, where do the neo-conservatives go? Some of them, to the Democrats! And if Clinton is the nominee, and then pivots to her real views on world trade, where do those for whom anti-globalization is the most important issue go? Some of them, to the Republicans!
I think this would make our government function better. I really this isn’t as exciting as shifting the whole structure to the left or right.
Wright played a much bigger role in Obama’s past and his campaign than Arpaio has in Trump’s. And Wright had extreme fringe viewpoints, while Arpaio is a figure who is symbolic of anti-illegal-immigrant sentiment, which is very common.
Still waiting for all the evidence of Obama’s foreign birth that Arpaio and Trump were looking for.
But Wright played absolutely no role in Obama’s campaign, and he certainly didn’t open for him in front of frothing at the mouth crowds with the sole purpose to insight anger and division.
Nonsense, Arapio was found by the courts to use racial profiling, unless you can show us Wright as being convicted and on trial when Obama was running we can dismiss all your platitudes as not being based on reality.
So yes, I will think that the media not taking Trump to task for his horrible fellow traveler is a demonstration of a double standard.
Arapio is a well publicized figure, and a symbol of anti-illegal-immigrant sentiment. Not only is this sentiment not on the fringe, it’s* popular.* The media doesn’t have to tar Trump with the association, he is doing it himself. Wright’s “America deserved 9-11 because it’s a big white devil” sermons don’t reflect a sentiment that is as widely held, to say the least.
The media has taken the Sheriff to task many times, and Trump is still prominently featuring him when he is in places where the issue he represents is potent. The story has gotten lot’s of coverage in the past and will as the campaign continues.
That is nice, do you realize that you are making the point that what the courts say should be based on popular opinion?
Not for this AFAIK.
Again, I only expect that to be fair the media also takes Trump to task until Trump repudiates Arpaio. And BTW, so should you and all others that do claim to believe in law and order. Unless you are defending the willful contempt of what the courts decided years ago.
Both sides of the political spectrum use bullshit to manipulate those who are paranoid and ignorant.
Wright was going to play a part in the campaign until his statements were publicized. And his views, unlike the anti-illegal-immigrant sentiment Arpaio represents, are almost universally unpopular.
Before you continue posting really ignorant points you need to get this: you are not even wrong, the point here was that Arpaio’ original lawsuit included legal residents and citizens that happened to be Hispanic, Arpaio with his racial profiling did run over their rights. I’m not talking here about illegal migration really. But **Racial Profiling. ** And the fact that Arapio is back in court, but this time for contempt as he has tried to get around what the courts recommended as remedy.
And then He investigated the wife of the judge presiding in his contempt of court case.
Are you telling us that you do agree with all that?