That’s not the context of the post I was responding to. Bridget Burke’s post about “urban” and 3/5th is implying something. Well, if people feel they are unfairly penalized then take advantage of geography and move and get an advantage. The rules are what the rules are and what they needed to be to form a country in the first damn place. This petulance is old.
Obama knew about this if you read the NYT article. Why the hell didn’t he do anything about it? http://www.nytimes.com/
Shouldn’t the president who is actually in charge of the country and knew about hacking of the DNC originating in Russia actually share more responsibility than the Republican Party? The Democrats need to take responsibility for shitty security more than the Republicans do.
Oh for sure, New York liberals are all about building the Wall, dissing Muslims, sneering at climate science. Boy, you sure got those guys figured out!
No. As I clearly explained, I was responding to the poster’s two claims. That’s why I separated the responses into two paragraphs, a standard convention in English writing.
The NY Times says that congressional elections were also targeted.
Man, imagine if Trump really WERE Pinocchio. The dowel industry alone could add thousands of manufacturing jobs to the US economy: he’d save us singlenosedly!
DA! Order of Lenin, comrade.
So, what cabinet post/will YOU have…?
Press Secretary…?
Well, not all the rules needed to form our country in the first place were good ideas. Even then, many of the Founders had problems with slavery. Surely, they thought, a solution can be found–in the meantime, let’s not anger Virginia. (Not to mention South Carolina.) But too many of the good Founders died young; long-lived TJ ended his life in elegant bankruptcy. His only accomplishment post-Presidency was founding the UVA–so the young gentlemen of Virginia would not have their minds polluted at those foul Yankee schools–or, even worse, “foreign” colleges. Then we got a generation of Southerners who considered slavery a positive good–and tried to destroy the country. They failed.
Hard work in many of the states that went Red–mostly, if not totally, by the people who live there–is the way to a better America. Yes, it’s difficult. But let’s see whether Trump & the rest of his dreadful party really improve those people’s lives.
My own Blue County in a Red State was a small note of hope.
The Donald is your King of Petulance; not even elected, and most of the country is tired of his shit.
Actually, his favorability rating is still rising. https://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating
And actually, it’s still underwater. Actually.
The framework that led to a flawed, like every other human endeavor, nation that had the potential to become the most powerful nation in history is not too shabby. And you know we have peaceful mechanisms to modify that framework.
With regards to The Donald, I guess it’s time to start the race for 2020.
Republicans are, all of a sudden, big fans of Russia for some reason according to polling.
“According to polling”? Seriously? Are these the same polling organizations which predicted Hillary’s POTUS win? Did the polling organizations suddenly become more accurate?
That polling indicated that Trump had a 30% chance of winning, and he won. I’m not seeing where the polling was particularly inaccurate. Are you going to seriously make the claim that all polls everywhere are not data? Because that’s just silliness considering how accurate presidential polling has been historically.
This is polling by Yougov, a well regarded firm. So, do you have any explanation for why Republicans are now, very suddenly, so pro Russia?
Well regarded firm by whom, and based on what time frame?
I’m saying that “current”, and “recent” polling numbers have to be taken with a grain of salt. “Historically” includes the latest poll numbers that have actually been vetted by the results of a general election. The polls have been proven wrong.
Political polling results/claims made in April, or September, are simply claims. Unproven claims. Polling results vetted by a general election should make, or break, a polling organization. Unless you simply assume all polling is correct even when it’s been proven wrong.
I have to wonder why Russia is so pro Republican (or at least anti Democrat) at this point.
No. No they haven’t. The polls indicated that Trump had roughly a 30% chance of winning. Things that have a 30% chance of happening happen all the time. 30% of the time, in fact.
Russia is anti-American. For lots and lots of reasons, some leftovers of the cold war, some tied to a need for an external enemy to unify the people and justify some authoritarian internal policies, some due to Russia’s traditional and continued xenophobia, and some due to what is perceived as American meddling in internal Russian affairs by providing funding for numerous Russian internal dissident organizations.
Since for the last 8 years US was considered, at least superficially, for a foreign observer, to be run by Democratic administration, that anti-Americanism equates to anti-Democrat. Nothing to wonder about, it’s pretty straightforward.
You’d think more people would be wondering that.
Some, perhaps, tell themselves: ‘the Russians worked so hard–devoting resources that could have been devoted to productive ends–out of Pure Admiration (of Trump). Because he’s just that admirable!’
Others might ponder the question: could the Russians be expecting to get an actual return on their investment? Could their devotion of resources to the cause have some purpose other than Pure Admiration?
Only one model (538’s) indicated anything like 30%. Lots of other major ones indicated percentages in the 90s. That’s why Wang ate that insect on national TV.