POTUS Donald Trump

[jimmer]

 

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/08/505709/

 

The latest, direct from the horse's mouth. At least, I think that's the orifice involved.

You say horse, I say jackass :-)

[D. Hocking]

 

The awesomeness of this interview cannot be understated.

 

Easy for someone to say when he is not the leader of their country....

[Badsmerf]

Hasn't this been like every single interview he's ever done? The guy is a complete idiot. There is a reason the gop didn't want him. He is single handedly going to hand the midterms to the dems (with the help of courts and redistricting), and I absolutely expect him to not win the gop bid for 2020... Which actually helps the dems more I think.

[ashbury]

and I absolutely expect him to not win the gop bid for 2020

Think of all the predictions people made in 2013 concerning 2016, and how well they panned out. I am willing to say nothing of any greater predictive power than "watch what happens next."

[D. Hocking]

I guess this means Golf Digest is also fake news -- or it might mean Trump is lying in his tweet, which seems unlikely.

 

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump  19m19 minutes ago

 

I love the White House, one of the most beautiful buildings (homes) I have ever seen. But Fake News said I called it a dump - TOTALLY UNTRUE

 

Think of all the predictions people made in 2013 concerning 2016, and how well they panned out. I am willing to say nothing of any greater predictive power than "watch what happens next."

 

Think of all the predictions people were making in September and even October 2016.

[nicksaviking]

Ha, now the transcripts of his initial phone calls with the Mexican and Australian leaders have been leaked.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/politics/australia-mexico-transcripts/?utm_term=.1c9cbc378708

 

Regarding the Syrian refugees: "The President: Malcom [sic], why is this so important? I do not understand. This is going to kill me. I am the world's greatest person that does not want to let people into the country. And now I am agreeing to take 2,000 people and I agree I can vet them, but that puts me in a bad position. It makes me look so bad and I have only been here a week."

 

Ha, what the hell?!?

[Squirrel]

Stupid, dumb , ****ing stupid moron ... and worse are those who voted for him. I wish they could get exactly what they deserve without the rest of it getting it, too. But then I remember that I really believe that most people don't deserve to suffer.

[D. Hocking]

It is like Trump was created by taking Ed Bundy, Archie Bunker,Gilligan,Frank Burns and Barney Fife and blending them into one person, then lowered his IQ by an additional 75 points.

 

I can only imagine how much foaming at the mouth is going to be occurring at the West Virginia rally tonight.

[jimmer]

And now republican governors are going to work with trump on healthcare since congress didnt pass the repeal and replace bill.

[Mike Sixel]

 

And now republican governors are going to work with trump on healthcare since congress didnt pass the repeal and replace bill.

 

with Trump, and not congress? wow. 

[D. Hocking]

I guess the governor of WVa is going to announce at Trump's rally tonight that he is switching parties to the GOP (the GOP really has a strong hold on the governorships).  He actually was a Republican until 2015, so I am guessing he was Democrat in name only from 2015 to 2017.

 

I should not stereotype, but looking at his picture and knowing he is from WVa, I would have guessed he was Republican in the first place.

 

http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/wvpn/files/styles/medium/public/201707/JusticeFairmont14.jpg

[ashbury]

Trump Says Mueller Just Called Him and Said He’s the Most Innocent Person Ever

 

_{^{(I know that all this sort of satire does is make me feel smug while riling up the 85% of country who support Trump and make them dig in their heels further. But I can't help myself.)}}

[D. Hocking]

 

 

Trump Says Mueller Just Called Him and Said He’s the Most Innocent Person Ever

 

_{^{(I know that all this sort of satire does is make me feel smug while riling up the 85% of country who support Trump and make them dig in their heels further. But I can't help myself.)}}

 

I heard someone reading this on the radio this morning, and sadly while I thought it was probably a satire, I was not 100% sure until the person clarified that it was.  This is not that far from something which he actually would say - which is a bit scary and "sad!".

[ashbury]

This is not that far from something which he actually would say

Essential to it being satire. Which is what makes it tricky to pull off. I try to remind myself not to do it here on TD - that is, when I notice I'm doing it.

[twinsnorth49]

"Don't worry about Canada, don't even think about them ".

 

I support this decision, it would really be our preferred relationship.

[Doomtints]

 

 or it might mean Trump is lying in his tweet, which seems unlikely.

 

:roll: :roll:

[Mike Sixel]

Interesting read that could also be applied to the electoral college results.

 

small, right wing, states have more than 1 vote per person, by far, in national elections. Eventually we'll get to the point where almost everyone lives in cities, and yet the rural voter will control elections. Probably not sustainable over long time frames.....

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/

[gunnarthor]

 

Interesting read that could also be applied to the electoral college results.

 

small, right wing, states have more than 1 vote per person, by far, in national elections. Eventually we'll get to the point where almost everyone lives in cities, and yet the rural voter will control elections. Probably not sustainable over long time frames.....

 

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-congressional-map-is-historically-biased-toward-the-gop/

This is overstated. If you look at the smallest states (3 or 4 EV), Clinton actually won more states (7-6) and EV (24-20).  

 

I think the article was a bit lacking in analysis. Currently, the GOP has an edge because they are viewed as the better answer in many states. Democrats have lost support in rural areas but that wasn't always the case. The MN DFL used to be pretty strong in rural areas, for instance. The party has abandoned those voters more than the GOP has won them. So these things can be pretty cyclical. If 1992 Bill Clinton had run in 2016, I think he would have had a sweeping victory.

[Mike Sixel]

This is overstated. If you look at the smallest states (3 or 4 EV), Clinton actually won more states (7-6) and EV (24-20).  

 

I think the article was a bit lacking in analysis. Currently, the GOP has an edge because they are viewed as the better answer in many states. Democrats have lost support in rural areas but that wasn't always the case. The MN DFL used to be pretty strong in rural areas, for instance. The party has abandoned those voters more than the GOP has won them. So these things can be pretty cyclical. If 1992 Bill Clinton had run in 2016, I think he would have had a sweeping victory.

And? The point is rural voters have more power nationally and in state houses than equal representation would suggest. And, their leverage per voter will increase as their relative population decreases.

[gunnarthor]

 

And? The point is rural voters have more power nationally and in state houses than equal representation would suggest. And, their leverage per voter will increase as their relative population decreases.

Unless you want to divide up both houses of congress and the White House into one big pie, you're always going to have some group with more voting power than other groups. That's what happens in our form of government. Sometimes it helps one party, sometimes it helps the other.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Unless you want to divide up both houses of congress and the White House into one big pie, you're always going to have some group with more voting power than other groups. That's what happens in our form of government. Sometimes it helps one party, sometimes it helps the other.

 

I do want the white house to be one vote=one vote, yes. Just like governships in, I think, every state. That would be a nice start.

[gunnarthor]

 

I do want the white house to be one vote=one vote, yes. Just like governships in, I think, every state. That would be a nice start.

I think that would be a pretty bad idea but one that will never happen, anyway.

 

Here's an article by Judge Posner on the value of the electoral college. Posner is generally considered the most respected judge not on the Supreme Court.

 

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2012/11/defending_the_electoral_college.html

[PseudoSABR]

Isn't Trump the very kind of candidate the Electoral College was designed to protect against?

 

I see no reason to give more weight to less-densely populated states, as they still do not garner presidential campaign visits even with their out-sized effect.   

 

 

[Badsmerf]

That article falls pretty short from being compelling. I don't think anyone is going to be able to justify people in Wyoming being worth more than people in California when it comes to voting for the president. Wyoming already has the advantage with the Senate, and now the electoral college gives them even more voting power. I don't really care which party benefits, it's still wrong. The electoral college needs to change. Maybe not abolished, but definitely changed.

[gunnarthor]

 

That article falls pretty short from being compelling. I don't think anyone is going to be able to justify people in Wyoming being worth more than people in California when it comes to voting for the president. Wyoming already has the advantage with the Senate, and now the electoral college gives them even more voting power. I don't really care which party benefits, it's still wrong. The electoral college needs to change. Maybe not abolished, but definitely changed.

Big states gain far more in the EC than small states. 14m people voted in CA for 55 EV. Less than 900k voted for 3 EV in Wyoming. That means that California voters actually had better voting power (250k voters per EV v. nearly 300k). But the big states huge payoff - in both the EC and the House - means they have far more impact on the nation than Wyoming. It's why Democrats have been able to have majorities in the House and control the White House while losing the popular vote in most states.  Those advantages were nullified slightly by adding the Senate so large states wouldn't dominate smaller states.

 

Now, gerrymandering is a different problem ....

[howeda7]

 

Big states gain far more in the EC than small states. 14m people voted in CA for 55 EV. Less than 900k voted for 3 EV in Wyoming. That means that California voters actually had better voting power (250k voters per EV v. nearly 300k). But the big states huge payoff - in both the EC and the House - means they have far more impact on the nation than Wyoming. It's why Democrats have been able to have majorities in the House and control the White House while losing the popular vote in most states.  Those advantages were nullified slightly by adding the Senate so large states wouldn't dominate smaller states.

 

Now, gerrymandering is a different problem ....

Your math is a bit off. 14 million and 900K are not the #s.  

 

CA has ~50 million people and 55 EV. ~1 million people per electoral vote. Wyoming has ~750K people and 3 EV. ~250K per EV. Votes in Wyoming have approximately 4 times as weight as CA. I'm not sure what the turnout %'s are for each state, but I'd be surprised if they're more than 10% apart, so the math wouldn't change much.

[gunnarthor]

 

Your math is a bit off. 14 million and 900K are not the #s.  

 

CA has ~50 million people and 55 EV. ~1 million people per electoral vote. Wyoming has ~750K people and 3 EV. ~250K per EV. Votes in Wyoming have approximately 4 times as weight as CA. I'm not sure what the turnout %'s are for each state, but I'd be surprised if they're more than 10% apart, so the math wouldn't change much.

http://www.cnn.com/election/results/states/california/president

http://www.cnn.com/election/results/states/wyoming

You're partly right - 14m is about right but I had the wrong number for Wyoming's turnout, it was 250k or so. Not sure how I ****ed that up so much.

[nicksaviking]

 

Big states gain far more in the EC than small states. 14m people voted in CA for 55 EV. Less than 900k voted for 3 EV in Wyoming. That means that California voters actually had better voting power (250k voters per EV v. nearly 300k). But the big states huge payoff - in both the EC and the House - means they have far more impact on the nation than Wyoming. It's why Democrats have been able to have majorities in the House and control the White House while losing the popular vote in most states.  Those advantages were nullified slightly by adding the Senate so large states wouldn't dominate smaller states.

 

Now, gerrymandering is a different problem ....

 

One of the biggest.

[nicksaviking]

Trump's retweeting pro-Trump Russian bots now:

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-twitter-bot-nicole-protrump45-2017-8

 

 

[D. Hocking]

I am still waiting for him to make some sort of statement of the Marine deaths off of Australia and the attack at the Islamic center in Bloomington.  They must not be discussing these things on Fox and Friends,

 

Ah - he just sent another set of  tweets, he must have finished his round of golf.  Good to know he is busy prepping for his big meeting on the opioid crisis...