Did you hear that Trump added a cleric to his party? She's casting Protection from Evil 10' Radius to guard him against the demons and witches of the Democratic party who "operate in sorcery and witchcraft" against him.
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
The Conservative General Election Campaign begins!
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Did you hear that Trump added a cleric to his party? She's casting Protection from Evil 10' Radius to guard him against the demons and witches of the Democratic party who "operate in sorcery and witchcraft" against him.
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
The worst part about these bloodsuckers is that they are in large part to blame for the whole 'poor people deserve it' attitudes on the religious right. In their minds it's as simple as, 'those losers don't have enough faith in God to believe their way out of poverty'. I'm not shitting you. All it takes to get rich is faith, so if you're not rich, you don't have faith. I grew up surrounded by morons like this...
Edit: None of them were rich either of course, neither did they get rich no matter how much money they sent to charlatans like this. But hey, they're better off than the losers so they have that going for them. God likes them a 'little bit more than those people' at least. I should never have dabbled in psychology...
The Conservative General Election Campaign begins!
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Not the best start...
The UK election is very interesting to me. I've essentially heard that while Corbyn is unbelievably unpopular (which is interesting to me. I wouldnt think it tenable to be as unpopular as he is, and still be the head of the opposition) - he's apparently an outstanding campaigner. The Tories had something like a 17% lead in the polls when Theresa May called her snap election, and they ended up losing seats.
The Conservative General Election Campaign begins!
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Not the best start...
The UK election is very interesting to me. I've essentially heard that while Corbyn is unbelievably unpopular (which is interesting to me. I wouldnt think it tenable to be as unpopular as he is, and still be the head of the opposition) - he's apparently an outstanding campaigner. The Tories had something like a 17% lead in the polls when Theresa May called her snap election, and they ended up losing seats.
A UK equivalent to the Electoral College or gerrymandering at play here, or is there some other factor in play? Voter turnout is generally better in Europe so that can't be the explanation, can it?
Did you hear that Trump added a cleric to his party? She's casting Protection from Evil 10' Radius to guard him against the demons and witches of the Democratic party who "operate in sorcery and witchcraft" against him.
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
WTF?!
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." ~Ephesians 6:12
"Lord, we ask you to deliver our president from any snare, any setup of the enemy, according to Ephesians 6:12. Any persons [or] entities aligned against the president will be exposed and dealt with and overturned by the superior blood of Jesus," she said.
That is a stretch. I am guessing just like the constitution, the bible isn't required reading for his administration and they can claim it says anything.
BTW, the rest of it reads: "[13]Therefore take up the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you will be able to stand your ground, and having done everything, to stand. [14]Stand firm then, with the belt of truth fastened around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness arrayed, [15]and with your feet fitted with the readiness of the gospel of peace."
Truth, peace, righteousness. . . three words I would never associate with Trump.
The Conservative General Election Campaign begins!
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Not the best start...
The UK election is very interesting to me. I've essentially heard that while Corbyn is unbelievably unpopular (which is interesting to me. I wouldnt think it tenable to be as unpopular as he is, and still be the head of the opposition) - he's apparently an outstanding campaigner. The Tories had something like a 17% lead in the polls when Theresa May called her snap election, and they ended up losing seats.
A UK equivalent to the Electoral College or gerrymandering at play here, or is there some other factor in play? Voter turnout is generally better in Europe so that can't be the explanation, can it?
The Conservatives ran a pretty dreadful campaign. They picked up on the unpopularity of Corbyn in the country and, rather than talking on the issues, they made the election about personalities - hoping that people would choose "strong & stable" Theresa May over Corbyn. The problem with that is that May does not come across as very personable and focusing the campaign on her helped Corbyn appear more palatable by contrast - as a result Labour picked up a lot more of the floating voters in the election than the Conservatives.
When May called the election in 2017 she had around a 20% lead over Labour in the polls and she therefore hoped to increase her majority. The results though reflected only a 2% lead and actually decreased her majority - ultimately making it impossible to deliver her policies.
Johnson currently has a minority government and thus has far less to lose by calling an election than May had. At the moment he has about a 12% lead over Labour in the polls, from being roughly level when he became Prime Minister. However, as you can see from this poll tracker from the Guardian, that's effectively the result of the Brexit party losing support.
Thus far Johnson's refused to agree a joint strategy for the election with the Brexit party - apparently believing he can further squeeze their vote by playing up the danger of Corbyn being elected instead. To me that feels like something of a repeat of May's error - relying too much on the supposed unpopularity of Corbyn. Johnson's failure to deliver on his promised Brexit in October leaves him vulnerable to attack by the Brexit party and I think their vote is much more likely to rebound from their current poll rating than to diminish further. If that is the case then the vote share of the Conservatives will certainly fall from the 42% gained in 2017.
That could still give them a decent majority, but that would then rely on votes being split more evenly among opposition parties, so that Labour also see a reduction from their 40% in 2017. I think Labour's vote share will indeed fall, as the Liberal Democrats are likely to pick up a substantial number of anti-Brexit votes. However, it does seem possible that there will be considerably more tactical voting in this election than has historically happened. If the opposition to the Conservatives is concentrated onto the party best able to defeat them in particular seats, this election could go very badly wrong for them.
On the issue of Corbyn's popularity, it's true that he has had a consistently low popularity rating with the electorate as a whole. However, he is extremely popular with activist Labour party members which has allowed him to retain (and in fact strengthen) his grip on the party despite the fact that the majority of his MPs have opposed him during his time as leader. He's also done slightly better in elections than would be expected from his popularity stats, perhaps reflecting that he likes campaigning and is relatively good at that.
Did you hear that Trump added a cleric to his party? She's casting Protection from Evil 10' Radius to guard him against the demons and witches of the Democratic party who "operate in sorcery and witchcraft" against him.
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
WTF?!
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." ~Ephesians 6:12
"Lord, we ask you to deliver our president from any snare, any setup of the enemy, according to Ephesians 6:12. Any persons [or] entities aligned against the president will be exposed and dealt with and overturned by the superior blood of Jesus," she said.
That is a stretch. I am guessing just like the constitution, the bible isn't required reading for his administration and they can claim it says anything.
BTW, the rest of it reads: "[13]Therefore take up the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you will be able to stand your ground, and having done everything, to stand. [14]Stand firm then, with the belt of truth fastened around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness arrayed, [15]and with your feet fitted with the readiness of the gospel of peace."
Truth, peace, righteousness. . . three words I would never associate with Trump.
Trump is seen as a bulwark against the 'evil' liberals. His shitty personal morals will always be weighed against the results of his battle against them. After all, King David committed murder trying to cover up his adultery and God still loved him, ditto for Moses and his dropping the ball in the desert of Sinai, and don't ever forget Noah and the whole get sloppy drunk and sleep with my daughters shenanigans that God somehow overlooked. You'll never convince these people that Trump's personal failings are any reason to abandon him. No, I'm not kidding. I know how the religious right thinks...
Did you hear that Trump added a cleric to his party? She's casting Protection from Evil 10' Radius to guard him against the demons and witches of the Democratic party who "operate in sorcery and witchcraft" against him.
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
WTF?!
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." ~Ephesians 6:12
"Lord, we ask you to deliver our president from any snare, any setup of the enemy, according to Ephesians 6:12. Any persons [or] entities aligned against the president will be exposed and dealt with and overturned by the superior blood of Jesus," she said.
That is a stretch. I am guessing just like the constitution, the bible isn't required reading for his administration and they can claim it says anything.
BTW, the rest of it reads: "[13]Therefore take up the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you will be able to stand your ground, and having done everything, to stand. [14]Stand firm then, with the belt of truth fastened around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness arrayed, [15]and with your feet fitted with the readiness of the gospel of peace."
Truth, peace, righteousness. . . three words I would never associate with Trump.
Trump is seen as a bulwark against the 'evil' liberals. His shitty personal morals will always be weighed against the results of his battle against them. After all, King David committed murder trying to cover up his adultery and God still loved him, ditto for Moses and his dropping the ball in the desert of Sinai, and don't ever forget Noah and the whole get sloppy drunk and sleep with my daughters shenanigans that God somehow overlooked. You'll never convince these people that Trump's personal failings are any reason to abandon him. No, I'm not kidding. I know how the religious right thinks...
This is 100% true, and bolstered by a Monmouth poll that came out just this week in which 62% of Trump supporters said there is literally NOTHING he could do to lose their support. This is also why I don't think impeachment possibly can motivate his base MORE than it already it. They have been at a fever pitch since he walked down that escalator. He has no room to grow or shrink. He has what he has. He's been between 37-43% approval for 3 years. The only thing it CAN do is fire up Democrats in the same way. Trump getting impeached can't give them a bigger persecution complex than they already have, because it's already maxed out. Those amps already go to 11.
In relation to my earlier post about the UK election I see this morning that the Liberal Democrats, Greens and Welsh nationalists have reached agreement that only 1 of these parties will stand in around 70 constituencies - to maximise the chances of an anti-Brexit candidate against the Conservatives. Assuming Johnson sticks to his decision not to enter into a similar pact with the Brexit party, this could have a significant impact on the balance of power in the next Parliament.
The Conservative General Election Campaign begins!
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Not the best start...
The UK election is very interesting to me. I've essentially heard that while Corbyn is unbelievably unpopular (which is interesting to me. I wouldnt think it tenable to be as unpopular as he is, and still be the head of the opposition) - he's apparently an outstanding campaigner. The Tories had something like a 17% lead in the polls when Theresa May called her snap election, and they ended up losing seats.
A UK equivalent to the Electoral College or gerrymandering at play here, or is there some other factor in play? Voter turnout is generally better in Europe so that can't be the explanation, can it?
The UK has a first past the post system, which means that MPs are elected according to the largest number of votes in each of 650 constituencies across the country. In practice this means that tactical voting is often key. In 2017 many voters 'lent' Labour their vote as they were disgruntled with the Conservatives. A 38% vote share could be enough for a victory... but only if votes for the 'remain' side are divided. It is also worth noting that the Conservatives really need to get about half the seats to get Brexit through, a hung parliament will likely not be enough for them as they threw their Unionist allies under the bus recently to get a deal. There is also the wild card that this is the first December election since 1923. So very many things could go wrong...
Looks like Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of NYC will be getting into the Democratic primary (He's trying to make sure he's on the Alabama Ballot, the deadline for which is Friday).
So that's... something? I mean. He's more qualified than Steyer. I guess. Lots of arguments for who this helps or hurts, but you have to feel like it's an indictment on Biden, since they would seem to share a decent sized voter type (with the potential exception of African Americans? I dont really know how the black community feels like Bloomberg).
Looks like Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of NYC will be getting into the Democratic primary (He's trying to make sure he's on the Alabama Ballot, the deadline for which is Friday).
So that's... something? I mean. He's more qualified than Steyer. I guess. Lots of arguments for who this helps or hurts, but you have to feel like it's an indictment on Biden, since they would seem to share a decent sized voter type (with the potential exception of African Americans? I dont really know how the black community feels like Bloomberg).
Biden really does seem to be a little bit brain-addled. I hate to say somebody is too old, but...
It appears to me like the Democrats are starting to think they need somebody closer to the middle than Warren with some name recognition. Despite all the hype, I still don't realistically think that Trump will be removed from office. Warren does not match up well against Trump. Neither does Bernie, even though I kind of like him.
Michael Bloomberg has as much chance of wining the nomination as my left ass cheek. If any of these so-called liberal or moderate billionaires wanted to actually help the progressive cause, they would put their infinite resources into a media venture that could counter what FOX News and AM radio do on the right. But they are too concerned about making sure they have 10 billion dollars instead of 8.5 billion dollars. Democrats are not nominating a billionaire to represent their party's ticket. No way, no how.
Michael Bloomberg has as much chance of wining the nomination as my left ass cheek. If any of these so-called liberal or moderate billionaires wanted to actually help the progressive cause, they would put their infinite resources into a media venture that could counter what FOX News and AM radio do on the right. But they are too concerned about making sure they have 10 billion dollars instead of 8.5 billion dollars. Democrats are not nominating a billionaire to represent their party's ticket. No way, no how.
They don't want to help the progressive cause, they want to stop the potential bleeding. Warren would be a disaster for them. She also might be a disaster for the Democrats chance of winning the presidency. It's an interesting conundrum....
Democrats who screamed at Bernie supporters after Hillary won the Primary to be for 'unity' sure don't seem interested in unifying with Bernie or Warren.
Seems that 'unity' line was nothing but hogwash. Joe Mancin (D?) even recently went on Fox Business and announced he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he was the nominee. It seems like all these corporatists and elites are freaking out.
Bloomberg will be the 4th billionaire running for President in 2020: Trump, Steyer, Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz.
It sure seems like billionaires and the wealthy are scared of a Warren or Sanders presidency. Good.
Democrats who screamed at Bernie supporters after Hillary won the Primary to be for 'unity' sure don't seem interested in unifying with Bernie or Warren.
Seems that 'unity' line was nothing but hogwash. Joe Mancin (D?) even recently went on Fox Business and announced he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he was the nominee. It seems like all these corporatists and elites are freaking out.
Bloomberg will be the 4th billionaire running for President in 2020: Trump, Steyer, Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz.
It sure seems like billionaires and the wealthy are scared of a Warren or Sanders presidency. Good.
Unity comes after the primaries. Just look at the GOP and how many of them disparaged Trump until he actually got the nomination and look at how many of those same people are completely up his ass.
Democrats who screamed at Bernie supporters after Hillary won the Primary to be for 'unity' sure don't seem interested in unifying with Bernie or Warren.
Seems that 'unity' line was nothing but hogwash. Joe Mancin (D?) even recently went on Fox Business and announced he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he was the nominee. It seems like all these corporatists and elites are freaking out.
Bloomberg will be the 4th billionaire running for President in 2020: Trump, Steyer, Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz.
It sure seems like billionaires and the wealthy are scared of a Warren or Sanders presidency. Good.
Unity comes after the primaries. Just look at the GOP and how many of them disparaged Trump until he actually got the nomination and look at how many of those same people are completely up his ass.
Who can beat Trump If he isn't removed from office? Interesting dilemma. Oh the drama!
I just got back from a trans support meeting. People are really anxious about the ripple effects of the Luna Younger case here in Texas.
It seems that Greg Abbott (?) directed Child Protective Services to investigate Luna's family, and one of the folks at the meeting said that, having worked at CPS for many years, CPS has incredible power to exert control over families, and Abbott could easily force CPS to ignore any evidence of Luna's female identity and produce a report indicting her mother on any grounds, however spurious--while I'm sure CPS' typical role is overwhelmingly to protect kids, it sounds like there aren't really a lot of checks or balances on the organization, and a politician who can issue an order to CPS can get whatever he or she wants from it.
And once you get a single condemnatory report from CPS, you can justify a full-blown crackdown on transgender youth across the state. Politicians are still mulling their options since they're not yet in session. Maybe they punish medical health professionals for helping children transition; maybe they punish parents who fail to suppress their transgender children; maybe they ban blockers and maybe they ban everything all the way down to crossdressing--we just don't know. All we know is that these folks disagree with the entire concept of transitioning to the other gender.
We might actually see a statewide ban on transgender teenagers attempting any form of transitioning. If a politician is willing to use CPS as a political weapon, it's not like he has a sense of restraint about his own power. And it's not like the push to criminalize transitioning is all about holding back and making sure we don't crack down too hard on individual liberty.
Every mental health professional who specializes in trans issues knows that it's important for trans kids to explore their identity at a young age; you can't lock someone up during their childhood and then expect them to be okay when you release them as adults years later. Turning 18 isn't the beginning of your personal freedom; it's the end of your only childhood. You only get one chance to be a kid, and too many people lost that chance.
They say we can't rush to judgment when kids are growing, but we don't accept that reasoning for any other health condition. I got diagnosed with depression when I was like 11, and they didn't make me wait until I was 18 to prescribe me mind-altering drugs. That wasn't even the right diagnosis, but it set the ground for an accurate diagnosis at age 16, and the treatment has left me with absolutely zero symptoms for the past 13 years. I've thought about it many times and I don't think I'd be alive today if the response was "let's wait until she's 18 and see what happens." Good doctors don't sit on their hands when patients are in serious pain.
The reason trans folks feel really protective of transgender kids is because we never had that support growing up, and we desperately needed it. The prospect of a ban on youth transition scares us because we know how many more people are going to suffer without treatment.
You hear stuff like this, about how government and conservative value types and others attack trans people through the government and other methods.
You see the culture and bullying and negative stereotype assumptions heaped on them that trans people have to put up with and it breaks your heart. As an overly optimistic man once said "why can't we all just get along?".
It just takes on backwards thinking mouth breather to be having a bad day and you could be his next victim. And there's a lot of people out there having bad days.
It's been 30 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall, a mercifully peaceful revolution.
People like my grandfather could visit their birthplace again for the first time since the Second World War, and some people met family members for the first time.
I hope Europe won't forget how bad it was when the Iron Curtain separated our continent, because countries are drifting apart again and nationalism is en vogue.
Apparently Michael Bloomberg's plan is to skip Iowa and New Hampshire and focus on Super Tuesday, which has literally never worked in the history of Presidential primaries. Apparently Jeff Bezos encouraged him to run. You know, it's one thing for these billionaires to have all the money. It's quite another when they feel entitled to rule in theory AND in practice. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are increasingly running on the idea that there shouldn't even BE billionaires, and when you see shit like this, even if you at first thought that idea sounded extreme, you become inclined to agree. Bloomberg's run is a gift to Warren and Sanders. His constituency is 7500 people in Manhattan who have a physical subscription to The Economist.
It looks like Nigel Farage has promised that Brexit party candidates will not stand for election in any seat currently held by Conservatives. They'll only field candidates in seats currently held by the opposition.
At first - this seemed like a really big deal, since one of the plausible ways that the Conservatives could come up short in this election would be vote splitting by Conservatives and those backing Brexit.
As I think about it more, I'm guessing any seat currently held by Conservatives were likely to elect another conservative MP. Those seats werent already lost to Labour (Or, so goes my logic). By contesting the seats held by the opposition, the issue of diluting the vote between Brexit and Conservatives again comes into play and may make retaining seats easier for Labour or the Lib-Dems.
\Not knowing a ton about british politics, I'd say that this essentially minimizes the risk of an unexpected outcome. Conservatives hold on where they are stronger, and split the vote where they're weaker. I would expect that constrains the number of pick up seats available to either side (by a bit, anyways).
Democrats who screamed at Bernie supporters after Hillary won the Primary to be for 'unity' sure don't seem interested in unifying with Bernie or Warren.
Seems that 'unity' line was nothing but hogwash. Joe Mancin (D?) even recently went on Fox Business and announced he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he was the nominee. It seems like all these corporatists and elites are freaking out.
Bloomberg will be the 4th billionaire running for President in 2020: Trump, Steyer, Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz.
It sure seems like billionaires and the wealthy are scared of a Warren or Sanders presidency. Good.
They probably are, because Warren and Bernie have plans to shake up the system. Trump promised much the same thing, in different ways, and though he ultimately didn't keep his promises, I think a Warren or Bernie in his position would get a similar style of underhanded, sustained character assault.
And I agree, "unity" among political activists where no true agreement exists is hogwash, and the same line is used on conservatives to make them fall in line with "the leader". Don't fall for it.
I was at Ohio State, several hours away, just for the chance to ask Charlie Kirk and other fake conservatives some questions. I didn't get a chance to ask mine, but the entire line was full of my side anyway. It snowballed from there and now they are showing up at Don Jr.'s events and making international news.
That's the funny part. They put on this tough guy persona talking about how they will debate anyone, but ask one question about how "stapling green cards to diplomas" helps Americans, and they shut down the Q and A.
Almost every one of the questions from the events of the past week or two are totally legitimate, but they are resorting to the same old slanders I would expect from journalists. "alt right", 'incels", etc.
Speaking of journalists, left wing outlets like WaPo have been more truthful about these events than right wing media.
Color me skeptical that these groups showing up laying into Turning Point USA are gonna abandon Junior's father a year from now. I mean, if they now know that organization is a grift set up by big money interests to recruit young conservatives then I guess that's fine. But the layers of irony in Don Jr. getting basically chased off stage by the right at an event about a book called "Triggered" are just too numerous for me to even get into.
An article on how countries like Canada and China effectively used retaliatory tariffs to effect the 2018 American election and how the trade war as a whole, hurt republicans and did nothing to help them.
I doubt this affected anyone's vote the way you think it did. Even targeted sanctions directly on Republicans will only encourage them to vote for Republicans.
Conservatives are motivated by fear according to science. If you make things worse for them, they get more fearful and more desperate to find a "strong man" who can 'fight back'. Taken to extrenes, they would sell out Democracy for authoritarianism. This is how Democracies have fallen all over the world (for example, Hitler was democratically elected and used an emergency and scapegoating of 'others' to grab more power and end democracy)
So did Democrats win big in 2018? Yes sure but the trade war disaster is only one piece of the puzzle in the portrait of lies, bigotry, corruption and incompetence that Donald Trump has portrayed. There's plenty to dislike there.
Comments
This is not some one off campaign stop in a chruch or photo with a controversial figure. She is an official part of the Administration. But by all means, let's continue to have a discussion about how Christianity is under attack in America. Well, actually it is. But it's not from liberals, it's from prosperity gospel charlatans like this woman.
So far...
One of their leading MPs, Rees-Mogg, implied that the victims of the Grenfell Fire should not have followed the advice of the fire brigade to stay in the building and lacked common sense. An MP defending him suggested that he was exactly the sort of clever person that we need to run the country.
The Welsh secretary resigns after it was revealed that he was aware that an aide of his sabotaged a rape trial.
Prime Minister compares Corbyn to Stalin, specifically by suggesting Labour policies are similar to the murder of millions of kulaks.
The party put out a video of a Labour minister being baffled by Brexit questions... except that it had been edited. They then lied about this, then a minister told multiple conflicting stories about the video until he refused to appear on a news programme and was 'empty chaired'.
Not the best start...
The worst part about these bloodsuckers is that they are in large part to blame for the whole 'poor people deserve it' attitudes on the religious right. In their minds it's as simple as, 'those losers don't have enough faith in God to believe their way out of poverty'. I'm not shitting you. All it takes to get rich is faith, so if you're not rich, you don't have faith. I grew up surrounded by morons like this...
Edit: None of them were rich either of course, neither did they get rich no matter how much money they sent to charlatans like this. But hey, they're better off than the losers so they have that going for them. God likes them a 'little bit more than those people' at least. I should never have dabbled in psychology...
The UK election is very interesting to me. I've essentially heard that while Corbyn is unbelievably unpopular (which is interesting to me. I wouldnt think it tenable to be as unpopular as he is, and still be the head of the opposition) - he's apparently an outstanding campaigner. The Tories had something like a 17% lead in the polls when Theresa May called her snap election, and they ended up losing seats.
A UK equivalent to the Electoral College or gerrymandering at play here, or is there some other factor in play? Voter turnout is generally better in Europe so that can't be the explanation, can it?
WTF?!
"For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms." ~Ephesians 6:12
"Lord, we ask you to deliver our president from any snare, any setup of the enemy, according to Ephesians 6:12. Any persons [or] entities aligned against the president will be exposed and dealt with and overturned by the superior blood of Jesus," she said.
That is a stretch. I am guessing just like the constitution, the bible isn't required reading for his administration and they can claim it says anything.
BTW, the rest of it reads: "[13]Therefore take up the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you will be able to stand your ground, and having done everything, to stand. [14]Stand firm then, with the belt of truth fastened around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness arrayed, [15]and with your feet fitted with the readiness of the gospel of peace."
Truth, peace, righteousness. . . three words I would never associate with Trump.
The Conservatives ran a pretty dreadful campaign. They picked up on the unpopularity of Corbyn in the country and, rather than talking on the issues, they made the election about personalities - hoping that people would choose "strong & stable" Theresa May over Corbyn. The problem with that is that May does not come across as very personable and focusing the campaign on her helped Corbyn appear more palatable by contrast - as a result Labour picked up a lot more of the floating voters in the election than the Conservatives.
When May called the election in 2017 she had around a 20% lead over Labour in the polls and she therefore hoped to increase her majority. The results though reflected only a 2% lead and actually decreased her majority - ultimately making it impossible to deliver her policies.
Johnson currently has a minority government and thus has far less to lose by calling an election than May had. At the moment he has about a 12% lead over Labour in the polls, from being roughly level when he became Prime Minister. However, as you can see from this poll tracker from the Guardian, that's effectively the result of the Brexit party losing support.
Thus far Johnson's refused to agree a joint strategy for the election with the Brexit party - apparently believing he can further squeeze their vote by playing up the danger of Corbyn being elected instead. To me that feels like something of a repeat of May's error - relying too much on the supposed unpopularity of Corbyn. Johnson's failure to deliver on his promised Brexit in October leaves him vulnerable to attack by the Brexit party and I think their vote is much more likely to rebound from their current poll rating than to diminish further. If that is the case then the vote share of the Conservatives will certainly fall from the 42% gained in 2017.
That could still give them a decent majority, but that would then rely on votes being split more evenly among opposition parties, so that Labour also see a reduction from their 40% in 2017. I think Labour's vote share will indeed fall, as the Liberal Democrats are likely to pick up a substantial number of anti-Brexit votes. However, it does seem possible that there will be considerably more tactical voting in this election than has historically happened. If the opposition to the Conservatives is concentrated onto the party best able to defeat them in particular seats, this election could go very badly wrong for them.
On the issue of Corbyn's popularity, it's true that he has had a consistently low popularity rating with the electorate as a whole. However, he is extremely popular with activist Labour party members which has allowed him to retain (and in fact strengthen) his grip on the party despite the fact that the majority of his MPs have opposed him during his time as leader. He's also done slightly better in elections than would be expected from his popularity stats, perhaps reflecting that he likes campaigning and is relatively good at that.
Trump is seen as a bulwark against the 'evil' liberals. His shitty personal morals will always be weighed against the results of his battle against them. After all, King David committed murder trying to cover up his adultery and God still loved him, ditto for Moses and his dropping the ball in the desert of Sinai, and don't ever forget Noah and the whole get sloppy drunk and sleep with my daughters shenanigans that God somehow overlooked. You'll never convince these people that Trump's personal failings are any reason to abandon him. No, I'm not kidding. I know how the religious right thinks...
This is 100% true, and bolstered by a Monmouth poll that came out just this week in which 62% of Trump supporters said there is literally NOTHING he could do to lose their support. This is also why I don't think impeachment possibly can motivate his base MORE than it already it. They have been at a fever pitch since he walked down that escalator. He has no room to grow or shrink. He has what he has. He's been between 37-43% approval for 3 years. The only thing it CAN do is fire up Democrats in the same way. Trump getting impeached can't give them a bigger persecution complex than they already have, because it's already maxed out. Those amps already go to 11.
The UK has a first past the post system, which means that MPs are elected according to the largest number of votes in each of 650 constituencies across the country. In practice this means that tactical voting is often key. In 2017 many voters 'lent' Labour their vote as they were disgruntled with the Conservatives. A 38% vote share could be enough for a victory... but only if votes for the 'remain' side are divided. It is also worth noting that the Conservatives really need to get about half the seats to get Brexit through, a hung parliament will likely not be enough for them as they threw their Unionist allies under the bus recently to get a deal. There is also the wild card that this is the first December election since 1923. So very many things could go wrong...
So that's... something? I mean. He's more qualified than Steyer. I guess. Lots of arguments for who this helps or hurts, but you have to feel like it's an indictment on Biden, since they would seem to share a decent sized voter type (with the potential exception of African Americans? I dont really know how the black community feels like Bloomberg).
Biden really does seem to be a little bit brain-addled. I hate to say somebody is too old, but...
It appears to me like the Democrats are starting to think they need somebody closer to the middle than Warren with some name recognition. Despite all the hype, I still don't realistically think that Trump will be removed from office. Warren does not match up well against Trump. Neither does Bernie, even though I kind of like him.
They don't want to help the progressive cause, they want to stop the potential bleeding. Warren would be a disaster for them. She also might be a disaster for the Democrats chance of winning the presidency. It's an interesting conundrum....
Seems that 'unity' line was nothing but hogwash. Joe Mancin (D?) even recently went on Fox Business and announced he would not vote for Bernie Sanders if he was the nominee. It seems like all these corporatists and elites are freaking out.
Bloomberg will be the 4th billionaire running for President in 2020: Trump, Steyer, Bloomberg, and Howard Schultz.
It sure seems like billionaires and the wealthy are scared of a Warren or Sanders presidency. Good.
Unity comes after the primaries. Just look at the GOP and how many of them disparaged Trump until he actually got the nomination and look at how many of those same people are completely up his ass.
Who can beat Trump If he isn't removed from office? Interesting dilemma. Oh the drama!
It seems that Greg Abbott (?) directed Child Protective Services to investigate Luna's family, and one of the folks at the meeting said that, having worked at CPS for many years, CPS has incredible power to exert control over families, and Abbott could easily force CPS to ignore any evidence of Luna's female identity and produce a report indicting her mother on any grounds, however spurious--while I'm sure CPS' typical role is overwhelmingly to protect kids, it sounds like there aren't really a lot of checks or balances on the organization, and a politician who can issue an order to CPS can get whatever he or she wants from it.
And once you get a single condemnatory report from CPS, you can justify a full-blown crackdown on transgender youth across the state. Politicians are still mulling their options since they're not yet in session. Maybe they punish medical health professionals for helping children transition; maybe they punish parents who fail to suppress their transgender children; maybe they ban blockers and maybe they ban everything all the way down to crossdressing--we just don't know. All we know is that these folks disagree with the entire concept of transitioning to the other gender.
We might actually see a statewide ban on transgender teenagers attempting any form of transitioning. If a politician is willing to use CPS as a political weapon, it's not like he has a sense of restraint about his own power. And it's not like the push to criminalize transitioning is all about holding back and making sure we don't crack down too hard on individual liberty.
Every mental health professional who specializes in trans issues knows that it's important for trans kids to explore their identity at a young age; you can't lock someone up during their childhood and then expect them to be okay when you release them as adults years later. Turning 18 isn't the beginning of your personal freedom; it's the end of your only childhood. You only get one chance to be a kid, and too many people lost that chance.
They say we can't rush to judgment when kids are growing, but we don't accept that reasoning for any other health condition. I got diagnosed with depression when I was like 11, and they didn't make me wait until I was 18 to prescribe me mind-altering drugs. That wasn't even the right diagnosis, but it set the ground for an accurate diagnosis at age 16, and the treatment has left me with absolutely zero symptoms for the past 13 years. I've thought about it many times and I don't think I'd be alive today if the response was "let's wait until she's 18 and see what happens." Good doctors don't sit on their hands when patients are in serious pain.
The reason trans folks feel really protective of transgender kids is because we never had that support growing up, and we desperately needed it. The prospect of a ban on youth transition scares us because we know how many more people are going to suffer without treatment.
You see the culture and bullying and negative stereotype assumptions heaped on them that trans people have to put up with and it breaks your heart. As an overly optimistic man once said "why can't we all just get along?".
It just takes on backwards thinking mouth breather to be having a bad day and you could be his next victim. And there's a lot of people out there having bad days.
People like my grandfather could visit their birthplace again for the first time since the Second World War, and some people met family members for the first time.
I hope Europe won't forget how bad it was when the Iron Curtain separated our continent, because countries are drifting apart again and nationalism is en vogue.
At first - this seemed like a really big deal, since one of the plausible ways that the Conservatives could come up short in this election would be vote splitting by Conservatives and those backing Brexit.
As I think about it more, I'm guessing any seat currently held by Conservatives were likely to elect another conservative MP. Those seats werent already lost to Labour (Or, so goes my logic). By contesting the seats held by the opposition, the issue of diluting the vote between Brexit and Conservatives again comes into play and may make retaining seats easier for Labour or the Lib-Dems.
\Not knowing a ton about british politics, I'd say that this essentially minimizes the risk of an unexpected outcome. Conservatives hold on where they are stronger, and split the vote where they're weaker. I would expect that constrains the number of pick up seats available to either side (by a bit, anyways).
They probably are, because Warren and Bernie have plans to shake up the system. Trump promised much the same thing, in different ways, and though he ultimately didn't keep his promises, I think a Warren or Bernie in his position would get a similar style of underhanded, sustained character assault.
And I agree, "unity" among political activists where no true agreement exists is hogwash, and the same line is used on conservatives to make them fall in line with "the leader". Don't fall for it.
I was at Ohio State, several hours away, just for the chance to ask Charlie Kirk and other fake conservatives some questions. I didn't get a chance to ask mine, but the entire line was full of my side anyway. It snowballed from there and now they are showing up at Don Jr.'s events and making international news.
All it takes is for enough people to speak out.
*concerning?
They started this monster but now can't control it.
Almost every one of the questions from the events of the past week or two are totally legitimate, but they are resorting to the same old slanders I would expect from journalists. "alt right", 'incels", etc.
Speaking of journalists, left wing outlets like WaPo have been more truthful about these events than right wing media.
An article on how countries like Canada and China effectively used retaliatory tariffs to effect the 2018 American election and how the trade war as a whole, hurt republicans and did nothing to help them.
Conservatives are motivated by fear according to science. If you make things worse for them, they get more fearful and more desperate to find a "strong man" who can 'fight back'. Taken to extrenes, they would sell out Democracy for authoritarianism. This is how Democracies have fallen all over the world (for example, Hitler was democratically elected and used an emergency and scapegoating of 'others' to grab more power and end democracy)
So did Democrats win big in 2018? Yes sure but the trade war disaster is only one piece of the puzzle in the portrait of lies, bigotry, corruption and incompetence that Donald Trump has portrayed. There's plenty to dislike there.