News of the Day III

[Flycoon]

By a 3:1 margin, millennials say preserving life is more important than the economy.

Baby boomers are 55-45, reopen the economy even if it means more deaths.

That one puzzled me.

Millennials have less to lose financially. Boomers are more likely to be worried about out living their financial assets; open everything for the kids and the boomers can stay home.

[BurnTHalO]

By a 3:1 margin, millennials say preserving life is more important than the economy.

Baby boomers are 55-45, reopen the economy even if it means more deaths.

That one puzzled me.

What percent of boomers are trump supporters?

Also, what percent are retired so they can stay out of harms way when everything reopens?

[Puckhead]

What percent of boomers are trump supporters?

Also, what percent are retired so they can stay out of harms way when everything reopens?

I thought I saw a poll that shows his numbers among the over 65 are dwindling.

[pete]

I thought I saw a poll that shows his numbers among the over 65 are dwindling.

There has been some vulnerability in Trump's numbers with the 65+ set over the past 2-3 months. Don't know if Biden can realistically win 65+ voters, but given how small Trump's margin for error is, anything Biden can do to cut into Trump's base support is potentially fatal to Trump's re-election efforts.

There was also a story in the Times today that the RNC has (push) poll tested 20+ attack lines against Biden and none of them seem to make a dent in Joe. People know Joe. Know he's not perfect. Still, for the most part, kind of like him. That won't stop the right from continuing to sling mud at him, but so far Joe's been teflon, which is a pleasant surprise.

[dannybolt]

There has been some vulnerability in Trump's numbers with the 65+ set over the past 2-3 months. Don't know if Biden can realistically win 65+ voters, but given how small Trump's margin for error is, anything Biden can do to cut into Trump's base support is potentially fatal to Trump's re-election efforts.

There was also a story in the Times today that the RNC has (push) poll tested 20+ attack lines against Biden and none of them seem to make a dent in Joe. People know Joe. Know he's not perfect. Still, for the most part, kind of like him. That won't stop the right from continuing to sling mud at him, but so far Joe's been teflon, which is a pleasant surprise.

It's also difficult to sling mud at the opposite candidate when you are running PigPen as your standard bearer.

Let's face it, you wanna say Joe isn't all there mentally, it's hard for anyone other than your base to take that seriously when Trump has recently suggested the mainlining of bleach as a possible remedy for COVID, and couldn't put a coherent sentence together if you put a gun in Ivanka's mouth.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk Biden corruption, when the only thing keeping their guy from being convicted in the Senate of bribery and obstruction of justice was a party-line vote that had the first case in history of a member of his own party voting to convict his sitting President.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously about Biden getting handsy, or having possibly sexually assaulted a woman when their guy openly brags about doing the same thing for decades.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about the economy when we are staring down the worst economy in the history of the country and they are the ones with their hands on the rudder.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about being pro-life when their very clear preference is economy over the lives of the citizenry in the dealing with this pandemic.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about competence in governence when Trump has made an extremely credible case with being the third worst president in our history, trailing only the president who fomented the civil war and the one that botched the period immediately afterwards.

So, I'm not terribly surprised that attacks on Biden aren't sticking. Anyone who isn't a true believer can see what the fuck the score is. It ain't looking good for Republicans because they abandoned their principals for a con-man. The people who are disgusted with our government for prioritizing the needs of the few over the many for decades were right in their assessment of the problem. They picked the worst possible remedy. Now the electorate has realized that and is course correcting.

Side note: 4 years ago I had a conversation with my then Big 4 Managing Partner, and Trumper, who told me anytime Hillary said anything about Republicans, Trump could just sit back, smile and say "Benghazi". Whether he was right or wrong isn't really material anymore. However, I wonder if he's considered that now the only response needed to combat an argument from a Republican on really, pretty much anything, would be to just reply with "Trump".

This bullshit centrist's .02. Take with however much salt you prefer.

[Puckhead]

It's also difficult to sling mud at the opposite candidate when you are running PigPen as your standard bearer.

Let's face it, you wanna say Joe isn't all there mentally, it's hard for anyone other than your base to take that seriously when Trump has recently suggested the mainlining of bleach as a possible remedy for COVID, and couldn't put a coherent sentence together if you put a gun in Ivanka's mouth.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk Biden corruption, when the only thing keeping their guy from being convicted in the Senate of bribery and obstruction of justice was a party-line vote that had the first case in history of a member of his own party voting to convict his sitting President.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously about Biden getting handsy, or having possibly sexually assaulted a woman when their guy openly brags about doing the same thing for decades.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about the economy when we are staring down the worst economy in the history of the country and they are the ones with their hands on the rudder.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about being pro-life when their very clear preference is economy over the lives of the citizenry in the dealing with this pandemic.

It's hard to take Republicans seriously when they talk about competence in governence when Trump has made an extremely credible case with being the third worst president in our history, trailing only the president who fomented the civil war and the one that botched the period immediately afterwards.

So, I'm not terribly surprised that attacks on Biden aren't sticking. Anyone who isn't a true believer can see what the fuck the score is. It ain't looking good for Republicans because they abandoned their principals for a con-man. The people who are disgusted with our government for prioritizing the needs of the few over the many for decades were right in their assessment of the problem. They picked the worst possible remedy. Now the electorate has realized that and is course correcting.

Side note: 4 years ago I had a conversation with my then Big 4 Managing Partner, and Trumper, who told me anytime Hillary said anything about Republicans, Trump could just sit back, smile and say "Benghazi". Whether he was right or wrong isn't really material anymore. However, I wonder if he's considered that now the only response needed to combat an argument from a Republican on really, pretty much anything, would be to just reply with "Trump".

This bullshit centrist's .02. Take with however much salt you prefer.

No salt, no chaser required. Here, here.
Now, where's that whiskey???

[RSchmitz]

"The Hill" continuously trying to pump up this "Obama-gate" cringe theory has made them lose all credibility in my eyes.

[the_narrow_way]

I don't even understand what the supposed grievance is with 'Obama-gate'. They found out Flynn had suspicious dealings with Russia and investigated? And?

[Flycoon]

[QUOTE=the_narrow_way;251056]I don't even understand what the supposed grievance is with 'Obama-gate'. [/!QUOTE]

Still Muslim.
Still born in Kenya.
Still Black.

‘Nuff said.

[dannybolt]

I don't even understand what the supposed grievance is with 'Obama-gate'. They found out Flynn had suspicious dealings with Russia and investigated? And?

I've not really dug into it, but from what little I've read and heard from conservatives it's the idea that the FBI interviewed the incoming National Security Advisor, which is pretty unusual, and he lied to them in his interview. Conservatives are arguing that the FBI set him up, and he only pled guilty as the FBI was squeezing him with threats to his son.

Again, I've only caught a little bit in drive by reading and mentions on the Left, Right and Center podcast (which I highly recommend), so by all means, investigate further. I'd read Rich Lowry at National Review, he seems to have a coherent take on the whole thing from the right.

[Flycoon]

coherent take on the whole thing from the right.

Didn’t there was such a thing anymore.

In other news, Trump wants whistle blower protections stripped. Just “so unfair”. Another way he embraces the Mob Boss mentality.

[dannybolt]

Didn’t there was such a thing anymore.

It all depends on where you look. If you are basing your opinion based on the general caricature from the left, it would certainly appear that way. The Bulwark and National Review are decent resources, although National Review depends very much on the writer.

[pete]

I've not really dug into it, but from what little I've read and heard from conservatives it's the idea that the FBI interviewed the incoming National Security Advisor, which is pretty unusual, and he lied to them in his interview. Conservatives are arguing that the FBI set him up, and he only pled guilty as the FBI was squeezing him with threats to his son.

Again, I've only caught a little bit in drive by reading and mentions on the Left, Right and Center podcast (which I highly recommend), so by all means, investigate further. I'd read Rich Lowry at National Review, he seems to have a coherent take on the whole thing from the right.

It's more (stupid) than that. The thing they're foaming at the mouth about now is that their lackeys released information that folks in the Obama administration made unmasking requests to reveal the name of a US citizen who was having suspicious calls with an authoritarian government that got picked up in our signals intelligence monitoring of said authoritarian government. They had no idea who that US citizen was until the intelligence community unmasked the name, hence there was no way this was "targeting" Mike Flynn. Anybody suggesting that this was some sort of surgical precision conspiracy to single out Flynn is either clueless about what unmasking is or is being deliberately mendacious.

Ironically, it appears the unmasking episode they were foaming at the mouth about may not have been with the Russians, but folks who know this stuff seem to think it may have been a Middle Eastern government, which leads me to openly wonder if it had to do with the alleged $15M cleric kidnapping scheme Flynn and his son supposedly worked on for Erdogan's government.

Let's be very clear about this: they were NOT tapping Flynn's phone. They were tapping Turkey's (probably) phone and Flynn got caught calling them.

Later, Flynn got picked up on signals intelligence again, this time talking to Kislyak and the Russians telling them to disregard the Obama administration's sanctions for meddling in the 2016 election, which he later supposedly lied to the White House and to Mike Pence about (at least that's the official story from the administration). When Sally Yates found out she went to the White House to alert McGahn that Flynn had been caught in the lie and was a potential blackmail target because of it.

Again, let's be very clear about this: they were NOT tapping Flynn's phone. They were tapping Russia's phone and Flynn got caught calling them.

The FBI then interviewed him and he lied about what he talked to Kislyak about, which was part of the FBI's strategy to see if he'd lie in the interview because, RICO-style, the plan was always to flip Flynn and get him to roll over on the rest of the campaign about their shenanigans with Russia.

The Trump/Waiver tin foil dumbasses are acting like Flynn's somehow been targeted/oppressed, but the truth of the matter is that if Flynn didn't want to get chucked in jail he should've:

1.) Not gotten caught calling an authoritarian scumbag regime planning a kidnapping scheme with his son to nab a dissident cleric for them.

2.) Not gotten caught calling another authoritarian scumbag regime to undermine the current administrations sanctions for election meddling.

3.) Not lied to the White House about #1 and #2.

4.) Not lied to the FBI about #1, #2, and #3.

Larger lesson of the story: don't be an idiot and call authoritarian scumbag regimes to conspire to commit crimes because authoritarian scumbag regimes have their signals surveilled by the US IC and they will hear you.

[the_narrow_way]

Conservatives are arguing that the FBI set him up, and he only pled guilty as the FBI was squeezing him with threats to his son.

That's where I'm having trouble following it. Don't want to get into trouble? Don't lie to the FBI. Then there's the crying about him being 'set up'. Isn't it standard operating procedure in every investigation to bring the suspect in for an interview? The authorities already know facts A, B, and C and they want to hear the suspect's version of A, B, and C. When they catch them lying then they get arrested.

[nutznboltz]

It's funny how the right praises the intelligence community when it links the shooting at the Pensacola AFB last year to Al Queda since it involved a Muslim, but crucifies them as the deep state whenever their briefings or findings turn out to implicate Trump, his cronies or minions, the Trump Campaign, Flynn etc.