Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[smjjames]

And then he gets reined in by Congress and makes an ass of himself for a few years.

Trump doesn't have a track record as a politician, but his negotiating strategy is well established.  He finds a counterparty (hereafter refered to as a chump) and gets them to have an investment in something he can influence.  He then proceeds to screw over the chump by tanking the chump's investment.  Then he goes to the chump and says "hey, how about you cut me a sweetheart deal so I have an incentive to stop ruining your investment?"

If you think that brinksmanship over the debt ceiling is bad... for Trump that's just a Tuesday.  He would probably do a default on US treasury bonds just to prove a point.  Basically his philosophy is blackmail is good as long as it's legal... think about how much potential to blackmail Congress the president has.  Think of how destructive it would be to use that power at every possible opportunity.

I realize that diplomacy involves a lot of backroom deals, 'you scratch my back and I scratch yours', some give and take, plus some cloak and dagger stuff, but blackmailing our friends is the quickest way to lose their trust.

While I wouldn't mind Trump strong-arming some sense into Congress, I hope he doesn't pull the blackmail stuff with our allies.

[Aklyon]

And who said it would be strong-arming sense into congress? They already think they make sense, when they aren't working to block things.

[Lord Shonus]

Did McKinley do anything noteworthy?

But by golly, McKinley was a Republican, and this is just yet another example of Obama stamping out the Republican legacy throughout the nation.  Obviously.

Funnily enough, there's a bill in play right now (introduced by an Alaskan Republican) to change the mountain's name to Denali.

[Reelya]

This wasn't the result of a bill, exactly.

They've been trying to change the name at the federal level since it was changed in Alaska back in 1975 the articles say, but Ohio congressmen (McKinley's home state) have kept posting conflicting bills for the last 40 years, exploiting a loophole to prevent the name change from sticking, due to a thing where the office responsible won't do a name change while there's an active bill regarding the matter.

Obama's administration used a pre-existing special ruling that lets them force a name change when it's been before the United States Board on Geographic Names for an excessive amount of time.

[mainiac]

Sticking it to Ohio, huh?  I wonder which Michigan politician is secretly responsible for this.

[smjjames]

Today's the day where the Kentucky Republican leadership is going to reject Rand Paul's attempt to circumvent state law and run for President and his current Senate seat at the same time. While two of his top subordinates are indicted for bribery. When he's got a strong populist Christian Democrat making a run for his Senate seat. It's so beautiful.

Kind of old, but, nope: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-rand-paul-can-run-for-president-senate-at-the-same-time/

He isn't doing that great in the polls anyway, so it might end up moot.

I wonder how he convinced them to bend the Kentucky law like that?

[RedKing]

New poll data from Monmouth:

Ben Carson has surged to a tie (23% each) with Trump in Iowa. Can a Trump attack on Carson be far off? And will he go full-retard dog-whistle on the attack and give it a racial subtext?

Also, Carly Fiorina is in 3rd in Iowa now (10%), followed by Cruz (9%), Walker (7%), and Jebby way back in sixth place (5%).


One of the more interesting things is in the second choice rankings, it's Cruz, Carson, Trump. Typically, Trump had been doing very poorly in second-choice polling, indicating Trump was either your first choice or no choice at all. Which in turn suggested that as candidates start dropping out, they'd all gravitate to an anti-Trump candidate. That effect may have been overstated.

Trump's net favorability rating in Iowa is up +19, which honestly makes me ashamed to have been born there. Ben Carson has a whopping +75. Cruz and Fiorina have seen modest gains in favorability since last month, while Walker and Bush have seen declines.



Still on life support: Rubio, Huckabee, Kasich, Paul
In hospice care: Jindal, Santorum, Christie
Pull the damn plug already: Graham, Pataki, Perry   (Rick Perry has actually reduced his staff in Iowa to ONE guy, and lost his Iowa co-chair to the Santorum campaign.)

[smjjames]

If you're putting Rubio in the life support section, you should put Bush in there too because both their polls numbers have been in the same area.

Also, according to the averages here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html Jindal should pull the plug already.

[Powder Miner]

Even if I have to accept that Rand Paul's numbers mean he probably won't have any sort of decent effect on the race, I can at least take solace in the fact that Christie is doing worse, hehe.

[Sheb]

You can rebound from low poll numbers, the issue is when you run out of money, as Perry seems to be doing.

[mainiac]

But Perry has the super PAC money.  As long as you have a billionaire bankrolling you, you can hang on and hope for a polling surge.  Look at how long Gingrich lasted last time thanks to Sheldon Anderson.

[nenjin]

And look at Gringrich. I suppose if he's still in government, representing their interests, it's still money well spent. But sometimes the mind boggles at how much money is thrown at candidates who ultimately don't amount to more than they started as. I dunno, maybe billionaires just few those millions as the cost of doing business in America.

[RedKing]

But Perry has the super PAC money.  As long as you have a billionaire bankrolling you, you can hang on and hope for a polling surge.  Look at how long Gingrich lasted last time thanks to Sheldon Anderson.

Gingrich was never lower than 4.4% at his worst (which coincidentally was Perry's peak at 31%). By contrast, Perry hasn't even MADE IT to 4% yet this whole cycle.

Deep pockets can keep you afloat if you show long-shot potential. Perry doesn't have even that.

[smjjames]

But Perry has the super PAC money.  As long as you have a billionaire bankrolling you, you can hang on and hope for a polling surge.  Look at how long Gingrich lasted last time thanks to Sheldon Anderson.

His staffing problems are a troubling sign for him. Though I'm sure he'd just say there is 'staff reorganization' going on.

They're all trying to hold on until at least the next debate because they might get a boost like Fiorina did.

[Sheb]

RedKing: The field is much more crowded this time around, so it's normal if candidates are polling lower.