There’s only one way for us to win this / Provoke outrage, outright
August 29, 2016 8:52 AM   Subscribe

 
Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?
posted by psoas at 8:57 AM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


Good post, but needs more @AP_Headlines:
Polls Tighten as Nation Struggles With Decision Between Non White Male and Global Crisis

Clinton Camp Unable to Disprove That Trump is God, Trump Doubles Down

Trump Doing Great With The Blacks, Per Trump Source
posted by tonycpsu at 8:57 AM on August 29, 2016 [73 favorites]


Thank you for the new thread, flt!

Found in the @rollcall photo archive: Sen. Paul Simon fixing @alfranken 's bow tie in 1991

So our answer to last thread's bow tie argument is Al Franken.
posted by stolyarova at 8:58 AM on August 29, 2016 [22 favorites]


My phone thanks you, flt.
posted by leotrotsky at 8:58 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


Gah. I was just about to post a reminder about AP_Headlines.
Clinton Aide Marital Spat to be Campaign Issue When Donald Trump Gets Phone Back
posted by scaryblackdeath at 8:59 AM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


A Weiner is going to be an important part of this news cycle and not in a way I expected, that's for sure.
posted by Tevin at 9:00 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Sad!
posted by y2karl at 9:01 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]




Still calling it for Hillary, and for it to be decided by midnight on election night.

Everything is just fretting and spending obscene amounts of money. The big question is what comes next, ie after Hillaru officially becomes President.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:02 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


A Weiner is going to be an important part of this news cycle and not in a way I expected, that's for sure.

I think a weiner has been an important part of the news cycle ever since he won New Hampshire.
posted by leotrotsky at 9:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Found in the @rollcall photo archive: Sen. Paul Simon fixing @alfranken 's bow tie in 1991
This is not the droid Paul Simon I was looking for.
posted by pxe2000 at 9:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Only ten weeks left of this insufferable bullshit. Or, you know... ten weeks and four to eight years.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?

It's not an irrational notion that Trmp was going for the Gollum and Smeagol bad/evil thing and overshot to three forms of evil.
posted by meinvt at 9:04 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Is there a reason Trump has to have three different nicknames here?

Yeah, if we stopped using silly nicknames for Trump in these election threads, I wouldn't miss them.
posted by lefty lucky cat at 9:05 AM on August 29, 2016 [53 favorites]


My favorite joke I've read is that Anthony Weiner's continued existence is proof against all of those conspiracy theories that the Clinton's have people killed.
posted by Navelgazer at 9:06 AM on August 29, 2016 [98 favorites]


well now that Huma Abedin is getting divorced it's hypocritical for Democrats to go after Steve Bannon's DV history with his ex-wife, is probably a real talking point getting rolled out right now
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:06 AM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


> [from last thread] what exactly is his plan to curb gun violence in cities?

My guess
1) [Bill] Clinton-esque lots more cops
2) Guliani & Bratton stop & frisk [or Toronto carding for another example]
3) not suing police departments in federal court for civil rights violations and seeking consent decrees with federal oversight.
posted by morganw at 9:07 AM on August 29, 2016


"Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?"

He has only one true name and that is Dinild Trimp.
posted by komara at 9:07 AM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


Anthony Weiner has serious impulse control problems around sex. The choices Huma Abedin has made are the right ones for her--she has nothing of which to be ashamed in this matter.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 9:07 AM on August 29, 2016 [58 favorites]


well now that Huma Abedin is getting divorced it's hypocritical for Democrats to go after Steve Bannon's DV history with his ex-wife, is probably a real talking point getting rolled out right now

Via the aforementioned AP_Headlines:
If Huma Abedin's personal life is off limits then so is Steve Bannon's.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


if we stopped using silly nicknames

Shitmittens was very popular for Romney in MeFi 4 years ago, so there is a bit of precedent here. Considering how much more nicknameable this over-ripe orange is, it's at least understandable.
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm actually just bothered by the Donnie/Donny consistency.

Also my yard sign has not yet arrived, c'mon Hilary people it's been three weeks.

I've had to fend off a fair number of donation calls too, look guys, I have a monthly donation going that's all I've got to give.
posted by emjaybee at 9:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Only ten weeks left of this insufferable bullshit. Or, you know... ten weeks and four to eight years.


I have some terrible news for you about every other election cycle after that until we finally come to our senses and elect giant meteor.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 9:09 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


btw if you're a fan of presidential candidate fan art, the Hillary Clinton subreddit banner is pretty cool right now
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:09 AM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


Mind you, I fully expect Trump to complain about the election being stolen, not concede for a while and possibly even demand recounts in some places. Which is fine, but I do hope Hillary makes a comment about "Oh, is still saying President Obama isn't a citizen?" She won't do it, but in my fanfic she totally does.

The big questions is where the Senate will flip and if so, by how much?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:09 AM on August 29, 2016


Can we respect Huma Abedin's wishes, and not create our own derails and hot-takes on the matter?

He was a jerk. She's leaving him. The media will handle this poorly. End of story.
posted by schmod at 9:09 AM on August 29, 2016 [72 favorites]


psoas: Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?

Personal house style, in which I prefer to call him Donnie and Donny, in the same sentence if possible. Trump is his brand, and I'll let him keep that.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:11 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Still calling it for Hillary, and for it to be decided by midnight on election night.

Everything is just fretting and spending obscene amounts of money. The big question is what comes next, ie after Hillaru officially becomes President.


If there is a benevolent omnipresence to the universe, the landslide will be big enough to make Mitch McTurtle the Senate minority leader and end this damned Supreme Court appointment delay.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:11 AM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


btw if you're a fan of presidential candidate fan art, the Hillary Clinton subreddit banner is pretty cool right now

Who's the artist?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:11 AM on August 29, 2016


if we stopped using silly nicknames for Trump in these election threads, I wouldn't miss them.

Yeah, it feels really juvenile. Adding an adjective to the beginning of his name a la Charles Pierce doesn't really bother me for some reason.
posted by aspersioncast at 9:12 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


@AP_Headlines

[fake], for those just joining us.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:12 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


I'm a person with a documented high tolerance for mockery of public figures, but we ought to be able to leave Abedin alone entirely, I would think.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:12 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


How likely is a Dem Senate?
posted by Monochrome at 9:12 AM on August 29, 2016


Who's the artist?

44757
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:13 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


That said I've had a WordReplacer turning his name into 'Turnip' for over a year now, to the point that I don't even see it. So I have no room to talk.
posted by aspersioncast at 9:13 AM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


end this damned Supreme Court appointment delay.

Democrats using the nuclear option? Bestill my beating heart.

If this happens I'll eat my left shoe.
posted by Talez at 9:13 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


That seems unfair to turnips, turnips are useful.
posted by emjaybee at 9:14 AM on August 29, 2016 [23 favorites]


aspersioncast: Adding an adjective to the beginning of his name a la Charles Pierce doesn't really bother me for some reason.

Interesting. I prefer a minor diminutive to "Dishonest Donald," because it feels to me like you're trying to make a new nickname stick, whereas Donnie and/or Donny is a less formal version of his chosen Donald.
posted by filthy light thief at 9:14 AM on August 29, 2016


How likely is a Dem Senate?
posted by Monochrome at 9:12 AM on August 29 [+] [!]


Last time I checked Sam Wang's PEC thing a bare Dem majority was very likely, and that was maybe sometime after the DNC.

In my head right now it's motherfucking landslide time.
posted by schadenfrau at 9:15 AM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


I've had a WordReplacer turning his name into 'Turnip' for over a year now

Mine turns it into "some rich asshole."
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:15 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


I like to go with plain old Trump. Sink the man, sink the brand. Sink it forever.
posted by mochapickle at 9:16 AM on August 29, 2016 [74 favorites]


If this happens I'll eat my left shoe.

What about your right shoe?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:17 AM on August 29, 2016


Democrats using the nuclear option? Bestill my beating heart.

If this happens I'll eat my left shoe.
posted by Talez at 9:13 AM on August 29 [+] [!]


I would have said the same thing about calling out dogwhistles as racism and bigotry not that long ago. Hillary's incarnation of the Democratic Party seems decidedly more ass-kicking than previous iterations. I am...optimistic.
posted by schadenfrau at 9:17 AM on August 29, 2016 [27 favorites]


This WashPo article from last week has some good breakdowns of Virginia polling between different regions and demographic groups. The takeaway is that he is doing worse than Romney in every region of the state except in the rural central and western portions, and he's doing worse than Romney in every demographic group, including the white, non-college educated men and the military. But hey, keep buying those ads in a state where's you're polling 10 points behind.
posted by peeedro at 9:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Monochrome: How likely is a Dem Senate?

schadenfrau: Last time I checked Sam Wang's PEC thing a bare Dem majority was very likely, and that was maybe sometime after the DNC.

Today’s Senate seat-count histogram *snapshot* -- Senate snapshot (49 polls): Dem+Ind: 51, GOP: 49, Meta-margin: D +2.2%, Nov. win probability: Dem. 72%
posted by filthy light thief at 9:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?

Don't forget "Amnesty Don".
posted by Kabanos at 9:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Here are the artist's imgur reuploads of several of the lovely sketches.
posted by stolyarova at 9:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


Still calling it for Hillary, and for it to be decided by midnight on election night.

Bruh, you still owe me cookies from the last election's bet. "Remember me, Mr. Blatcher? Mefi, November 6, 2012. If you're going to shoot cookies at a cashman, Mr. Blatcher, you'd better be prepared to finish the job."*

*this is a far side joke.
posted by cashman at 9:19 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


aspersioncast: "Adding an adjective to the beginning of his name a la Charles Pierce doesn't really bother me for some reason."

Oh, I find Pierce near unreadable because of that kind of thing.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:19 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


feels to me like you're trying to make a new nickname stick

Ugh that totally makes sense; it does feel like something right out of his playbook.
posted by aspersioncast at 9:19 AM on August 29, 2016




I like to go with plain old Trump. Sink the man, sink the brand. Sink it forever.

Does he have anything that can be boycotted? His brand is on a lot of things, but it seems to be licensing deals only.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:20 AM on August 29, 2016


He licenses his name, and if his name becomes unappealing, those deals will stop.
posted by mochapickle at 9:21 AM on August 29, 2016 [25 favorites]


Bruh, you still owe me cookies from the last election's bet. "Remember me, Mr. Blatcher? Mefi, November 6, 2012. If you're going to shoot cookies at a cashman, Mr. Blatcher, you'd better be prepared to finish the job.

You've mentioned this before, but I though YOU owed *me* cookies for that 2012 call? Is there a comment you can link to?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:23 AM on August 29, 2016


I'd be willing to bet we see the nuclear option if we have a Dem senate.

No offers of footwear eating, though.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:23 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


He licenses his name, and if his name becomes unappealing, those deals will stop.

Ooooh, I would love to help! Except...I already avoided everything with is name on it.

Can I just contact the manufacturers who have these deals and tell them that I think their own image is diminished by their association with him? Or is there a better tack here?
posted by wenestvedt at 9:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


His name is already pretty unappealing to me, but I'm not part of the highly-coveted "gullible, angry racist" demographic.
posted by The Card Cheat at 9:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Josh Marshall has a new piece about the coup within the PoT(T) being finished: Takeover Complete
Over the last few years, as 'government shutdown' went from being a crazy ass thing Newt Gingrich did twenty years ago - never to be tried again - to the top item on the Republican policy agenda, you could hear more and more Republicans saying something like this: We thought it was this great thing that we had our own cable news network as an arm of the GOP or the conservative movement, echoing talking points, spinning the news. But at a certain point we realized Fox News wasn't working for us. We're working for Fox News. [...]

Several months ago I described the build of 'nonsense debt' and 'hate debt' in the GOP which made Trump's takeover possible. Indeed, whether genuine or merely opportunistic, you now have more than a few Never Trump conservative media personalities stepping forward to explain how the rightwing media echo-chamber created a framework in which you are immediately discredited if you do not subscribe to a series of demonstrably false claims, non-facts and theories. And there you have it: Years of build up of fantastical conspiracy theories, completely unrealistic political goals, all leaving the party ungovernable and vulnerable to a takeover by someone like Donald Trump who was willing to satisfy the demand the institutional GOP had studiously cultivated but was both unwilling and unable to satiate.
As usual, Josh has a really insightful piece demonstrating support for his hypothesis of "nonsense debt" by highlighting points figures like Charlie Sykes have made. The PoT(T)'s propaganda arm became the party's body, while the so-called establishment are simply flailing, ineffectual limbs.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 9:25 AM on August 29, 2016 [46 favorites]


Because this still hasn't been fixed yet: The GOP's Stealth War Against Voters (August 24, 2016)
The latest tool: Election officials in more than two dozen states have compiled lists of citizens whom they allege could be registered in more than one state – thus potentially able to cast multiple ballots – and eligible to be purged from the voter rolls.

The data is processed through a system called the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program, which is being promoted by a powerful Republican operative, and its lists of potential duplicate voters are kept confidential. But Rolling Stone obtained a portion of the list and the names of 1 million targeted voters. According to our analysis, the Crosscheck list disproportionately threatens solid Democratic constituencies: young, black, Hispanic and Asian-American voters – with some of the biggest possible purges underway in Ohio and North Carolina, two crucial swing states with tight Senate races.
So what I've done is set myself a reminder to check my voter registration status a little bit before early voting begins in my state. Here is a chart someone provided in the last thread, that shows early voting for each state. Don't let yourself get 'magically' unregistered!
posted by cashman at 9:25 AM on August 29, 2016 [27 favorites]


From the post about their respective health records: Clinton was the first presidential candidate to release her medical records during the primary, presenting a detailed document from her physician that outlined medical conditions including hyperactive thyroid and seasonal allergies.

Finally, a politician who will represent my interests with respect to shitty thyroids and overactive immune systems.
posted by pie ninja at 9:25 AM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


Democrats using the nuclear option? Bestill my beating heart.

If this happens I'll eat my left shoe.


At this point it's clear that McConnell is not dealing in good faith, but that he will simply work to obstruct whenever possible. I think the nuclear option on judicial appointments is one way out of this looming constitutional crisis, and hopefully we'll see Dems have the spine to use it.

It's been considered before.
Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., is irked that Democrats have used filibusters to block 10 of Bush’s choices for federal appeals courts.

He’s vowed not to let it happen this year, particularly with the possibility that there could soon be a Supreme Court nominee to consider. But to carry out that promise might require changing Senate rules that now allow just 41 members to block any judicial nominee.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:25 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


if his name becomes unappealing, those deals will stop.

Fingers, eyes, and legs all crossed.
posted by aspersioncast at 9:26 AM on August 29, 2016


That seems unfair to turnips, turnips are useful.

But when turned into Irish jack o lanterns, they do sort of look like Trump.
posted by maxsparber at 9:27 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


The fact that we got the nuclear option on non-SC judges already means it's a lower bar for a change.
posted by Chrysostom at 9:28 AM on August 29, 2016


Is there a reason Trump has to have three different names here?

Using nicknames avoids accidentally summoning him when calling his name three times.
posted by cazoo at 9:28 AM on August 29, 2016 [79 favorites]


You've mentioned this before, but I though YOU owed *me* cookies for that 2012 call? Is there a comment you can link to?

I'll memail you, so as not to derail the thread with the talk of delicious, delicious cookies.
posted by cashman at 9:30 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh man Diane Rehm is talking at length with a white supremacist caller and it's surreal.
posted by Taft at 9:33 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


She's what?!

Please tell me she's dismissive.
posted by stolyarova at 9:34 AM on August 29, 2016


Oh jesus he's a full-blown alt-righter.
posted by stolyarova at 9:35 AM on August 29, 2016


@realDonaldTrump: Inner-city crime is reaching record levels. African-Americans will vote for Trump because they know I will stop the slaughter going on!

@paulschwartzman: NYC homicides. 1990=2262 2015=352

DC homicides 1990=474 2015=119

Chicago homicides 1990=851 2015=488
posted by Existential Dread at 9:36 AM on August 29, 2016 [73 favorites]




It was Jared Taylor. WTF Diane Rehm why are you giving these people a platform?!
posted by stolyarova at 9:37 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


She's on with Jared Taylor, right?
posted by mochapickle at 9:38 AM on August 29, 2016


That Rehm guest is Jared Taylor, editor of American Renaissance which describes itself as a "race-realist, white advocacy organization".
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:38 AM on August 29, 2016


Hillaru

Picturing a WRX with a big H logo on it...
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:38 AM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


He's so gross.
posted by mochapickle at 9:38 AM on August 29, 2016




Triple jinx.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:38 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


NYT: At Least 110 Republican Leaders Won’t Vote for Donald Trump -- a timeline of who announced their opposition, and when, in counterpoint to a timeline of Trump's actions and pronouncements. ('Leaders,' in this context, is 'leaders within the Republican party,' and includes former officials and representatives as well as current ones)
posted by cjelli at 9:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


I just realized I've been confusing Huma Abedin with Amal Alamuddin for, like, months now.
posted by Faint of Butt at 9:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


Can I just contact the manufacturers who have these deals and tell them that I think their own image is diminished by their association with him? Or is there a better tack here?

Maybe contact advertisers/sponsors of news shows Donald Trump frequently appears on and let them know how often (or how little) one sees their ads?
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh man Diane Rehm is talking at length with a white supremacist caller and it's surreal.

It was Jared Taylor. WTF Diane Rehm why are you giving these people a platform?!


I'm on record as thinking Diane Rehm sucks, but isn't sunlight the best disinfectant with these assholes?

Let the cretin go on, spew bile, have the rest of the panelists and Ms. Rehm treat him with open contempt while simultaneously eviscerating him. I mean, it's NPR. I don't think they've got a large white nationalist listener base who would otherwise be amenable to his arguments.
posted by leotrotsky at 9:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


So we're pretty clear that the Trump campaign is assuming that his supporters have no more recent or direct experience of the inner city or African-Americans than throwing out their kid's copy of The Chronic on cassette and maybe, MAYBE an episode of Law & Order from before Lennie Briscoe died, right?
posted by Captain l'escalier at 9:46 AM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


He is going to go with his gut.

To paraphrase a wise man, his gut has shit for brains.
posted by jonmc at 9:46 AM on August 29, 2016 [51 favorites]


I may have mixed metaphors there. Clearly soap is the best disinfectant for assholes.
posted by leotrotsky at 9:47 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


isn't sunlight the best disinfectant with these assholes?

I would have thought so, but it really appears otherwise. It seems to be empowering them. I fear we are seeing the beginnings of openly racist or 'racialist' advocacy groups.
posted by readery at 9:49 AM on August 29, 2016 [21 favorites]


I'm on record as thinking Diane Rehm sucks, but isn't sunlight the best disinfectant with these assholes?

I'm inclined to say no, given what the Trump candidacy has done to embolden the collection of neo-nazis, MRA types, and other assorted assholes that constitute the alt-right. These people have every right to stand out on a corner and spew their hate speech, but I don't see boosting their signal by having them on an NPR program as a good thing.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:49 AM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


I'm on record as thinking Diane Rehm sucks, but isn't sunlight the best disinfectant with these assholes?

I was wondering what the response was so I moseyed over to the post about it on her official Facebook page. It's a mix of people who are surprised and horrified that this kind of white supremacy still exists, people who are upset that she didn't call out Taylor's worst assertions (for example, about white people being genetically different), and a sliver of Trump supporters who insist they aren't racist.
posted by stolyarova at 9:50 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


Personally, I think it's impossible to understand white supremacy without having some form of reporting/exposure to their thinking. Not pleasant, but a picture of reality.

people who are surprised and horrified that this kind of white supremacy still exists


That's exactly why it needs to be out there.
posted by Miko at 9:52 AM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


Trump's African-American outreach...whoo boy.

My overall impression about the "pivot" is that someone on his new team sat him down and actually managed to convince him that he needs to improve his image among women and minorities if he actually wants to win. And he took that advice to heart, and he's going for it with gusto. Good news for his campaign, right? Nope, because of course he's incapable of accepting advice with any finer nuance than "make black people like you", and of course he's going to do it in the most clueless, tone-deaf, transparently pandering, cringeworthy, offensive way possible. He's too simple and ignorant to be Machiavellian.

And, I honestly think he's incapable of the kind of empathy and theory-of-mind that would be needed to understand why his style of outreach is not only ineffective, but actually insulting and counterproductive. He genuinely doesn't understand that other people have their own experiences and values and thought processes, which may not include exalting Donald Trump's every whim. He's never needed to understand that. It's evident in everything he does - people are just frustratingly uncooperative machines to him.

I'd feel sorry for him if he weren't one if the most dangerous people in the world right now.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 9:53 AM on August 29, 2016 [52 favorites]


Tablet ran an artcile recently by a Jewish guy who said he's alt right, and the comments filled up with, no you aren't, we hate Jews, and one guy saying we would kill you all if we could.

One of the Tablet editors argued it is important to see this stuff and know it exists. I argue that they gave an unmoderated forum for antisemties to clap each other on the back for trolling Jews.

Sometimes the best disinfectant is disinfectant. You know: Destroy the infection, rather than give it a place to grow.
posted by maxsparber at 9:54 AM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]




Trump is going to win.
posted by charred husk at 9:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Tablet ran an article recently by a Jewish guy who said he's alt right

Is there a reason we're not calling them the alt-wrong?
posted by dersins at 9:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


Alt-reich has a better ring to it.
posted by leotrotsky at 9:58 AM on August 29, 2016 [52 favorites]


isn't sunlight the best disinfectant with these assholes?

Not in this election season. Ordinarily, yes, this would work because the media would (okay, might) call out the racism and other batshittery for what it is.

This year? This year most of the media is committed to false equivalencies in the name of "balance" or whatever. This year journalists are bending over backwards to continue the "both sides" narrative when that's demonstrably bullshit. The fact that we're even using a term like "alt right" to describe out-and-out white supremacists says a lot for how far that goes. Even Rachel Maddow is patting crazy Trump surrogates on the hand so they'll keep coming onto her show.

None of this is good. At all.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 9:59 AM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


Is there a reason we're not calling them the alt-wrong?

I refuse to call them the alt-right. Why let racists give themselves a hip-sounding rebranding?
posted by maxsparber at 9:59 AM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


That's exactly why it needs to be out there.

This thinking assumes that a majority of the people who don't already understand / haven't confronted white supremacy are going to witness it being talked about in the mainstream media and be taken aback by it, or express skepticism toward it. I think the more likely scenario is that this will normalize it, because the people on these shows aren't the hood-wearing types, they're people with some amount of academic credentials, sitting at think tanks with professional-sounding names. They're still spewing the same racist themes, but with bullshit statistics that have to suddenly be debunked on live radio/television instead of being shouted into the void as they ought to be. I just don't think it's a winning move to expect them to hoist themselves by their own petard.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:01 AM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


This year? This year most of the media is committed to false equivalencies in the name of "balance" or whatever. This year journalists are bending over backwards to continue the "both sides" narrative when that's demonstrably bullshit. The fact that we're even using a term like "alt right" to describe out-and-out white supremacists says a lot for how far that goes. Even Rachel Maddow is patting crazy Trump surrogates on the hand so they'll keep coming onto her show.

Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?
posted by leotrotsky at 10:02 AM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


A done deal in August is death for ratings for the next few months. So they pretend it's still a race, and help it become one again.
posted by yellowbinder at 10:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [25 favorites]


leotrotsky you're the type of MeFite I would expect to have a reasonable, thoughtful answer to the question, not the one who's posing it.
posted by Tevin at 10:03 AM on August 29, 2016


Tablet ran an artcile recently by a Jewish guy who said he's alt right

I hope he's enjoying the company of his new friends in the comments section, and observing their loyalty to him as a member of the cause. If he's young and just sheltered, maybe this will help him and other young readers.
posted by Countess Elena at 10:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Are we still pretending the electoral college doesn't exist in these threads, lest we "be complacent"?

Just trying to keep the strategy straight.
posted by odinsdream at 10:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]




Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?

The Nation: How False Equivalence Is Distorting the 2016 Election Coverage
posted by tonycpsu at 10:05 AM on August 29, 2016 [22 favorites]


NPR ran this piece this morning, which was mildly terrifying to say the least. Some choice quotes from Trump supporters they interviewed:

In regards to Trump's unclear message: "I listen to half of what Trump says," Callahan explains. "And then I move on because you have to get people's attention."

Does it matter whether Trump deports everyone or offers amnesty? (Fairly opposing viewpoints, I would say -ed): Boz says illegal immigration is a problem, but when it comes to policy, he trusts Trump to figure that out. "Whatever he wants to do, I'll back him. That's all I can say. It's tough," Boz says.

Again - amnesty, really? "That's a negotiating point," Kiefer says. "Remember, he wrote the book The Art of the Deal."

Why is Trump apparently changing his position? "Obviously people are telling him that he has to come more to the middle to not offend young white women like you, who are college-educated and just think he's an evil man," Delaberta says.

Does anything Trump do matter? "He could shoot someone on Broadway and I would still vote for him," says Judy Callahan.

Pressed on whether she meant that literally, Callahan laughs.

"Well, only if he just, if he just wounded them. We'll just let him wound 'em," Callahan jokes. "No, what I'm trying to say to you is, the people who are here today, they're going to vote for Trump."

posted by backseatpilot at 10:06 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?

Well, speaking as a member of the press, that's the myth we like to tell ourselves. But the truth is that there are a lot of myths in journalism, some of which actually wind up detracting from our ability to moderate discussion. One of them is the myth of fairness and impartiality, where we are not the arbiters of truth, but merely provide a forum for balancing viewpoints. This is easily gamed by people who want to push the overton window in their direction, so they just pick an extremist viewpoint in opposition to a moderate viewpoint and all of a sudden the press readjust the balance, treating both sides as equal.

The second is a desire to treat an election as a horse race. In this circumstance, the racist right is more interesting as potential Trump voters than as a social ill, and so they get a lot of media time. That media time might be somewhat disapproving, but for a right wing base that considers media disapproval to be a badge of honor, this actually helps authenticate them to fellow travelers. And so, without being prepared to engage in an in-depth look at the so-called alt-right, the media is actually benefiting them by acting as a slightly disapproving press organ.
posted by maxsparber at 10:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [65 favorites]


Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?

If you haven't seen or read the Documentary/Book Merchants of Doubt, it's a good start on getting a handle on what happened over the last 30-40 years to create this media environment where absolute bullshit gets to play on the same field as well-established fact. The short answer is: a PR blitz in support of short-term profits at the expense of humanity has eliminated our ability to filter actual expertise from bullshitspertise.
posted by dis_integration at 10:10 AM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


Whenever I read Trump claiming he'll keep us safe, I keep expecting his next sentence to be "do you have stairs in your house?"
posted by Joey Michaels at 10:15 AM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]


I wonder a lot about how much the slow death of journalism is impacting the way they're playing now. I wonder if they would have been this desperate for ratings if we still had paid classified ads, for example.
posted by corb at 10:17 AM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


Like many of us, I have a racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic family member.
(from the last thread.)

Should we call them members of the RSHX community? I think they'd hate it, but we can do things like having symposiums around 'Mitigating harm in the RSHX community' and applying rigorous standards of fairness and equality to them, on the grounds that they're a vanishing part of our culture and need love and care in their twilight years.

Or they could be the Homophobic AntichoiceTransphobic Evangelical Racist Sexist community, but I think that would be an unfortunate acronym.
posted by Devonian at 10:17 AM on August 29, 2016 [45 favorites]


Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?

Stepping back from that, what makes an idea unacceptable? If you take your cues from people around you, and you cover politics, and someone just ran for the presidency and got the nomination of a major party while embracing these ideas -- well, looking around at everyone involved in politics right now, perhaps that legitimates the views rather than de-legitimizes the candidate. Trump is still the nominee. Look at Paul Ryan and the rest of the GOP leadership -- for the most part, they're talking down the ideas but continuing to support the candidate who backs them and at the end of the day one of those things matters more. It signals that maybe white supremacy is something the leadership of the party will tolerate, if distastefully; perhaps, then, overt white supremacy is no longer an entirely unacceptable idea, as wrong and bigoted as it is, and as terrible as it is, and as terrifying as it is. I worry that this will be Trump's lasting legacy.

Taking the longer view, though, this is absolutely not new: why didn't the media shut down the entirety of the 'debate' over Obama's citizenship and birthplace? It's not because there were two equally compelling sides, that's for sure.
posted by cjelli at 10:19 AM on August 29, 2016 [28 favorites]


I say we just stop talking about details of the election, except on comedy shows, and otherwise discuss character motivations and minutia about or involving "Mr. Robot" for the next couple of months. I want to know what the hell Angela is up to, personally. She's a enigma.
posted by raysmj at 10:20 AM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


This thinking assumes that a majority of the people who don't already understand / haven't confronted white supremacy are going to witness it being talked about in the mainstream media

We have plenty of evidence that that is the case (viz, Facebook thread from the Rehm show mentioned above). Heck, I have it in my personal life.

I think MeFites, in particular the political animals who tend to inhabit these threads, don't really have the strongest sense for the wider popular conversation. If you step away and begin talking election with people who don't follow the news cycle much, don't hang out online, have never heard of Breitbart or 538, and so on, you might be surprised at how little a 'done deal' this is and how much less many Americans know about what's going on in this election than we and our cohort do. I used to hate it when people talked about MetaFilter having an 'echo chamber' effect, and I still disagree that it's an ideological echo chamber, but there is a real sense in which #internetoutrageoftheday has very little impact outside focused online channels with a strong political lean. That's one reason having these factions represented on radio - which has a much more diverse listener base - is a good thing.

I don't disagree that false equivalence is a problem, and I'm not going to go to the mat on this issue of the particular guy on the particular show, but I also think that if it's okay for us to talk about supremacists and know exactly who they are and what they have to say and what their web channels promulgate, it's ok for radio hosts to do so, too.
posted by Miko at 10:20 AM on August 29, 2016 [41 favorites]


Stuart Stevens, chief strategist to Romney's 2012 campaign.

Originally read this as Sufjan Stevens, and thought to myself
"No wonder Romney lost—that guy's 50 state strategy stalled out after only the first two."
posted by Atom Eyes at 10:21 AM on August 29, 2016 [113 favorites]


This election has done more to dissuade me from the vague, positive feelings I had about my far-flung relatives than any previous one. It's getting exhausting going to Fb and seeing that okay, my sweet Aunt Betty is fucking racist or aw, shit, cool Uncle Dave is going down with the right wing ship and will be posting memes the entire way down.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:23 AM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


I don't disagree that false equivalence is a problem, and I'm not going to go to the mat on this issue of the particular guy on the particular show, but I also think that if it's okay for us to talk about supremacists and know exactly who they are and what they have to say and what their web channels promulgate, it's ok for radio hosts to do so, too.

In some ways Diane Rehm is doing a longer version of the Hillary ad with the KKK. "The reason a lot of Klan members like Donald Trump is that a lot of what he believes we believe in."

She's not raising this asshole up, she's dragging the rest of the right down.
posted by leotrotsky at 10:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Josh Marshall has a new piece about the coup within the PoT(T) being finished: Takeover Complete

The PoT(T)? I did RTFA and I still have no idea what this means. A Google web search brings up the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan. Restricting the search to metafilter.com brings up only this comment in this thread.

Help me out here. Can anyone tell me what the PoT(T) is?
posted by Mothlight at 10:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [23 favorites]


This is a much larger discussion, but: after witnessing this shitshow so far, I'm interested in ideas about how we can improve the media's ability to fill its proper role in a democracy. Because it's obviously broken.

Part of that is up to the media themselves – but it's not always enough for a journalist to simply have the best intentions and make the best effort. Forces are exerted on the industry which are beyond any one outlet's control: profit motives, fragmentation of the media into ideological echo chambers (assisted by the Internet), a (partly deserved) lack of public trust in the media as a whole, innumerable game and sabotage the system toward their own ends, the general public's limited ability to digest nuance, etc. There are outlets out there who are still doing real, journalism – but .

There is no single solution. But to whatever extent the media was once able to illuminate truth and disinfect with sunlight, the Internet era has eviscerated it. We're gonna need new models, new principles and standards, entirely new ideas about what the media is and how it should work. Because the old ones clearly don't work in the web era.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


r involving "Mr. Robot" for the next couple of months. I want to know what the hell Angela is up to, personally. She's a enigma.

Totally onboard with any derail into dystopian scifi territory. Think of Angela as a black ops operative from the Bernie camp tunneling into a high level Trump corp executive position. (not that there is any similarity between T corp and E corp.)
posted by sammyo at 10:25 AM on August 29, 2016


>perhaps, then, overt white supremacy is no longer an entirely unacceptable idea, as wrong and bigoted as it is, and as terrible as it is, and as terrifying as it is.

Yeah, but if a newscaster said 'Let's be clear, Trump is the candidate of white supremacists, and the Republican Party is the party of white supremacists,' people would flip their shit. So it's not THAT overt. Yet.
posted by Sing Or Swim at 10:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'd link Jon Stewart's "STOP STOP STOP HURTING AMERICA" bit, but it didn't work the first time, so why bother again.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


I think cjelli's point is important. White supremacy has become more acceptable, in large part because the racist right has co-opted and mastered the language of social justice, and has found ways to present their stances as a legitimate, culturally based point of view; they've found ways to discuss their views without using the epithets and obviously extreme proposals that would get them disinvited to national media discussions. In the end, they have these views, and they have persuaded a lot of Americans to support them. It is absolutely palpable - it drives politics and policy even in my own city, let alone in this election.
posted by Miko at 10:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [22 favorites]


Whenever I read Trump claiming he'll keep us safe, I keep expecting his next sentence to be "do you have stairs in your house?"

found the goon
posted by rorgy at 10:27 AM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


I figured PoT stood for Party of Trump, but I'm lost on the second T. Halp?
posted by palomar at 10:28 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


but I also think that if it's okay for us to talk about supremacists and know exactly who they are and what they have to say and what their web channels promulgate, it's ok for radio hosts to do so, too.

Of course it's "ok" for them to do it -- I'm not advocating some kind of gag rule here -- I'm just saying that I don't have the same optimism you seem to that it will lead to more people rejecting white supremacy. Some will, but some will find the ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to the newsletter.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:30 AM on August 29, 2016


I believe the idea was the "Party of Truman (and Trump)" -- or vice versa? -- in the last thread.

I admit I bailed out on Thursday.
posted by wenestvedt at 10:30 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Make the effort.
Vote.
It is important.
'nuff sed

(if you can add to this, memail me. I will include in the next posting)

-----
U.S. Election Assistance Commission: Resources for Voters (eac.gov)
-----
Can I Vote? National Association of Secretaries of State (canivote.org)
-----
Student Voting Guide - Brennan Center for Justice (brennancenter.org)
-----
Campus Vote Project (campusvoteproject.org)
-----
Voting and Elections - Find answers to common questions about voting in the US. (usa.gov)
-----
Early Voting Calendar (vote.org)
-----
Absentee and Early Voting - National Conference of State Legislatures (ncsl.org)
-----
Federal Voting Assistance Program (fvap.gov)
-----
Vote From Abroad Dot Org (votefromabroad.org)
-----
How to Vote in Every State (YouTube Channel | URL links on right side of page)
posted by lampshade at 10:31 AM on August 29, 2016 [40 favorites]


70 days is roughly the entire Canadian election campaign.

I'm so tired of election shit already.
posted by GuyZero at 10:33 AM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


to whatever extent the media was once able to illuminate truth and disinfect with sunlight

At the risk of continuing this journalism discussion which already pops up on MeFi with discouraging frequency, I think we also need to problematize our idea that the media was ever able to "illuminate truth and disinfect with sunlight." That's an ahistorical idealization of what "the media" has done - not least because "the media" is not monolithic. Today, the media includes everything from screedy ideological quasi-news websites and podcasts to major dailies in international and national circulation to newsmagazines with longform thinkpieces to light-news pubs like Time to massive cable networks to local outlets to national and local news and talk radio. Today as in the past, this "media" represents an incredibly wide range of levels of support for journalistic ideals and explicit or implict ideological bias. 100 years ago, major cities had sometimes a dozen or more competing papers - some union-driven, some anti-union driven, some lefty, some righty, some populist, some intellectual. Even in whatever ideal land people refer to when they speak of how great the media used to be, sure, we had a New York Times but also a Daily News and a New York Post. Television news was remarkable for its control by the few major broadcast networks and, because of their need to maintain market share, walked an incredibly mainstream line in terms of their reporting. We no longer have news outlets like that because market segmentatin rules the day. We live in an age of media fragmentation, and we won't be able to convince "the media," as a whole, to do anything collectively. I think we're only able to select certain outlets that we demand a higher standard from, and attempt, as [paying whenever possible] news consumers to hold them to that standard. But we won't be able to silence, or even influence, what goes on in markets driven by loyalty to a particular segment (e.g., Fox) as non-members of that segment; yet, we'll still have to live in a world in which they influence the views of millions of individuals.

It's that pretty tricky obstacle course we have to navigate, and there is no wholesale solution. I'm still glad to know whatever is being said in fringe outlets that is impacting the course of the nation and insinuating itself into individual views and state and city policies. In fact, it's essential not to pretend it doesn't exist.
posted by Miko at 10:34 AM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]


Help me out here. Can anyone tell me what the PoT(T) is?

the potash people are...getting out of hand.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:34 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


AP: PoT(T) Interpretable in Many Different Ways, Experts Say

[fake]
posted by Spathe Cadet at 10:35 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


Some will, but some will find the ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to the newsletter.

This is true, but I'd rather know who they are and who they're listening to. A polity that rests on keeping people in ignorance of particular political views, however offensive to stated national ideals, is not a secure one. The fight for democratic and pluralist values, in my view, has to happen at a different level, and that's not one of not allowing people access to bad ideas, it's assisting them in building the critical thinking skills, historical knowledge, and practices of empathy that will allow them to reject those views.
posted by Miko at 10:36 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


I refuse to call them the alt-right. Why let racists give themselves a hip-sounding rebranding?

I'm completely cool with letting them self-label. It just makes them easier to avoid, and will hopefully lead to more tribal infighting and destabilization of the "right". Kind of like libertarians and Tea Partiers.
posted by mayonnaises at 10:36 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Help me out here. Can anyone tell me what the PoT(T) is?

the potash people are...getting out of hand.


goddamn K Street lobbyists.
posted by GuyZero at 10:36 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


We live in an age of media fragmentation, and we won't be able to convince "the media," as a whole, to do anything collectively. I think we're only able to select certain outlets that we demand a higher standard from, and attempt, as [paying whenever possible] news consumers to hold them to that standard. But we won't be able to silence, or even influence, what goes on in markets driven by loyalty to a particular segment (e.g., Fox) as non-members of that segment; yet, we'll still have to live in a world in which they influence the views of millions of individuals.

Sure -- accept the things you cannot change, but change the things you can. Public radio giving a platform to a white supremacist seems squarely in the latter category.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:37 AM on August 29, 2016


I thought it was "Party of Trump (Potty)." Josh Marshall humor.
posted by stolyarova at 10:37 AM on August 29, 2016


In some ways Diane Rehm is doing a longer version of the Hillary ad with the KKK. "The reason a lot of Klan members like Donald Trump is that a lot of what he believes we believe in."

It's a good plan to win an election, but, I think, a bad plan in the long run. There are people who will just never vote for Hillary. Never ever. And that's fine.

But if you cast the right wing as now really racist, I am not convinced you drive people away from the right. I am worried you let them know that racism is just something they are going to have to be okay with. And there are plenty of right wingers just champing at the bit to tell them why racism is okay.

I mean, the rise of ISIS didn't happen in a vacuum. Now, these are genuinely, insanely awful people, but that's a selling point for them. Because they position themselves as being at war with something worse -- the west -- and when you're at war with the best, it helps to present yourself as being the worst thing ever. The Nazis didn't shy away from imagery that made them terrifying, even though it made them look like baddies. And we're over here telling Muslims that they don't have a place here, which doesn't give them much choice.

People can get onboard with terrible ideas -- even take pride in how terrible they are -- if they think it is in service of defeating something even more terrible And the right has been demonizing liberals, and Clinton specifically, for so long that there are plenty of people who are willing to say, racism? So what? We're trying to halt the destruction of America.

I do not believe in the marketplace of ideas. I don't think there is any real evidence that good ideas beat bad idea, that more and better speech beats bad speech, that sunlight is the best disinfectant. I think the media's job is to act in service of truth, not some imagined idea of "balance," and until they do that, all they are doing is propping up a narrative, and acting as a mouthpiece, for people who are genuinely, actively trying to build a racist right wing. And the time is good for that. They have been wink wink nudge nudged by Trump, who has basically championed their ideas anyway, and now the left is saying "this is the right."

Sure, there will be some Republican moderates who jump ship and vote Democrat. But, in the meanwhile, for those that don't, racism is now officially part of the right wing platform. And many of them have just been waiting for this to finally happen, because, honestly, there are a fuck ton of racists in America who don't want to be polite any more, and everybody is giving them permission to say what they have been thinking all along without any real checks and balances.
posted by maxsparber at 10:37 AM on August 29, 2016 [64 favorites]


racism is now officially part of the right wing platform.

It always has been (and by always I mean post-1950s). I'm happier to know how it works then to have it rest in the whitepapers of political consultants, sold to the public under a veil about "crime" or "broken families" or "welfare dependency."
posted by Miko at 10:41 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


If you step away and begin talking election with people who don't follow the news cycle much, don't hang out online, have never heard of Breitbart or 538, and so on,

I suspect you are right, but it's still very weird for me to imagine this. One of my coworkers is broadly in the same political universe as me – in the sense that, at least, he doesn't like Trump. I don't really talk about politics at work, but I have mentioned a couple of things to him in passing, because it's hard to resist "have you heard about [bugshit insane thing that Trump just did]? what the actual fuck, right?" – and it's quickly become apparent that he's just not following the election at all. I assume that he absorbs stuff from social media, and has learned at least the broad outlines of Trumps odiousness that way. But he is decidedly not someone who is thinking about the election's long-term effects on the Supreme Court, or looking for expert opinion on the candidate's tax and immigration policies, or anything like that.

So, yeah. I do think that 90% of what we discuss here on MeFi is very much "inside baseball" to a lot of folks. It's kind of frustrating to me, because the actual political and legislative effects of our votes should not be considered wonkish and obscure.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 10:41 AM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


I do not believe in the marketplace of ideas. I don't think there is any real evidence that good ideas beat bad idea, that more and better speech beats bad speech, that sunlight is the best disinfectant. I think the media's job is to act in service of truth, not some imagined idea of "balance," and until they do that, all they are doing is propping up a narrative, and acting as a mouthpiece, for people who are genuinely, actively trying to build a racist right wing. And the time is good for that. They have been wink wink nudge nudged by Trump, who has basically championed their ideas anyway, and now the left is saying "this is the right."

Cosigned.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:41 AM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


well now that Huma Abedin is getting divorced it's hypocritical for Democrats to go after Steve Bannon's DV history with his ex-wife, is probably a real talking point getting rolled out right now

@maggieNYT: The problem for Clinton team - after Democrats repeatedly pointed to Bannon personal past, going to be hard to argue Weiner is off limits
posted by GhostintheMachine at 10:46 AM on August 29, 2016


to whatever extent the media was once able to illuminate truth and disinfect with sunlight

1950s and 60s-era American mythology about larger-than-life heroes like Cronkite and Murrow leave aside that the larger press was mostly complicit with what the American government was doing to destabilize countries overseas, to secure natural resources and to fight a covert war with the Soviets. News reporting has always been a business venture. The goal has always been maintain the audience, and the narrative is often based on what makes a profit.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 10:46 AM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


Truth needs to make a comeback! I know it can do it.Philosophy aside, it's no big deal to assign truth values to plenty of stuff. Donald Duck, for example, is not the President of NATO. It would be false to argue that Crooked Hilary supports making all Americans get a tattoo of Ultra-Man. People who believe and repeat utter falsehoods do not have their own "reality"; they are either mendacious or dupes.
posted by thelonius at 10:49 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


I do think that 90% of what we discuss here on MeFi is very much "inside baseball" to a lot of folks.

Oh god yeah. And we end up spoiled, too. Even the people who generally agree with us can be annoying. I have a coworker whose heart is in the right place, but their version of political discourse is basically clumsily recounting half-understood bits from last night's Daily Show, their takeaway from which is, "This fucking guy Trump!" And I mean, yeah, that fucking guy, but I'm painfully aware I'm talking to someone who could have blown either way with the wind but just happened to blow my way.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 10:51 AM on August 29, 2016 [23 favorites]


So what's the "truth" about the right that we're not hearing from the media? OR what's the "truth" about this election we're not hearing from the media? And how do we have access to that "truth"?
posted by Miko at 10:52 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The problem for Clinton team - after Democrats repeatedly pointed to Bannon personal past, going to be hard to argue Weiner is off limits

Or, it's a perfect point to highlight what women go through trying to manage a relationship with a toxic man, and note that sometimes it's women against men, and happens in same-sex relationships, too.

People should be supported when they leave physically and/or emotionally abusive partners. Bannon was one such partner, as was Weiner.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:53 AM on August 29, 2016 [43 favorites]


I'm happier to know how it works then to have it rest in the whitepapers of political consultants, sold to the public under a veil about "crime" or "broken families" or "welfare dependency."

I agree, but I don't think the best way to do that is to provide the so-called alt right with an unmoderated, uncritical mechanism for recruitment, which is what things like, say, comments sections for the media end up doing.
posted by maxsparber at 10:54 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Help me out here. Can anyone tell me what the PoT(T) is?

When I came up with that, I intended the Party of [Strom] Thurmond (and Trump). When Nixon et al. let Thurmond into the party, the GOP eventually went to PoT (as evidence by Racist Ronnie's Neshoba County Fair State's Rights address). When Donald Trump took over the party, I added his initial in parentheses to emphasize that he is a symptom of the Thurmondite faction in the Republican party; hence PoT(T).

I refuse to let the Republican party hear the end of Thurmond until they cop to the racism and hate they've been peddling for 50 years, and crucially do something constructive about it.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 10:54 AM on August 29, 2016 [29 favorites]


I'm painfully aware I'm talking to someone who could have blown either way with the wind

The flip side for me is tracking these threads in detail and then trying to bring them into conversation with folks like that, or even supporters of Trump: "Did you hear about #outrageousthingTrumpsaidyesterday?" And when their answer is "No," or "No but I don't care, still voting for him," then I realize how little this minutiae matters to the nation's imagination of the presidency, the candidates, the outcome. It's not a battle fought or won in minutiae, though in Trump's case, a lot of small things have started to add up to his abandonment by people for whom he went one bridge too far. But not, notably, by his base, who are saying clearly "there is no bridge too far, I'm onboard no matter what." And, similarly, there is no Clinton corruption issue I can imagine alienating me from her candidacy, simply because I'm an ideologue.
posted by Miko at 10:55 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


How much of the false equivalency we see in the media today was the direct result of Fox News and the threats that if other media outlets didn't play nice, conservatives would withhold access and go sulk in their own corner?

"No wonder Romney lost—that guy's 50 state strategy stalled out after only the first two."
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:21 PM on 8/29


Never has there been a joke so perfectly tailored to my sense of humor.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 10:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]




Yeah, I'm just not sure that 1950s/60s-style "mainstream consensus truth/reality" is/was a better state of affairs than "false equivalency."
posted by Miko at 10:58 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Can someone explain why this is happening, exactly? What happened to the press and the media's ability to act as a social antibody to unacceptable ideas?

I read a slew of articles about media coverage of this race on Friday, and deleted all the tabs in an attempt to steer myself back to sanity. Quickly Googling now, I cannot find the source to attribute this idea, but:

The media does not know how to handle an asymmetric contest.

The "fair and balanced" approach, the coverage of the horse-race, the false equivalence is all they know; it is their entire toolbox. They literally no longer know how to write about the asymmetric difference between the Clinton Foundation and Trump's bankrupt approach to business. They do not know to note, how to name, how to write that one is not the mirror image of the other. That Trump is orders-of-magnitude different from Clinton.

It's been a long time since we had such a truly asymmetric race, two asymmetric candidates. Truly, the conversation should be about the fact that Trump hasn't passed the prerequisites to be enrolled in the same course as Clinton. That Trump's rap sheet is 5 pages, compared to a single speeding ticket on Clinton's. But most media people can't even think of how to shed sunlight on those differences.
posted by Dashy at 11:01 AM on August 29, 2016 [47 favorites]


GhostintheMachine: "@maggieNYT: The problem for Clinton team - after Democrats repeatedly pointed to Bannon personal past, going to be hard to argue Weiner is off limits"

What? What role does Weiner play in the election?
posted by boo_radley at 11:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


Mr Trump has at least 3 names according to what we read. Why not?
Isis, Islamic State, Isil, or Daesh?
posted by Postroad at 11:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The problem with the "fair and balanced" approach is that if the sun is directly overhead and one person says it's noon and a second person swears it's midnight, saying that maybe it's six o'clock doesn't make you wise and evenhanded, it just makes you another person who doesn't know what time it is.

It's not a system that is built to deal with total disregard for facts.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:05 AM on August 29, 2016 [106 favorites]


Metafilter definitely obsesses more over ALL THE ELECTION THINGS!!! than the wider public. I have a number of politically active friends who think the campaign should be ignored as so much theatre.
posted by bardophile at 11:05 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think we can look to the collapse of the Tea Party as a sign that giving people a public space to air their terrible opinions does not mean those ideas are going to take over the country.

America has done a pretty great job of defining racism as un-American over the last 50 years. Far right loonies aren't going to upend that overnight, and certainly not when faced with a strong headwind. Granted, as with the Tea Party, we might be stuck with them for the next decade, and they may do some ugly damage, but then again, the Tea Party was itself unusually successful, so these folks might get pushed back in the corners by January. I don't know if any national politician has yet claimed to embrace the alt-right, but if that doesn't happen, I don't expect them to get invited on many chat shows after the election.

Honestly, one of the great things about the label "alt-right" is that any vile kook with a cause can claim to be a part of it, and tar the rest by association. Racists, men's rights activists, gamergaters, Dominionists, sovereign citizens, chem-trailers, flat-Earthers, the more minimized they have been, the more they see "the rise of the alt-right" as their ticket to respectability, and the greater the millstone they hang around the necks of the larger, more organized bands of hate-fueled yahoos.
posted by GameDesignerBen at 11:07 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


The naming of Trumps is a difficult matter
It isn't just one of your election year games
You may think I'm as mad as a hatter
When I tell you D. Trump must have three different names.
posted by Death and Gravity at 11:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [22 favorites]


What? What role does Weiner play in the election?

Exactly my thoughts. If Bannon's ex wife had been CEO of Trump's campaign, there would have been an equivalence. Bannon's character failings are relevant, as would Abedin's be.
posted by bardophile at 11:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


Trump has no problem weighing in on the Abedin/Weiner scandal.
"I only worry for the country in that Hillary Clinton was careless and negligent in allowing Weiner to have such close proximity to highly classified information," Trump said in a statement. "Who knows what he learned and who he told? It's just another example of Hillary Clinton's bad judgment."
posted by xyzzy at 11:10 AM on August 29, 2016


I do not believe in the marketplace of ideas. I don't think there is any real evidence that good ideas beat bad idea, that more and better speech beats bad speech, that sunlight is the best disinfectant. I think the media's job is to act in service of truth, not some imagined idea of "balance," and until they do that, all they are doing is propping up a narrative, and acting as a mouthpiece, for people who are genuinely, actively trying to build a racist right wing.

I have a slightly different take, which is that the "marketplace of ideas" approach has real benefits... and also has limits. It's been showing those limits for a while, but it's something a lot of media outlets have stuck to out of belief in the approach, out of habit, out of various incentives. This election cycle we're not just approaching the limits, we've blown past them. Habits and incentives are still in place, but belief in a lot of things has certainly been shaken, and so at least some voices (probably a plurality) are saying "Yeah, Trump is different. This is a new level of BS."

"Service of truth" is a hard standard because truth isn't always apparent and is often socially constructed. That's one of the reason why the marketplace of ideas is a good place to start. But it can't just be a mechanically applied format, there has to be a limit where outlets can also assume the authority to comment to call out mistakes, challenge fabrication, and make some judgment on relative strength/weakness of competing cases.
posted by wildblueyonder at 11:10 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


So what's the "truth" about the right that we're not hearing from the media? OR what's the "truth" about this election we're not hearing from the media? And how do we have access to that "truth"?

Perhaps the "truth" is the emotional gap between what we feel about the right and what the media reports. And perhaps it is an emotional hunger that is harder to sate, lately, because the right keep stooping lower and uglier. As a result, the act of putting a white supremacist on NPR (for example) is reduced to being just another bite-sized outrage and not the centerpiece on an incomprehensible smorgasbord of irresponsibility.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:11 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


I've been taking a break from these threads since I already have a stress/anxiety diagnosis. And I keep away from Facebook for the same reason. But today I looked briefly at Facebook for a message I was expecting, and right at the top, there was a post from a Berner about Assange "killing" Hillary with some scandal. The post in itself was disgusting, but the comments below were terrifying. The language alone was really harsh. But what I don't get is why some far-left people prefer Trump?!?? It is absurd.
posted by mumimor at 11:12 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think we can look to the collapse of the Tea Party as a sign that giving people a public space to air their terrible opinions does not mean those ideas are going to take over the country.

The Tea Party collapsed? It seems to me that they got themselves a candidate for president. Sure, the fiscal-austerity die-hards might give Trump a little side-eye, but really the Tea Party was a white anxiety movement from the start.
posted by dis_integration at 11:13 AM on August 29, 2016 [32 favorites]


I think we can look to the collapse of the Tea Party as a sign that giving people a public space to air their terrible opinions does not mean those ideas are going to take over the country.

Well, firstly, I am not convinced there actually has been a collapse. Tea Partiers have done shockingly well in local elections, and have gotten quite a few candidates into the House of Representatives.

But, secondly, American racism has a specific history, and I am one who firmly believes you can predict the future by looking at the past unless heroic efforts are made not to repeat the past. And that history is that defeated racists do not go home in a glum funk, but instead engage in extrajudicial acts of terrorism to promote their agenda.
posted by maxsparber at 11:14 AM on August 29, 2016 [45 favorites]


I think we can look to the collapse of the Tea Party as a sign that giving people a public space to air their terrible opinions does not mean those ideas are going to take over the country.

Actually, hear me out: I know this may sound crazy, but I'm not sure the Tea Party actually collapsed. I think it just decentralized and stopped holding Big! Rallies! - from what I have seen of the primary process, the beliefs behind the Tea Party are very much a part of discourse, and politicians have to account for and answer to them.

In similar vein, I think that the recent loud public space of Trumpists to air their opinions may "collapse" - as in, you're not going to see huge rallies for Trump forever - but pockets of those opinions may lie under the surface again - bigger and more coordinated than they ever were before, because now they know their neighbors agree with them.
posted by corb at 11:14 AM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


I'm so tired of FB posts telling me that someone's statements will annihilate, destroy, murder, obliterate, kill, wipe out, or blow away someone else. Apparently, the way of people who get their news from FB is to assume that public figures spend 70% of their time dropping the mic.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:15 AM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


Technical question y'all-

Is the election result decided by whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first OR is it necessary for the losing party to concede? Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?

There's a batch of cookies that depends on the answer!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:16 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


A Weiner is going to be an important part of this news cycle and not in a way I expected, that's for sure.

Ridiculous and not in a way we expekted.
posted by y2karl at 11:16 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Apparently, the way of people who get their news from FB is to assume that public figures spend 70% of their time dropping the mic.

Which may explain why people love Hamilton.

(I love it too.)
posted by wildblueyonder at 11:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


America has done a pretty great job of defining racism as un-American over the last 50 years.
I think this is true; most Americans do think racism is bad.
It's also true that most white Americans don't think they are racist at all.
posted by librosegretti at 11:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


the marketplace of ideas
The problem with the marketplace of ideas is not that good ideas compete against bad ideas--it's that it is LITERALLY a marketplace. Horse races, conflict, and salacious scandal sell diapers, milk, and Viagra single-packs. I remain convinced that Edward R. Murrow was from the future.
Does a concession speech matter at all technically
No. It's a courtesy. As such, it is unlikely that Trump will give one.
posted by xyzzy at 11:18 AM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


New polls out from Emerson, Monmouth, and the LA Times.

Emerson:

Ohio: Clinton 43, Trump 43, Johnson 10, Stein 2
Ohio Senate: Portman 40, Strickland 25
Pennsylvania: Clinton 46, Trump 43, Johnson 7, Stein 2
Pennslyvania Senate: McGinty 39, Toomey 46
Michigan: Clinton 45, Trump 40, Johnson 7, Stein 3

Monmouth:

General Election: Clinton 49, Trump 42
General Election: Clinton 46, Trump 39, Johnson 7, Stein 2

LA Times/USC:
General Election: Clinton 44, Trump 44
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 11:19 AM on August 29, 2016


Is the election result decided by whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first OR is it necessary for the losing party to concede? Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?

There's no concession clause in the constitution. It matters however that we have political institutions that seem legitimate in the eyes of the public. A refusal to concede and admit the legitimacy of the electoral process starts to move us closer to the kinds of conditions that cause crises of Presidential democracies and civil wars.
posted by dis_integration at 11:22 AM on August 29, 2016 [29 favorites]


Is the election result decided by whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first OR is it necessary for the losing party to concede? Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?

Electoral College

The Twelfth Amendment mandates that the Congress assemble in joint session to count the electoral votes and declare the winners of the election.[43] The session is ordinarily required to take place on January 6 in the calendar year immediately following the meetings of the presidential electors.[44] Since the Twentieth Amendment, the newly elected House declares the winner of the election; all elections before 1936 were determined by the outgoing House instead.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:22 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Tea Partiers have done shockingly well in local elections, and have gotten quite a few candidates into the House of Representatives.

The Senate too. It was nauseating to see Rubio run as a "moderate Republican" when he explicitly ran for Senate in 2010 on a Tea Party platform. Ted Cruz, Jodi Ernst and Tom Cotton all embody the TP ethos as well.
posted by donatella at 11:22 AM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


Ok let's talk about the past and do a quick comparison. Huma is a good person married to an asshole who she is going to divorce. Bannon is an asshole who beat up and divorced a good person. Consider the kind of character that Trump chooses to hang out with vs. Hillary's choice.
posted by humanfont at 11:23 AM on August 29, 2016 [55 favorites]


Is the election result decided by whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first OR is it necessary for the losing party to concede? Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?

A concession speech also has the benefit of legitimating the electoral process itself, so I, personally, think it matters beyond technicality. It tells the voters that they can put their faith in the system to reflect the collective decision of the voters. A refusal to concede runs the risk of undermining our collective social and legal agreement that it is just 270 to win, rather than some other metric.
posted by cjelli at 11:23 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


So what's the "truth" about the right that we're not hearing from the media? OR what's the "truth" about this election we're not hearing from the media? And how do we have access to that "truth"?

For starters, Hilary Clinton isn't dying of a brain tumor
posted by thelonius at 11:23 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls? *explodes in a hail of fire*
posted by corb at 11:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [42 favorites]


Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?

Al Gore famously retracted his concession in 2000. It doesn't matter at all technically, or in any other way. As some have said, it legitimizes the process and the winner to a certain degree, but given how much birtherism has taken root, I'd say that it doesn't do that much.
posted by Etrigan at 11:25 AM on August 29, 2016


It matters however that we have political institutions that seem legitimate in the eyes of the public. A refusal to concede and admit the legitimacy of the electoral process starts to move us closer to the kinds of conditions that cause crises of Presidential democracies and civil wars.

Good point.

FINE, cashman you won, since Romney conceded around 1am, even though Obama reach 270 around 10ish in 2012.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls?

asinine false-equivalency we-report-you-decide complete and total horseshit about the Clinton Foundation being some kind of scandal or evidence of corruption and criminality
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


raysmj: I say we just stop talking about details of the election, except on comedy shows, and otherwise discuss character motivations and minutia about or involving "Mr. Robot" for the next couple of months.

Join us, jooooiiiin uuuusss ... because I'm thinking of joining Reddit just so I can geek out more on this show.

And now, back to your regularly scheduled program.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:26 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Never mind, Al Gore took his concession back, so I wish too!
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 11:27 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Tea Partiers have done shockingly well in local elections, and have gotten quite a few candidates into the House of Representatives.

Yes: the House Freedom Caucus, for example, is reflective of a lot of Tea Party policies, and has exercised an outside influence on the Republican party because they have enough votes within the caucus to block the party's majority in Congress -- taken with the Hastert Rule (not really a rule, but), they have an internal pseudo-veto on Republican action that was one of the driving forces behind the leadership crisis within the party in 2015.
posted by cjelli at 11:27 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


[ctrl-F "Biden"] no results, hope I'm not double-linking

I quite appreciated The Atlantic's piece on Biden (and also Hillary).
Clemons: It’s occurred to me that virtually no one can talk to the average man in America as well as you can, and then all of a sudden Donald Trump is doing it. He is communicating a message that A) you citizens have gone off to fight these battles around the world but you’re getting screwed in these relationships, other nations aren’t paying enough, and we’re not getting a good deal. When I talk to my relatives in Oklahoma, Kansas, and Texas, they’re hearing that. I’m just interested in what you think Americans need to hear that they’re not hearing about internationalism, international engagement, why it pays off for them in ways they are not sensing and feeling?

Biden: I absolutely think it is the key issue. It’s not only foreign, but it’s domestic. I was doing the interview on Morning Joe, and they asked the same question. And I said, “Look, the truth is we just haven’t paid enough attention to these people. We haven’t spoken to them.” And everybody went nuts going, “Aw Jesus! Hillary is going to think that’s an attack.” But I asked my team what did Hillary just say in her speech? She said we’re not paying enough attention—and the phrase I used that really upset them—I said, “We’re not showing them enough respect.” And she also said we’re not showing enough respect.

The truth is we are not showing enough respect. There is a new breed of Democrat that is represented by our administration, in my view, and the smart guys, the guys and gals who are Harvard, Yale, Penn graduates; the very, very well-informed, well-educated, elites of the party. They are the new version, if they don’t watch it, of the limousine liberals when I was coming up in the 60s. Because at its core there’s a disconnect with some really, really, really smart, good, decent people who are with us and part of the larger Democratic younger elite, the millennial elite who don’t understand the middle class anymore.

You may remember when I came in, [Biden’s then-Chief of Staff] Ron Klain said, “Look, ask to be able to do a middle class [task] force,” to focus on how can we administratively, by executive order, ease the pain of the middle class, which got clobbered, the bottom fell out with the Great Recession.
It has some great anecdotes and insight.
posted by fraula at 11:28 AM on August 29, 2016 [28 favorites]


> But if you cast the right wing as now really racist, I am not convinced you drive people away from the right. I am worried you let them know that racism is just something they are going to have to be okay with. And there are plenty of right wingers just champing at the bit to tell them why racism is okay.

Some thoughts on naming and visibility:
  • Yes, naming white supremacists as white supremacists in public speeches makes white supremacy more visible. And one of the worst things that Donald Trump has done in his miserable life is help signal-boost white supremacy, so that the white supremacists all know that they've got lots of compatriots out there.
  • BUT: they already knew that. There already existed a ton of ways for them to show each other that there exist a relatively large number of white supremacists. Even before Trump, and even before digital forums like /pol/ and stormfront, and, hell, even before the Internet, they knew that they had a lot of fellow-travelers out there. They have a flag, for chrissake. They put this flag on their cars. All they have to do is look around for the flag of the Confederacy. The more Confederate flags they see wherever they are, the more they know that their views are mainstream.
  • As such I'm not particularly worried about it being a bad move for Hillary Clinton to call out Trump's connections to white supremacists. If they didn't already know their own strength, it'd be a bad move. But they do know their own strength. They've known it for a while.
  • Best practice for referring to the Democratic Party candidate for President is referring to her as "Clinton," "Hillary Clinton," or "Secretary Clinton." Best practice for referring to the Republican nominee for President is referring to him as "Trump," "Donald Trump," or "Mr. Trump." Other names for either candidate are best avoided. Although, like everyone else, I really like the elaborate and surreal epithets that Jezebel and other former-Gawker-empire sites use when referring to Trump, it's best to leave the epithet-crafting to the professionals.
  • Best practice for referring to the white supremacist alt-right is to refer to them as the white supremacist alt-right. It's immature not to use the name that they've devised for themselves, but irresponsible not to explain what that name means when you use it.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 11:29 AM on August 29, 2016 [45 favorites]


corb: How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls? *explodes in a hail of fire*

prize bull octorok: asinine false-equivalency we-report-you-decide complete and total horseshit about the Clinton Foundation being some kind of scandal or evidence of corruption and criminality

Exactly. Donny's coverage is softening as he "blurs*" on immigration, and Hillary hasn't done much of note [from what I've heard/ seen in the news].

* That was word used today on NPR, and I imagined that Donnie is flip-flopping so fast he's a blur on this particular topic.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:29 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


The Tea Party collapsed?

To my understanding, the Tea Party was two things: first, ultra-conservative policy positions (including the Grover pledges), but second and more importantly, Shut It All Down. Their main tactic was disruption, taking all their toys and going home, governing by government shutdown.

The former will always exist in some form, and it is the base of the current alt-right.

The latter ... didn't work out so well. You can point to some victories, and they certainly did some damage as well, but I actually think that some of the resurgence of progressive/Democratic causes and successes these days is due to the basic recognition that you can't just shut it all down, even when you're not getting your way. Roads have to be built. Schools have to be funded. Compromises must happen, and we can't elect people whose goal it is to read nursery rhymes or have a temper tantrum on C-SPAN.
posted by Dashy at 11:30 AM on August 29, 2016


Trump isn't going to give a concession speech and his hordes don't want him to, either. Remember when John McCain gave that very classy, hopeful concession speech emphasizing the legitimacy of the democratic process and the important of respect for the office of the presidency? And they booed and jeered at him for it?
posted by DirtyOldTown at 11:30 AM on August 29, 2016 [27 favorites]


But what I don't get is why some far-left people prefer Trump?!??

I talked to some Trump supporters recently (who were by all standards very intelligent people). They acknowledged that he didn't posses good judgement, that he didn't have the temperament for presidency, and that he didn't have any grasp of any policies at all. I don't think they were 'far-left' people, but I think their reasons for supporting Trump may be similar to far-left folks that support Trump...

1. A deep-seated hatred for Hillary (which may come for a variety of reasons, some somewhat rational, others deeply irrational).
2. Essentially a kind of political nihilism... The 'burn it all down' mindset... That Trump will essentially bring such chaos and discord that there will have to be a radical restructuring (revolution? who the fuck knows).

I was eager to discuss the matter because it was my first interaction with actual Trump supporters, but after about 10 minutes of discussion I had to leave the room.
posted by el io at 11:31 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Emerson poll is landline-only. Skews older.
posted by waitingtoderail at 11:31 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls? *explodes in a hail of fire

Relax. That LA Times poll is one that 538 has spoken about in specific last time it turned up. "This has been a fairly consistent difference between this poll and most others. Take the LA Times poll, add 6 points to Clinton, and you usually wind up with something close to the FiveThirtyEight or RealClearPolitics national polling average." That LA Times poll produced the same result last time.

And the Emerson poll? It's their first since the primary. It's worrying but not to panic about.
posted by Francis at 11:32 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


Technical question y'all-

Is the election result decided by whoever gets to 270 electoral votes first OR is it necessary for the losing party to concede? Does a concession speech matter at all technically or it just an indication that the loser will not be challenging the vote at all?


What is your definition of "election result decided"?

The president and vice-president are not elected until the on the Monday after the second Wednesday in December, when the Electors cast their votes for president and vice-president.

While faithless electors have been a thing, it's unlikely, and since 270 is a true majority of (50% +1) of 538, once enough states have designated sufficient Electors for Party A to have at least 270, it can be assumed that Party A's candidates will be elected POTUS and VPOTUS.

States designate electors in a bunch of different processes, but generally speaking, once there is a certification of the popular vote, it can be assumed that the Electors for the party with the most votes will be designated as the Electors for the winner-take-all states (mutatis mutandis for proportional states)

Certifying the popular vote takes a state-dependent amount of time, but Math People can usually help the news media make a "call" of the winners in most states after some portion of votes has been reported.

tl;dr: conscession speech doesn't matter, "election result" in the constitutional sense of the world not decided until December.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:33 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


fraula, thanks for linking to that Atlantic piece. Fascinating and very informative.
posted by zarq at 11:34 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Romney conceded around 1am, even though Obama reach 270 around 10ish in 2012.

He had to write the concession speech (he was sure he wouldn't need one), so that's at least part of the delay there.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 11:35 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


Actually, another technical nightmare question: what if enough electors are knocked out that it's possible faithless electors could take the top polling candidate below 270? I know it gets kicked to the House, but what's the actual timeline for that? Could we be without a president? Would Obama just stay on until it was decided?
posted by corb at 11:37 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


To my understanding, the Tea Party was two things: first, ultra-conservative policy positions (including the Grover pledges), but second and more importantly, Shut It All Down. Their main tactic was disruption, taking all their toys and going home, governing by government shutdown.

The Tea Party was always conservative Republicans, and it was never grassroots. It wasn't even really a separate demographic within the GOP. A bunch of former politicians and consultants from what is now referred to as "the establishment" got together and formed a network of organizations, funded them (with help from outside groups like the Kochs) based on set of issues like Obamacare and immigration, and voila, branding! In essence, they're pretty much the loudest bigots of the GOP with corporate sponsorship. And no, they haven't really gone away. In a lot of ways they created the environment that gave us Trump, although I doubt many of them expected or even wanted this outcome.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:38 AM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls?

He was always going to gain in the polls just because Clinton's convention bounce was going to wear off. This is a boring normal thing that happens mostly just because most Americans don't think very much, very hard, or very often about politics.

We should just be glad that, ojala, her bounce seems to have only been a point or so.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:38 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


>> But what I don't get is why some far-left people prefer Trump?!??
> […] Essentially a kind of political nihilism... The 'burn it all down' mindset... That Trump will essentially bring such chaos and discord that there will have to be a radical restructuring (revolution? who the fuck knows).


Probably this, I once saw a documentary on how in a similar situation someone in a Guy Fawkes mask saved civilization.
posted by farlukar at 11:40 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Mind you, Hillary's chances of to win, as charted by 538, peaked at a high of 96 percent in the now-cast down to 74% in the polls-plus forecast, which shows less hyperbole than their now-cast. And PEC's history of meta-analysis makes everything loop pretty darned good for Hillary. As a bonus, there's a list of Notable dates in 2016:
July 18-21 – Republican National Convention, Cleveland, Ohio.
July 25-28 – Democratic National Convention, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. (The beginning of Hillary's climb up, which has plateaued a bit, with a sizable lead of Donnie)
September 26 – First Presidential debate – Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY.
October 4 – Vice-Presidential debate – Longwood University, Farmville, VA.
October 9 – Second Presidential debate – Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
October 19 – Third Presidential debate – University of Nevada, Las Vegas
posted by filthy light thief at 11:41 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Remember when John McCain gave that very classy, hopeful concession speech emphasizing the legitimacy of the democratic process and the important of respect for the office of the presidency? And they booed and jeered at him for it?

The movie Game Change does not attempt to hide its bias against Sarah Palin, so I take most of the portrayals of any particular events with a grain of salt, but I appreciated what they showed of how things kinda-sorta-work in the losing party's campaign "headquarters" once it's clear that losing party is gonna lose.

Romney conceded around 1am, even though Obama reach 270 around 10ish in 2012.

Here's Romney working on his concession speech in MITT. I haven't seen the documentary, but it is my understanding that Romney didn't start writing the speech until the results were clear.
posted by sparklemotion at 11:42 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


peaked at a high of 96 percent in the now-cast down to 74% in the polls-plus forecast

Comparing these things makes baby Jesus cry!
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 11:44 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


Comparing these things makes baby Jesus cry!

I did that only to highlight the fact that Hillary has had a significant lead for a while. Sorry baby Jesus!

He was always going to gain in the polls just because Clinton's convention bounce was going to wear off. This is a boring normal thing that happens mostly just because most Americans don't think very much, very hard, or very often about politics.

But he didn't. Really, Donny has kept flubbing and floundering. Check the 538 charts again. Depending on which you pick, Hillary has been maintaining more than 70% and Donny has been stuck in the 20% range
posted by filthy light thief at 11:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Comparing these things makes baby Jesus cry!

Really, so does paying any attention at all to the now-cast.
posted by dersins at 11:45 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


As long as Hillary Clinton is referred to as Hillary, I'll refer to her complete jerkhole of an opponent as Donald. Here in MefiLand, I may digress and call him Tiny Hands Donald, or just That Jerkhole, as I'm confident you all know who I mean

I live in Maine, where we have a complete jerkhole, as in racist gasbag, of a governor, so when I post to facebook or elsewhere, I have to specify which racist, vile, crude, nasty jerkhole I mean. It gets complicated, but I persevere.
posted by theora55 at 11:48 AM on August 29, 2016 [33 favorites]


I know it gets kicked to the House, but what's the actual timeline for that? Could we be without a president? Would Obama just stay on until it was decided?

The 12th amendment puts a deadline of March 4th following the election, but the 20th amendment states that January 20th is the last day of the presidency and vice presidency. But, sec. 3 of the 20th states that if no president has been chosen by the last day of the current presidents term, the vice president becomes president until the choice is made. So Biden would be president until the house selects a new president, which I think they still have to do by March 4th?

It's not really clear how to interpret the Jan 20-March 4 gap, but that's how I'm reading it.
posted by dis_integration at 11:49 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Sorry, vice president elect. So not sure how that would work out since we vote for president/vice-president as a combo now. It just says: Congress decides, really.
posted by dis_integration at 11:50 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


I live in Maine, where we have a complete jerkhole, as in racist gasbag, of a governor

About that... "Dear America: Maine here. Please forgive us – we made a terrible mistake. We managed to elect and re-elect a governor who is unfit for high office."
posted by peeedro at 11:51 AM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]




But I tell you, a Trump needs a name that's particular,
A name that's peculiar, and more full of gloss,
Else how can he keep up his wig perpendicular,
Or spread out his hatred, or light up his cross?
Of names of this kind, I can give you a line,
Such as Carrot Juice, Traffic Cone, or Melted Push-Pop,
Such as Squashed Jack-o-lantern, or Bad Clementine-
Names that never belong to more than one Trump.
posted by leotrotsky at 11:53 AM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


First off, the TV show Veep is wrong.

From the 12th Amendment, If nobody gets a majority, the House votes by state from the top 3, and keeps going until someone wins 26 states. Also, the Senate picks the VP (however they want).

Per the 20th, if there's no President by January 20, the newly-elected VP acts as President until the House picks a President.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 11:55 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Rudy, I wish she'd performed Freedom too, but there's no reason to make such a huge deal out of it.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 11:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


(Under the old system, of course, the House would do a song and dance number until Hamilton decided who to support.)
posted by Huffy Puffy at 11:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


To my understanding, the Tea Party was two things: first, ultra-conservative policy positions (including the Grover pledges), but second and more importantly, Shut It All Down. Their main tactic was disruption, taking all their toys and going home, governing by government shutdown.

Uhh, that's the entire strategy of the Republican Party as a whole, and has been for 8 years at the minimum, and more like since 1992 with a 8 year interlude of preemptive wars and torture. Mitch McConnell has already promised absolutely nothing will change under Hilary if he still controls the Senate. They fundamentally do not acknowledge the legitimacy of democratic outcomes except to the extent Republicans win. they will not allow President Hilary to seat a SCOTUS judge, ever. And they'll continue to threaten to destroy the federal budget and/or world economy unless taxes for billionaires are eliminated entirely, and every woman is required to report her monthly cycle to the local pastor and police chief.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:57 AM on August 29, 2016 [37 favorites]


Per the 20th, if there's no President by January 20, the newly-elected VP acts as President until the House picks a President.

Right but in the modern era if there's no President, there's also no Vice-President, right? Nobody is voting for Kaine or Pence apart from Clinton and Trump. So if there's an electoral college tie and the house drags its feet till after Jan 20 then who is President?
posted by dis_integration at 11:58 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Apparently, the way of people who get their news from FB is to assume that public figures spend 70% of their time dropping the mic.

I honestly think there's a large percentage of Americans who are about to be shocked that sick burns and dank memes don't determine elections.
posted by bongo_x at 12:02 PM on August 29, 2016 [27 favorites]


No. If there's no majority, the offices split: the new House picks the President (by state, from the top 3) and the new Senate picks the VP. So somebody will win.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:02 PM on August 29, 2016


I believe that Article 29, Section 14, paragraph 11, Part 3 states that if there is no majority, the presidency will be decided by bofa.
posted by Cookiebastard at 12:04 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


Mike Pence is Steve Carell's best character yet.
posted by Smedleyman at 12:06 PM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


Bofa who?
posted by pxe2000 at 12:06 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


They fundamentally do not acknowledge the legitimacy of democratic outcomes except to the extent Republicans win. they will not allow President Hilary to seat a SCOTUS judge, ever.

Which is why we'll immediately go nuclear on the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations.
posted by leotrotsky at 12:07 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


I believe that Article 29, Section 14, paragraph 11, Part 3 states that if there is no majority, the presidency will be decided by bofa.

It's not Facebook likes?
posted by bongo_x at 12:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


> So if there's an electoral college tie and the house drags its feet till after Jan 20 then who is President?

There won't be an electoral college tie. But if the government on the whole refuses to...government... there are no written rules to compel them. Moreover, there cannot possibly exist rules to compel them.

In reality (even if there were an electoral college tie, which there won't be), if the election goes to the house, the rules requiring that congressional members vote in state delegations rather than as individuals mean that in practice the Presidency will go to whoever the Republican Party wants. Presumably they'd give it to Paul Ryan, or someone equivalent to Paul Ryan.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Giuliani Blasts Beyoncé’s VMA Performance: ‘I Saved More Black Lives’ Than She Has

Jesus Christ, these people are vile.
posted by bibliowench at 12:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


bofa DEEZ HOUSES OF CONGRESS OHHHHHHH SICK BURNNN
posted by infinitewindow at 12:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [50 favorites]


> No. If there's no majority, the offices split: the new House picks the President (by state, from the top 3).

Ohhh crap forgot about the "top three" part. This is top three among vote-getters in the Electoral College, right? So if there's a split, enough party loyalist (rather than Trump loyalist) electors in the Electoral College would faithlessly vote for the agreed-upon Paul Ryan equivalent to get him into third, and then the Republican Party would use their gerrymandered advantage in votes-by-state-delegation to select the Paul Ryan equivalent candidate.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


or someone equivalent to Paul Ryan.

that's an easy one, just take any random guy out of a gym who's doing curls in front of a mirror and staple a copy of The Fountainhead to his head
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [56 favorites]


Full text of the Constitution, with notes. Nobody is getting elected President unless they get enough electoral votes to finish in the top 3. If Henry Clay couldn't get elected in 1824/25, neither can Paul Ryan in 2017.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


How is he gaining in the polls? How is he POSSIBLY gaining in the polls?

just my two cents but i blame him supporters
posted by beerperson at 12:11 PM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


> that's an easy one, just take any random guy out of a gym who's doing curls in front of a mirror and staple a copy of The Fountainhead to his head.

This is both an accurate description of Paul Ryan and an accurate description of what San Francisco has become over the course of the 21st century.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 12:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [36 favorites]


In a split electoral college, as in the Olympics, the worst possible place to be is fourth.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 12:15 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Bus to November: Bloomberg reporters Esmé E. Deprez and M. Scott Brauer traveled cross country from Philadelphia to Los Angeles this month, traversing over 3,041 miles through 11 states, in 15 buses driven by 17 drivers. They spent two weeks interviewing riders about the US Presidential candidates and upcoming election.
posted by zarq at 12:17 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


well that effectively steals the thunder from my Hot Air Balloon To November longread
posted by beerperson at 12:18 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


[A few comments deleted. ennui.bz, just skip this thread, and in general stop it with the perpetual you-guys-are-all-dupes schtick about everything.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:24 PM on August 29, 2016 [40 favorites]


Only ten weeks left of this insufferable bullshit.

If only.

The day after the election is when the Republicans turn it up to eleven. For those of you who weren't around for the 90s, expect an endless series of congressional investigations, subpoenas, depositions, calls for independent prosecutors and frivolous lawsuits.

You really need to brace yourself for this now. It will be relentless, unending, exhausting attacks intended to wear you out until once again everyone is calling for her exit due to "Clinton fatigue." Buck up. There is no time to go wobbly. Don't let the bastards wear you down.
posted by JackFlash at 12:26 PM on August 29, 2016 [74 favorites]


Which is why we'll immediately go nuclear on the filibuster for SCOTUS nominations.

That presumes that the Democrats retake the Senate, only the majority can excercise the nuclear option. If the Republicans maintain control, they can block appointments for 4 years and there's nothing to stop them other than "norms". And we've seen how that has worked.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


[A few comments were deleted, please reload before replying.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


For your daily schadenfreude needs, Politico has the story of how a self-described "registered genius, board certified hacker, and grape soda connoisseur" took advantage of both PAC fundraising loopholes and the Trump campaign's slowness to solicit money via email and advertise on Facebook:

Meet the man siphoning money from Donald Trump: A 25-year-old with no Trump ties raises $1 million by dangling 'dinner' with the GOP nominee

The best part is that the site, dinnerwithtrump.org, is still up, with only slight design changes since the story broke. It continues to invite suckers Trump supporters to "Enter for a chance for you and a guest to have dinner with Donald Trump." The dinner is defined, in the fine print, as "a Sponsor-selected fundraising evening event held with Donald Trump and other attendees", i.e. a rubber-chicken entree at whatever Trump rally the scam artist chooses.
posted by Doktor Zed at 12:33 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


> Yeah, I'm just not sure that 1950s/60s-style "mainstream consensus truth/reality" is/was a better state of affairs than "false equivalency."

fwiw, re: media coverage and the alt-right...
OTM: Define "Normal" - "I'm pretty exited these days. What I've seen in many, many places the capacity to build things from the bottom up, to create your own network. Journalism is a shrinking wedge of this explosively growing pie of ways to share ideas and knowledge and be responsive, and that's where there's a lot of opportunity. And the media that persists will recognize that and facilitate it and draw on it as much as they will create it themselves." (28m)
  1. Romney strategist on the "alt-right": "It's just rebranded racism. It's like calling slaves 'agrarian interns.'"
  2. I disagree with this. Racism is much bigger and more varied; the alt-right is a specific, virulent manifestation.
  3. They are trying to adopt a policy that disregards ideologically purity, to bring in more converts.
  4. “The KKK had a very anti-Catholic element. It had a violent streak about it that no one on the alt-right has anything to do with,” says Mr Taylor [a leading member of the alt-right]
  5. Jamelle Bouie is right: This is why I take the "alt-right" seriously. They are the vanguard for political conservatism and may well shape the GOP for a generation.
  6. This is why I'm worried. Dems can't keep this up forever. And the next GOP prez will probably be alt-right.
  7. “The GOP will remain in control in most states.”
  8. The key point is that conservative elites recommended for the rubes a news diet they were unwilling to follow themselves... When conservative elites recommended a news diet they did not rely on themselves, that is when they lost touch with what they had done.
Michael Munger on Slavery and Racism: "We are going to take a look at a paper that you coauthored with Jeffrey Grynaviski that is forthcoming in the journal Social Philosophy and Policy, [working paper version is here] and the paper is called “Reconstructing Racism: Transforming Racial Hierarchy from Necessary Evil into Positive Good.” And we are going to use slavery as our jumping off point, but I’m sure we’ll get into general issues of ideology and norms. And of course emergent order... We’re trying to understand in this conversation, and you and your coauthor in the paper are trying to understand how a certain set of views came to be believed. Which is a form of an ideology — in this case, racism."
posted by kliuless at 12:34 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


I wonder how much of the polling is just Republicaks drifting back to him. Sure the "pivot" was a bust and he's still racist as hell, but they can live with that, and eat was actually driving them away was the infighting with other republicans, which he's somehow put a lid in.
posted by Artw at 12:36 PM on August 29, 2016


@AP_Headlines
Trump Touts Consistent Record of Wearing Pants to Calm Swing Voters
[fake] This Twitter account just keeps on giving.
posted by Talez at 12:37 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]




Thanks for that bus article. Yet again I find myself wondering why supporters of the wall truly think that it will have much of a long term effect on heroin trafficking into the US. A huge proportion of heroin entering the US currently comes in by sea and several tunnels and catapults have already been discovered and de-activated. Even if "the wall" is set up like the one that divided East and West Germany with guard towers every few meters, there's no chance that a border wall will stymie South American and Mexican drug lords for long. As a symbol it might have value, but that would be a pretty expensive symbol.
If the Republicans maintain control, they can block appointments for 4 years and there's nothing to stop them other than "norms".
There are some lawsuits floating around that attempt to force the Senate to hold SCOTUS confirmation hearings. The substance of most of these suits is a Constitutional argument that the President is obligated to nominate to fill vacancies and that the Senate is obligated to provide "advice and consent." The problem with such lawsuits is that courts generally require the litigant to show that they are being harmed by government action.
posted by xyzzy at 12:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Ann Coulter Defends Donald Trump’s Consistency | Andrea Mitchell | MSNBC

"Trump has been pretty consistent from day one that we've always been at war with Eurasia Eastasia"
posted by Talez at 12:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


twitter.com/AP_Headlines
Sorry, that page doesn’t exist!

But this one does:
twitter.com/A_Headlines
They must have changed the name today since I found it at the first address this morning.
posted by soelo at 12:42 PM on August 29, 2016


The idea of Huma's freedom fills me with joy.
posted by angrycat at 12:43 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Democrats using the nuclear option?

belated: you know, since congress has the power to declare war and our country has an aging, but still terrifyingly viable nuclear capability, i really wish that we had chosen a different metaphor for ending the filibuster
posted by murphy slaw at 12:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yep, they updated it an hour ago.
posted by soelo at 12:45 PM on August 29, 2016




belated: you know, since congress has the power to declare war and our country has an aging, but still terrifyingly viable nuclear capability, i really wish that we had chosen a different metaphor for ending the filibuster

Yeah I hate this too. If anything the filibuster, whose essential purpose was always to ensure white supremacy (no, really), is the nuclear option that blows up our ability to govern. But in general martial metaphors seem dangerous when applied to democratic adjudication (or public speech for that matter, JON STEWART GOES NUCLEAR ON ... !!! )
posted by dis_integration at 12:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


My understanding was that the lack of a majority in the electoral college followed by a failure of the house to elect a President would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis. The Supreme Court would have to rule on what happened next.

Theoretically they could decide to follow the line of succession where the Speaker of the House probably Ryan or Pelosi would be defacto President. It isn't clear if she would entitled to a full term or only be an interim President pending a decision by the House.

They might also decide that Biden is President on the basis of the fact that the President is sworn in before the VP and therefore Biden is still technically VP when the President's term end. Or if the house picked a VP but not a President; then Pence or Kaine could be President.

The Supreme Court could also decide to call a constitutional convention to consider the matter. Although this isn't outlined in the Consitition itself they could use their power to compel the appropriate public officials to do it.

The thing is that it is unprecedented and legal scholars with a partisan bent would claim that whatever they wanted was the true constitutional path.
posted by humanfont at 12:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


From The Guardian: Trump's slump in Nascar country deepens Republican fears of defeat
Election models put Hillary Clinton’s chances of victory in November’s presidential election at over 80% – in the words of the New York Times, her chance of losing is about the same as the probability that an NFL kicker makes a field goal from the 20-yard line. FiveThirtyEight statistician Nate Silver predicts a 28% chance of a landslide, in which she wins the popular vote by double digits.
Is it me, or did this paragraph flip things around? Isn't the probability of her losing the election the same as an NFL kicker missing a close field goal?
posted by ZeusHumms at 12:58 PM on August 29, 2016


@kept_simple, with a link to this article in Politico:
for the love of god don't start rethinking barry goldwater just because of donald trump
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:02 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


It seems to me that we've reached the point where no hard-right, racist, culture-warmongering Republican candidate will ever win the presidency again. That means that the only hope for the GOP to win the presidency is to nominate a moderate. But as we saw quite clearly, the Republican base is in no mood for compromise. That means that the Republican leadership needs to get their base in the mood for compromise, which means that somehow or other they have to assuage their base's feelings of dread, insecurity, and anger. Clearly, they can't pull that off through media messaging, so their only option is policy. But the only way that the GOP can produce any federal policy in pursuit of that goal is by... compromising with the Democrats, which is a one-way ticket to defeat in the primaries.

So, we have a Catch-22, and it's hard to see how it could end. Republican members of Congress seem content to collect their paychecks for playing at political theater in lieu of actual work, so they have no incentive to buck the gravy train. Perhaps the only way they'll approach the bargaining table is if the gravy train bucks them—if the Republican base becomes so unappeasable that they'll primary any incumbent, no matter what they do. But, then again, the mere fact of approaching that fanatical singularity would make the Republicans actually elected to Congress less willing or even able to make any compromise with the Democrats or do any legislating.

This is a lot of spitballing on my part, to be sure, and I'm no political scientist or historian, but it seems pretty consistent with what we've seen from the past few years. A few months ago I told some acquaintances, "Hillary's going to win in a landslide, but it is going to suck." I fear we're looking at the same story for the foreseeable future.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 1:03 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


I don't let myself read MeFi political threads until I've done some phone banking.

Also on my To Do list this week: donate to Senate candidates in swing states, with letters cc'd to the incumbent Republican Senators - and Mitch McConnell - explaining that my donation is entirely based on the Republicans' outright refusal to do their job and act on the Supreme Court nomination.
posted by kristi at 1:03 PM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


Is it me, or did this paragraph flip things around? Isn't the probability of her losing the election the same as an NFL kicker missing a close field goal?

Yeah. It's a UK paper, so they might have misunderstood the metaphor.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 1:03 PM on August 29, 2016


belated: you know, since congress has the power to declare war and our country has an aging, but still terrifyingly viable nuclear capability, i really wish that we had chosen a different metaphor for ending the filibuster

Yeah I hate this too. If anything the filibuster, whose essential purpose was always to ensure white supremacy (no, really), is the nuclear option that blows up our ability to govern. But in general martial metaphors seem dangerous when applied to democratic adjudication (or public speech for that matter, JON STEWART GOES NUCLEAR ON ... !!! )


I don't know, with Trump besieged in the battleground states, with moderate republicans under fire with their flanks exposed, and with Merrick Garland stranded in no-man's-land, the SCOTUS nominations are a powder keg and the new front lines. There's no chance of a ceasefire. We need to exploit their weak points, regardless of the firestorm it will cause. Triggering the nuclear option certainly wouldn't be the opening salvo in the ongoing attack on senate rules.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:03 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


I mean I think likely the Republicans will confirm Garland after Clinton wins, but I've underestimated the Republican Party's capacity for self-destructive idiocy before.

If there were any actual indication that the Republicans were to actually do this reasonable thing, what I'd like to see is Obama withdraw Garland's nomination so that the new incoming President could make her own nomination.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


Yeah. It's a UK paper, so they might have misunderstood the metaphor.

About the same odds as the Quarterback failing to ace the basket.
posted by bongo_x at 1:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


> About the same odds as the Quarterback failing to ace the basket.

Hotbox!
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:11 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


If there were any actual indication that the Republicans were to actually do this reasonable thing, what I'd like to see is Obama withdraw Garland's nomination so that the new incoming President could make her own nomination.

He's too decent for that. Also, Garland isn't a bad choice for a justice, even if he's not a liberal as some of us would like.

That said, after we win the Senate, I've love to see Hillary nominate Goodwin Liu just to twist the knife.

Being an asshole needs to have consequences, or they'll never learn.
posted by leotrotsky at 1:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


It seems to me that we've reached the point where no hard-right, racist, culture-warmongering Republican candidate will ever win the presidency again.

Ha.
posted by Artw at 1:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


It seems to me that we've reached the point where no hard-right, racist, culture-warmongering Republican candidate will ever win the presidency again.
I am concerned about what happens when someone who has Trump's divisive beliefs but has a more media-friendly approach starts to gain momentum.
posted by pxe2000 at 1:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


You Can't Tip a Buick: I mean I think likely the Republicans will confirm Garland after Clinton wins, but I've underestimated the Republican Party's capacity for self-destructive idiocy before.

I've heard the idea kicked around that once Hillary is elected, she'll pull Garland and put someone in who is more liberal. Garland was the shoe-in moderate, and by blocking any frickin' discussion of his placement, Obama showed that the GOP isn't interested in being anything but obstructionists.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


This article has been linked multiple times in these threads already:

Mother Jones: I spent 5 years with some of Trump's biggest fans. Here's what they won't tell you.

If you haven't looked at it, I can reiterate that it's worth your time. Staggering stuff:

"Have you heard of the Illuminati? The New World Order?" Sharon asked so as to prepare me. "I'm tea party," Sharon said, "but I don't go along with a lot that my mom does." Whether they clung to such dark notions or laughed them off, tea party enthusiasts lived in a roaring rumor-sphere that offered answers to deep, abiding anxieties. Why did President Obama take off his wristwatch during Ramadan? Why did Walmart run out of ammunition on the third Tuesday in March? Did you know drones can detect how much money you have? Many described these as suspicions other people held. Many seemed to float in a zone of half-belief.
posted by RedOrGreen at 1:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


About the same odds as the Quarterback failing to ace the basket.

Or the silly mid on sweeping a sticky wicket.
posted by dersins at 1:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am concerned about what happens when someone who has Trump's divisive beliefs but has a more media-friendly approach starts to gain momentum.

Somebody with Trump's beliefs and a shred of discipline and the ability to appear superficially reasonable/civil is an incredibly dangerous person.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


that's an easy one, just take any random guy out of a gym who's doing curls in front of a mirror and staple a copy of The Fountainhead to his head.


Be realistic. The wikipedia summary of Fountainhead printed out is more likely to fit, be what they read, and be staple-able.
posted by srboisvert at 1:15 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


Yeah. It's a UK paper, so they might have misunderstood the metaphor.

About the same odds as the Quarterback failing to ace the basket.
posted by bongo_x at 4:09 PM on August 29 [1 favorite +] [!]


Ted Cruz, is that you?
posted by leotrotsky at 1:16 PM on August 29, 2016




Can you imagine how depressing it must be to live in that alternate multiverse where Trump is leading?
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 1:20 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Somebody with Trump's beliefs and a shred of discipline and the ability to appear superficially reasonable/civil is an incredibly dangerous person.

"Nixon with charisma? I COULD RULE THE UNIVERSE!"
posted by Atom Eyes at 1:21 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


The wikipedia summary of Fountainhead printed out is more likely to fit, be what they read, and be staple-able.
You know, I went through an anti-Establishment Objectivist Ayn Rand phase, too. When I was 13. Upon achieving adulthood I was able to recognize that I was an idiotic asshole. The reverence that Ryan and other politicians and business leaders have for Rand (or even SparkNotes Rand) would only be comprehensible to me if they were actually 13.
posted by xyzzy at 1:21 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


The majority of adults are stuck emotionally at the high school level.
posted by BentFranklin at 1:24 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Somebody with Trump's beliefs and a shred of discipline and the ability to appear superficially reasonable/civil is an incredibly dangerous person.

rather than snark, I'll just say that I find the creation of hypothetical undefeatable candidates of doom to be sort of a perplexing exercise
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:29 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


rather than snark, I'll just say that I find the creation of hypothetical undefeatable candidates of doom to be sort of a perplexing exercise

yes, for good or for ill, so far all major party candidates have been human beings.

and how.
posted by murphy slaw at 1:33 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The majority of adults are stuck emotionally at the high school level.

I sometimes wonder what percentage of Very Serious types are just performing.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:35 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]




ZeusHumms, I read this line as placing the line of scrimmage on the kicker's team's own 20-yard line and asking him to kick what, 95 yards?, rather than placing the line of scrimmage on the other team's 20-yard line? The writer could possibly explained a little more clearly, or, as others here have said, mixed the sports example completely between sports.
posted by Silverstone at 1:37 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The majority of adults are stuck emotionally at the high school level.
posted by BentFranklin at 1:24 PM on August 29 [2 favorites −] Favorite added! [!]


Hush. We're supposed to tell them it gets better.
posted by schadenfrau at 1:38 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


document from her physician that outlined medical conditions including hyperactive thyroid

This quote from the journo is bugging me. Doesn't Hillary have hypothyroidism? That's an underperforming thyroid. But there are effective treatments for that.
posted by porpoise at 1:39 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm not sure Trump's fundamental appeal to morons is really combinable with a more restrained approach, TBH.
posted by Artw at 1:39 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Yeah I think there's a statistical ceiling on the number of people willing and able to believe this much bullshit.
posted by schadenfrau at 1:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is why I'm worried. Dems can't keep this up forever. And the next GOP prez will probably be alt-right.

I'm going to disagree strongly here. Dems don't need to keep this up forever. They just need to keep it up longer than the GOP. And right now? Assume Clinton wins this one - and she gets her wish of making Texas competitive by bringing up Hispanic turnout (it doesn't matter if she wins or loses - just that she makes it competitive).

Throw a media-savvy version of Trump as the GOP candidate in 2020. They are still on an anti-immigrant platform. Texas demographics have shifted further against them and with the hispanic vote on its own now matching the white vote Texas lines up in the D column. This makes things very hard for the Republican who already has an uphill struggle to take on a sitting president.

And by 2024 they really really need to not be running on an anti-immigrant platform unless they want to lose Texas and Georgia as well as California and New York.

The next GOP President is IMO going to be a moderate Latino from what is going to be the Republican equivalent of the DLC.
posted by Francis at 1:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


the unhinged ranting of a violent narcissist, but y'know, nicer
posted by Existential Dread at 1:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Somebody with Trump's beliefs and a shred of discipline and the ability to appear superficially reasonable/civil is an incredibly dangerous person.

Fortunately the Republican Party primary electorate has decided that when faced with the choice between an undisciplined lunatic with reprehensible beliefs (Trump) and a disciplined lunatic with reprehensible beliefs (Cruz), they'd prefer the undisciplined lunatic.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:46 PM on August 29, 2016 [41 favorites]


ZeusHumms, I read this line as placing the line of scrimmage on the kicker's team's own 20-yard line and asking him to kick what, 95 yards?, rather than placing the line of scrimmage on the other team's 20-yard line?
That would be Jill Stein's chances.
posted by dfan at 1:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


I sometimes wonder what percentage of Very Serious types are just performing.

All of them.
posted by notsnot at 1:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Fortunately the Republican Party primary electorate has decided that when faced with the choice between an undisciplined lunatic with reprehensible beliefs (Trump) and a disciplined lunatic with reprehensible beliefs (Cruz), they'd prefer the undisciplined lunatic.

Well, as reprehensible as I find Trump, there is something about Cruz's neutral expression that would make me want to punch him, even if I knew nothing at all about his beliefs.
posted by Mooski at 1:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


That would be Jill Stein's chances.

Stein's not even in the stadium. She's back in Lexington at a meeting of the recycling committee.
posted by dersins at 1:51 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


The next GOP President is IMO going to be a moderate Latino from what is going to be the Republican equivalent of the DLC.

There are no moderate Latino GOP members. There's only a dozen GOP hispanics in Congress (I'm sorry but Bill Flores sure as hell ain't hispanic) and apart from Rubio and Cruz, who among them could really contest a GOP presidential nomination? Devin Nunes is just as batshit insane and sure as hell won't be a senator or governor of CA anytime soon.
posted by Talez at 1:54 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The next GOP President is IMO going to be a moderate Latino from what is going to be the Republican equivalent of the DLC.

See: Brian Sandoval.
posted by stolyarova at 1:55 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


More info, fwiw:
In June 2015, Sandoval signed several bills designed to overhaul Nevada's education system. The reforms substantially increased funding for public schools and grants, and created incentives to recruit more teachers and promote professional training. $10 million were appropriated for preschool programs and an expansion of full-day kindergarten across Nevada.

Sandoval is widely regarded as a moderate Republican, supporting abortion rights, Obamacare, immigration reform, and renewable energy.
posted by stolyarova at 1:57 PM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


I think the more interesting way to consider who will win future seasons of America's Next Top Fascist starts with the observation that we are in the middle of a major media shift, not at the end of one. 2008 was the first election where the Internet/social media was as important as television/mass media. But here in 2016, mass media still exists and is still relevant, even though it's no longer the only game in town. By 2024, television will likely have gone the way of AM radio; sure, a few old crazies will still be paying attention to it, but ultimately it will not be politically relevant compared to the Internet.

America's Next Top Fascist will doubtlessly come from the same alt-right sleazepool that Trump lives in these days, but unlike Trump he'll be a native of it. And he'll1 be unspeakably weird by 20th century standards, even weirder than Trump.

We're in for a politically... let's say awkward time — digital media practices and institutions are making visible different tendencies than the ones that mass media made visible, but the parties haven't quite caught up with the new terrain, but the parties are the only game in town.

1: gendered language used deliberately here.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 1:57 PM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


Also possible is a split in the Republican party, with someone like Sandoval representing the non-shitstains and someone like Jason Miller representing the Party of Trump.
posted by stolyarova at 1:59 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Mother Jones: I spent 5 years with some of Trump's biggest fans. Here's what they won't tell you.

If you haven't looked at it, I can reiterate that it's worth your time.


Definitely. The article is an excerpt from Arlie Russell Hochschild's forthcoming book, Strangers in Their Own Land: Anger and Mourning on the American Right. It distinguishes itself from this summer's various articles in which a liberal journalist heroically reported incredulously from their first Trump rally by its immersion in Trump supporters' lives and its empathy toward them. Its encapsulation of their worldview is worth quoting at length:
What the people I interviewed were drawn to was not necessarily the particulars of these [conspiracy] theories. It was the deep story underlying them—an account of life as it feels to them. Some such account underlies all beliefs, right or left, I think. The deep story of the right goes like this:

You are patiently standing in the middle of a long line stretching toward the horizon, where the American Dream awaits. But as you wait, you see people cutting in line ahead of you. Many of these line-cutters are black—beneficiaries of affirmative action or welfare. Some are career-driven women pushing into jobs they never had before. Then you see immigrants, Mexicans, Somalis, the Syrian refugees yet to come. As you wait in this unmoving line, you're being asked to feel sorry for them all. You have a good heart. But who is deciding who you should feel compassion for? Then you see President Barack Hussein Obama waving the line-cutters forward. He's on their side. In fact, isn't he a line-cutter too? How did this fatherless black guy pay for Harvard? As you wait your turn, Obama is using the money in your pocket to help the line-cutters. He and his liberal backers have removed the shame from taking. The government has become an instrument for redistributing your money to the undeserving. It's not your government anymore; it's theirs.

I checked this distillation with those I interviewed to see if this version of the deep story rang true. Some altered it a bit ("the line-waiters form a new line") or emphasized a particular point (those in back are paying for the line-cutters). But all of them agreed it was their story. One man said, "I live your analogy." Another said, "You read my mind."
These Trumpists aren't going to vanish into thin air on November 9, no matter what the election result.

Fun fact: Prof. Hochschild coined the term "emotional labor".
posted by Doktor Zed at 2:00 PM on August 29, 2016 [112 favorites]


See: Brian Sandoval.

He's a state governor who fucked up an entire industry in his state and has no experience on the national stage. Heller probably isn't retiring in 2018. His next chance to contest a senate seat would be 2022 which would give him the standing to even contest a presidential nomination.
posted by Talez at 2:00 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah, the solar thing is a stain on Sandoval's otherwise pretty decent tenure as governor. He's a huge improvement over Jim Gibbons, though, and it's hard (as a Nevada resident) not to like him better for not being Gibbons.
posted by stolyarova at 2:02 PM on August 29, 2016


the real danger is if they split the ticket to sweep up all factions of the futureGOP

Handsome Hispanic Business Dude/Incredibly Racist Hatsune Miku Avatar '24

guys we're so fucked, this is def what's gonna happen
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:03 PM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


The problem with Merrick Garland is that he will be 64 years old in November. I would like to think that President Clinton and a Democratic Congress can get us a justice with a longer lasting influence.
posted by DanSachs at 2:03 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


At some point, the only way the Republicans can win the presidency on a white supremacist platform will be to split the left and middle of the Democrats - not entirely unlike what happened in Maine during these last two elections with LaPage.
posted by Joey Michaels at 2:07 PM on August 29, 2016


I admit that I kind of have a crush on Sandoval. He's handsome!

also he recently adopted a desert tortoise which is the cutest thing
posted by stolyarova at 2:07 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think in 2020 the Republican Party will nominate an actual caterpillar for President — you know, that "nimble navigator" caterpillar that the Trumpists have inexplicably cathected onto — but will withdraw their support after it pivots into a butterfly.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 2:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


The only way the GOP is going to win is if the Eisenhower faction wrests control back from the white supremacist faction. Reasonable Republicans need to make themselves heard and not back Diet Batshit Insane (i.e. Cruz) and instead turn to someone like Bloomberg or Bush (if either of them could be convinced to come back to the party).

The qualifications for being a viable Republican candidate shouldn't be "hates abortion, hate immigrants, hates taxes".
posted by Talez at 2:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


the meme is for a centipede and those stay horrible and crawly until they die

in other words a much better symbol for D. Trump than a caterpillar, though with all this pivot talk they think they've got a caterpillar and it turns out to have been a nasty centipede all along
posted by stolyarova at 2:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


If there is a god I swear Grover Norquist better have a fucking lot to answer for.
posted by Talez at 2:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


Oh, it's a centipede. that makes so much more sense...
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 2:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The problem with Merrick Garland is that he will be 64 years old in November. I would like to think that President Clinton and a Democratic Congress can get us a justice with a longer lasting influence.

At this point I'll take any liberal butt in the seat.

I am not looking forward to the government-function-threatening shit fit we can expect for the next n years
posted by The demon that lives in the air at 2:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


'Waiting for the centipede to turn into a butterfly' is a wonderfully apt metaphor for so many things about the American political process...
posted by Sing Or Swim at 2:11 PM on August 29, 2016 [77 favorites]


Yeah. It's a UK paper, so they might have misunderstood the metaphor.

It's the Grauniad. They understood perfectly and then fucked it up.
posted by vbfg at 2:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


'Waiting for the centipede to turn into a butterfly'

Beautiful.
posted by stolyarova at 2:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


The next GOP President is IMO going to be a moderate Latino from what is going to be the Republican equivalent of the DLC.

It might take a while. The GOP continues to ignore its own demographic analysis (the so-called 2013 "autopsy"), and Trump has, in the meantime, burned a lot of bridges with the conservative part of the Latino community with talk about deportation squads and walls. Such a candidate would have to have a lot of bona fides to fix the damage done.

*

*
posted by a lungful of dragon at 2:15 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


The GOP continues to ignore its own demographic analysis (the so-called 2013 "autopsy"),

In 2008 they had 17 and said "Hit me". In 2012 they had 19 and said "Hit me again". In 2016 they bust and say "Hit me again".
posted by bongo_x at 2:19 PM on August 29, 2016 [23 favorites]



It's the Grauniad


Oh, I thought it was The Guardian. Never noticed that they're anagrams.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 2:21 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The only way to find out if it is a caterpillar or a centipede is to wrap it tightly in an impenetrable silk cocoon and leave it alone in a dark place until it hatches.
posted by Doroteo Arango II at 2:21 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


While I appreciate your thoroughness it is technically possible to tell a centipede from a caterpillar by looking at it.
posted by stolyarova at 2:23 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


[Couple deleted; leeeet's ease back from joking about ways to harm Republican voters; even as a very very obviously-joking thing, not a good direction for us to go.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 2:27 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


Bus to November: Bloomberg reporters Esmé E. Deprez and M. Scott Brauer traveled cross country from Philadelphia to Los Angeles this month, traversing over 3,041 miles through 11 states, in 15 buses driven by 17 drivers. They spent two weeks interviewing riders about the US Presidential candidates and upcoming election.

I did almost that same route from Philly to L.A. in two weeks working on a webseries ad campaign for Miller Lite a couple years ago.
posted by Navelgazer at 2:27 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


I could totally see the water-carriers of the Trump GOP arguing that we can't possibly know that centipedes never turn into butterflies, typical know-it-all ivory tower liberal elites arrogantly thinking they've got centipedes completely figured out
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


I find myself increasingly interested in what the GOP leadership will do if this election costs them both the White House and the Senate. In the last election, they held meetings to regroup, consider what they did wrong and what they needed to do. They did not change. Now, facing the same situation, they need to embrace demographic change, and yet, to do so is to alienate their base, the tea party leaning white people. How to resolve this? The future of the party is at stake.
posted by Postroad at 2:31 PM on August 29, 2016


>we can't possibly know that centipedes never turn into butterflies,

Is it too late for more 'you can't explain that' jokes?
posted by Sing Or Swim at 2:31 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Oh, I thought it was The Guardian. Never noticed that they're anagrams.
They're the same thing. The Grauniad is what the satirical magazine Private Eye calls The Guardian due to their large number of typos.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 2:31 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


Grauniad is like Drumpf, but for newspapers
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:35 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Grauniad is what the satirical magazine Private Eye calls The Guardian due to their large number of typos.

Oh, hah. I think I was thinking of Granta.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 2:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now, facing the same situation, they need to embrace demographic change, and yet, to do so is to alienate their base, the tea party leaning white people. How to resolve this?

Through gerrymandering and vote suppression. And of that doesn't work, violence.
posted by happyroach at 2:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


on the down side, I started a derail about centipedes and caterpillars. On the up side, though, I am apparently kind of ignorant of the details of Trumpist symbolism. This indicates, I think, that there's still a chance I could come away from this election with some small shred of sanity intact. Sure, I've been exposed to how Trumpworld thinks, but I probably haven't taken a lethal dose...
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 2:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Grauniad is like Drumpf, but for newspapers
Nah, it's a lot more affectionate.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 2:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


@darth:
"of course the actual wall is still the centerpiece of our campaign that has never changed it is a real concret..."
@noahcrothman: Trump backers Giuliani, Perry, and Chris Collins all now using “technological,” “digital,” and “virtual” to describe the wall.
followed by
"a digital and virtual wall is still a very effective wall no body is saying this is going to be a real wa..."
@aaronblake: Trump to CNN on Thursday: "This is going to be a real wall."
this tweetthread is solid gold
posted by Existential Dread at 2:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


The Emerson poll is landline-only. Skews older.

Sure, but theoretically they compensate for that by increasing the weight of liberal respondents slightly and decreasing the weight of conservative respondents. Polling is more of an art than a science so the weighting may be off but the fact that it is landline-online in and of itself does not make the result wrong given the adjustments.

That said... they have Trump leading Clinton 45-33 among 18-34 year olds in Michigan. That can't possibly be right. Can it?
posted by Justinian at 2:45 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


followed by

"a digital and virtual wall is still a very effective wall no body is saying this is going to be a real wa..."

@aaronblake: Trump to CNN on Thursday: "This is going to be a real wall."

this tweetthread is solid gold


Remember when the thread briefly appeared to be rehashing the debate over original sin?

We've now moved along to the doctrine of the Real Presence.

I can't wait for pentecostalism to happen
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:57 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


HRC rolls out a new mental health policy agenda (WaPo):
"The plan, the Democratic nominee said, seeks to fully integrate mental health services into the nation’s health-care system during her tenure as president. Measures include a national suicide prevention initiative, higher payments for providers in the Medicaid program, an emphasis on treatment over jail for low-level criminal offenders with mental health issues and the creation of new housing and job opportunities."
I belong to the 40% of people who have been diagnosed with a serious mental illness and who are currently unable to find local treatment options, so I found her focus on community support to be germane to my interests.
posted by xyzzy at 3:01 PM on August 29, 2016 [63 favorites]


HRC rolls out a new mental health policy agenda

Headline: Clinton's New Mental Health Policy Fails to Address Trump's Virtual Walls
posted by nubs at 3:06 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


"Previously, I thought your policy proposal to build a wall was one of the most wrongheaded and idiotic ideas ever. Now I think it's virtually one of the most wrongheaded and idiotic ideas ever."
posted by defenestration at 3:11 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


O. Alan Noble @TheAlanNoble

realizing that every cliché about millennials is true about Trump.
1. Has no work experience in a field but expects to start at the top

2. Has terrible social media habits which endanger his employer
3. Suffers from acute entitlement syndrome
4. Doesn't know history
+ 8 more reasons. And the punchline?
O. Alan Noble @TheAlanNoble

And the BEST PART is that millennials see right through him! HAHAHAHAHA
posted by palindromic at 3:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [36 favorites]


> "Service of truth" is a hard standard because truth isn't always apparent

Indeed. And I have a gut-level fear of people who are sure that the truth is in fact always apparent because it obviously coincides with what they themselves believe. And I see a lot of that on MeFi. (Which, yes, is an echo chamber, though one that I love.)
posted by languagehat at 3:29 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


The AP's recent fuckwitted reporting on the Clinton Foundation are Specimins of Old Journalism:
CNN Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter recounts the difficulties the AP had getting Clinton’s meeting records and then asks his audience: “Did they just want to show they had done the work, did they just want to show they had found something, even if it didn’t amount to much?”

Carroll’s answer: “We didn’t say it amounted to the end of the world. We said this is an important and interesting thing that people should know about.”
posted by Dashy at 3:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump's Director of Minority Outreach Past Mark Burns tweets a really offensive cartoon of Clinton in blackface. No really. [real]
posted by chris24 at 3:55 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


Carroll’s answer: “We didn’t say it amounted to the end of the world. We said this is an important and interesting thing that people should know about.”

Uh huh. How about looking into Trump's "important and interesting" business dealings? Oh, right. Private sector. Free pass.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


guys what if all this time he has just been talking about dragging roger waters out of the home for old rockers for one more performance and sticking mexico with the tab
posted by entropicamericana at 3:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


From that Old Journalism article.
In other words, the AP found no evidence of quid pro quo, no smoking gun, nothing here that was wrong, no rock-solid reason to cast aspersions, no real conclusion. But they went with the story anyway because of the impression people might have — an impression the AP’s story gives them. Yet remember that Carroll says she “can’t be held responsible for the way that everybody thinks about and responds to” this story. Does not compute.


The story should have been that there was no evidence that contributions mattered, but--as was noted on the Keepin' it 1600 podcast-- the press default is that Clinton is guilty. The question is how is she guilty?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 3:58 PM on August 29, 2016 [19 favorites]


Trump's Director of Minority Outreach Past Mark Burns tweets a really offensive cartoon of Clinton in blackface. No really. [real]

WTF? That manages to be racist in ways I don't even understand. (Hot sauce?)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 4:02 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


really offensive cartoon of Clinton in blackface

Hoo, shit. That is...something. Gah.
posted by sandettie light vessel automatic at 4:04 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


pastOR mark burns
posted by chris24 at 4:05 PM on August 29, 2016




waitingtoderail: “The Emerson poll is landline-only. Skews older.”
Funny story about that Emerson poll. This happened right in front of my eyes today on Twitter:
Polling Note: Good reason to think today‘s Emerson poll is oversampling GOPs. It was landline only poll. https://t.co/rJrg4UkHqB— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) August 29, 2016
@joshtpm Yes. As co-founder of Senior Votes Count! I can say only older people use land lines, and often vote against their own interests— Jon Bowzer Bauman (@JonBowzerBauman) August 29, 2016
Yes, the "real" Bowzer, apparently.
posted by ob1quixote at 4:06 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


Pastor Mark Burns called into MSNBC to defend his tweet.

Its a bit a of a rant, in which he talks about Bill Clinton doing blackface, and about how he won't be PC, and he's pushing Trump's current talking point about how the Democratic party only treats black people as votes.
posted by airish at 4:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Good god, they're going to have that idiot Mark Burns on Hardball tomorrow. The media is going to wreck the country. If you have somebody posting cartoons of people in blackface, you do not invite them on your network! You ban them from it.

I feel like if you took the most despicable people throughout US history that hadn't committed a violent crime, networks today would give that person a forum to spread hate and bigotry and fear. It's just terrible. That pastor is an idiot. I mean it's no secret that many pastors are money-making scumballs who profit off the backs of their congregations, but this guy is out there doing the most ridiculous things.
posted by cashman at 4:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]


Yes, the "real" Bowzer, apparently.

Why does the Mushroom Kingdom think they have the right to meddle in this election
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]




Oh, Mark Burns was referencing this photo, which was proven false by Snopes, which claims to show the Clintons in racist outfits.

It was shit like this that finally made me ask the question: "Is it truly possible that every single thing they've said about this woman is complete and utter bullshit?"

Sadly, it took me a couple more years for the answer to become "Yes."
posted by Mooski at 4:19 PM on August 29, 2016 [38 favorites]


Why does the Mushroom Kingdom think they have the right to meddle in this election

Reminds me of a Twitter conversation I had with friends back in 2012.
posted by Servo5678 at 4:21 PM on August 29, 2016


So what's the "truth" about the right that we're not hearing from the media? OR what's the "truth" about this election we're not hearing from the media? And how do we have access to that "truth"?

Regarding the media supplanting truthseeking with horserace-tracking, the truth that is supplanted is stuff like actual policy details.
posted by rhizome at 4:25 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Jon Bowzer Bauman seems pretty awesome. His twitter picture roll is all kinds of charming.

Plus this:
Bauman tours extensively with his Bowzer and the Stingrays group at fairs, amusement parks, cruise ships, malt shoppes and conventions all over the world. They headline "Bowzer's Ultimate Milkshake Party ".

(I only know Sha Na Na from Andy Daly/Comedy Bang Bang so it was a pleasant surprise to me.)
posted by kittensofthenight at 4:25 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


As for Bannon vs. Weiner, the comparison makes no sense. Committing domestic violence is not the same as being slut-shamed.
posted by rhizome at 4:26 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's a stupid comparison and Weiner isn't involved in the campaign and it's a distraction from real issues.

But I think you water down the real phenomenon of slut-shaming by applying it to a dude sending sexts outside his marriage with his kids in bed with him while publicly embarrassing his wife.
posted by Justinian at 4:29 PM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


Now, facing the same situation, they need to embrace demographic change

But do they? I think they'll believe that they can filibuster away, run bullshit Clinton Rules scandals in the House, take back the Senate in 2018, and use that as a platform for 2020, which in turn creates possibilities to lock down the US House and state legislatures for another decade.

The base plus midterm turnout plus existing control of state governments plus the capacity to map districts' voting preferences down to the block makes for a potent balm against demographic change, especially if Trumpism remains part of the mainstream political discourse like the emissions from a toxic chemical plant.
posted by holgate at 4:31 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Criticize Colin Kaepernick but support Donald Trump? Think again
Wealthy people criticize America regularly without incurring the criticism Kaepernick did this weekend — and in fact, one of them is running for president.

Peter Wade articulated as much for Esquire: "And let's not forget we have a presidential candidate whose campaign slogan is Make America Great Again. The key word in that phrase is 'again,' meaning that America right now is not great."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:33 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


I find myself increasingly interested in what the GOP leadership will do if this election costs them both the White House and the Senate. In the last election, they held meetings to regroup, consider what they did wrong and what they needed to do. They did not change. Now, facing the same situation, they need to embrace demographic change, and yet, to do so is to alienate their base, the tea party leaning white people. How to resolve this? The future of the party is at stake.

Same as last time, pick up some seats in the midterm, and declare mission accomplished. They've got the attention spans of goldfish.
posted by leotrotsky at 4:38 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Fired Manager Corey Lewandowski Still Involved in Donald Trump Campaign
a few weeks and a lucrative cable network contract later, Lewandowski is back in the fold, according to multiple campaign sources. They describe Lewandowski’s relationship with the candidate as “stronger than ever.”

Each day, Trump wakes up, usually in his Fifth Avenue penthouse, and has a routine round of calls, sources say, that includes his campaign leadership (which has changed in recent weeks), his children, some close allies and someone else quite frequently: Lewandowski.

“They talk almost every day,” one senior level campaign staffer said, requesting anonymity.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:38 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The base plus midterm turnout plus existing control of state governments plus the capacity to map districts' voting preferences down to the block makes for a potent balm against demographic change, especially if Trumpism remains part of the mainstream political discourse like the emissions from a toxic chemical plant.
There's a chance that gerrymandering is going to have SCOTUS review before the 2020 census. A pair of Maryland Democrats are suing on First Amendment grounds in a case about Democratic gerrymandering in MD's 6th district. The case was originally thrown out by a federal judge in 2014 but resurrected when SCOTUS determined that the case should have been reviewed by a three-judge panel. That review just occurred and the panel ruled that the case should go forward.
posted by xyzzy at 4:39 PM on August 29, 2016 [25 favorites]


Well, this is not going to help media consumers' ability to tell [real] and [fake] apart:
Facebook fires trending team, and algorithm without humans goes crazy
Module pushes out false story about Fox’s Megyn Kelly, offensive Ann Coulter headline and a story link about a man masturbating with a McDonald’s sandwich
Grauniad, [real] (I assume)

And yes, the sandwich in question was indeed chicken.
posted by Westringia F. at 4:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [25 favorites]


(I only know Sha Na Na from Andy Daly/Comedy Bang Bang so it was a pleasant surprise to me.)

Really? Never seen Woodstock, eh? Go take a look, and imagine what all those LSD-saturated heads made of them as they took the stage.
posted by Thorzdad at 4:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


WaPo: Trump enlists veteran Florida strategist Susie Wiles as communications adviser
Veteran Florida Republican strategist Susie Wiles is joining Donald Trump's campaign as senior adviser for battleground communications, the latest in a series of staffing moves with 10 weeks left until the election.

Wiles, who is a co-chair of Trump's Florida campaign, managed Florida Gov. Rick Scott's 2010 campaign for governor. During a career in politics and government that has spanned more than three decades, she also worked as a scheduler for Ronald Reagan.
Seems like an odd move on Wiles part. She obviously has a solid background and impressive CV so why would she sign on with the HMS Trumptanic?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:44 PM on August 29, 2016


CNN Rocked By Report That Cory Lewandowski Is Still Working With Donald Trump
CNN had a problem after campaign finance documents revealed that Cory Lewandowski was still being paid by Donald Trump.

The problem has grown now that ABC News reported that Lewandowski is still closely involved with the Trump campaign[...]

The ABC report is especially damaging because it states that Trump has ordered that Lewandowski is given full security clearance at any rally he attends and that the former campaign manager was “running the show” at a recent Trump rally in New Hampshire.
CNN deserves to eat every bite of this shit sandwich of their own making.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [70 favorites]


Media outlet lays with dogs, gets fleas.
posted by tonycpsu at 4:54 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]




Russian hackers breached a computer used by county elections officials in Arizona
The FBI says it has found breaches in voter registration systems in Illinois and Arizona, and it's urging states to increase their computer security ahead of the November presidential election. Hackers targeted voter registration systems in Illinois and Arizona, and the FBI alerted Arizona officials in June that Russian hackers were behind the assault on the election system in that state.
Source: WaPo [real]

Fucking fantastic.
posted by Westringia F. at 4:57 PM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


How is CNN the last to know about this? It's been the topic of discussion in multiple news outlets ever since they hired him several months ago.
posted by Atom Eyes at 4:58 PM on August 29, 2016 [16 favorites]


Seems like an odd move on Wiles part. She obviously has a solid background and impressive CV so why would she sign on with the HMS Trumptanic?

They'll pay her seven figures for 10 weeks work.

Who here wouldn't take that deal?
posted by Talez at 4:58 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


BREAKING: CNN discovers two months after everyone else already knew that they were carelessly violating pretty much every single journalistic ethics guideline possible.
posted by xyzzy at 5:00 PM on August 29, 2016 [53 favorites]


Seriously, how the fuck is CNN suprised by this?
posted by Artw at 5:07 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


CNN is shocked, shocked.

(that anyone noticed their slimy move)
posted by Yowser at 5:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Seriously, how the fuck is CNN suprised by this?

Maybe they'll rip a page right out of the Trump playbook and turn it around: "How the fuck are any of you surprised by this?"
posted by Mooski at 5:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Westringia, I saw the stock "cybercrime" photo in that article and for a moment I honestly thought the fingers in the photo were green because they were supposed to be Pepe's fingers. This is doubtful, although it would have been highly appropriate.

I wish to hell it was feasible to replace those systems with paper, or at least use only air-gapped machines and computers guarded at every step, the way ballots are. I bet if it were the Democratic candidate that the hackers are likely to interfere for, there'd be a lot more noise on this story.
posted by Countess Elena at 5:09 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]




Earlier quoted:
Election officials in more than two dozen states have compiled lists of citizens whom they allege could be registered in more than one state – thus potentially able to cast multiple ballots – and eligible to be purged from the voter rolls.
Which two dozen states? Would flipping ALL of them to Red win the election for Trump? I suspect maybe not, considering who is already in charge - Republicans.

Voter Suppression IS Voter Fraud. Pass it on.

As co-founder of Senior Votes Count! I can say only older people use land lines, and often vote against their own interests
I've told many times of my Young Republican experience of witnessing a deal between nursing home owners and Republican ops to have people come in to "help" older residents fill out absentee ballots in California. I never reported it because my GOP Activist Mother was too close to it, but I've never seen any news in the 44 years since of such a scheme being exposed, and I can't believe that this was the only place/time it happened. But it has explained much of the Republican advantage with really-older voters to me.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


Awwww, Jon Bowzer Bauman From Sha-Na-Na Campaigns With Hillary Clinton in Iowa

He did the pose!
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Given the average retirement age for a Supreme Court Justice Garland would be likely to serve at least 20 years. That's certainly long enough to leave a mark on the court.
posted by humanfont at 5:15 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump Campaign Embeds Staff Member with the Media, But Clinton's Aide's Husband is a Jerk
posted by nubs at 5:18 PM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


Fired Manager Corey Lewandowski Still Involved in Donald Trump Campaign

Watch for him on CNN, guy's a true believer (in Trump as president or Trump as eventual benefactor for his career, which is very likely the case as lover or hate him Businessman Trump seems loyal to "his people".)

(Lewandowski continued to revive "severance" at least as recently as a few weeks ago when there was a disclosure on a CNN interview)
posted by sammyo at 5:22 PM on August 29, 2016


Shitmittens was very popular for Romney in MeFi 4 years ago, so there is a bit of precedent here.

For the record, "shitmittens" has been part of the MeFi lexicon since 2003.
posted by homunculus at 5:23 PM on August 29, 2016


Can someone explain to this Canadian what the advantage of voting machines are, and why Americans don't just use the hack proof pencil and paper approach?
posted by peppermind at 5:23 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


the hack proof pencil and paper approach

There was a push after the 2000 election, where issues with paper ballots were the problem (although that was the "punch a hole" style). I suspect paper and pencil has the same kind of edge cases (marking outside the lines, not filling in enough, accidentally marking 2, etc --- pencil versions of "hanging chads")).

In theory voting machines would avoid those kinds of issues (no selecting 2 people for same office, no hanging chads, no "not filling in circle enough for machine" or whatever). But of course there are other issues.
posted by thefoxgod at 5:27 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Because we are voting on like 12 different things on one ballot, so it's way less error-prone to have some sort of automatic counting method.
There are also polling places that have to offer a bunch of different ballots (primaries and/or early voting), so a touch-screen is more likely to get you the right ballot than a volunteer poll worker is.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 5:28 PM on August 29, 2016


Upthread there's a discussion about false equivalencies in the media and why this happens. Here are my (somewhat late) thoughts:

There's (for lack of better words) a cognitive effort required to make the connection between what people say, what they do, and the outcomes that result from their words and actions. Someone has to make that cognitive effort in order for news to matter.

Media too often focuses on superficially reporting the words. Less often, they report actions. Even less, the context and results of actions.

The NYT has more resources to devote to news, so they often have better reporting. But when they take the shortcut of reporting without doing the in-depth cognitive effort, they can get hijacked by propagandists. Most media has fewer resources to offer and is correspondingly more likely to err.

IMHO, PBS Newshour does very well at balancing all steps of reporting. The NYT appears to rely on critical and informed readers to do the cognitive effort. Other outlets (FOX, Breitbart) appear to rely on consumers NOT to do the cognitive effort so that the media can promote a specific agenda.

MetaFilter election threads crowdsource reporting. I see raw news, I see opinion/commentary, and there's always interpretation/context available if someone asks politely.
posted by Emmy Noether at 5:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


Can someone explain to this Canadian what the advantage of voting machines are, and why Americans don't just use the hack proof pencil and paper approach?

First, pencil and paper isn't hack proof. It does take a physical heist however.

Second I think that the reason they do it is because (depending on state) they don't just elect political representatives but coroners, police chiefs, and judges. (And campaigns to become a judge are their own bundle of wrong).
posted by Francis at 5:29 PM on August 29, 2016


My amuse. I use Https Everywhere and when I follow Huffy Puffy's link, it redirects to an error message at
https://www.senate.gov. How can I be sure I'm not getting some injected corrupted version of the Constitution from the insecure connection? ;)
Request unable to be completed.

The submitted https request was not able to be completed at this time.

Please retry your request using http. This may require disabling some browser based plug-ins.

http://www.senate.gov
(Please don't go into solutions mode here guys, I am fully capable of jumping through the required hoop to pull up the link, I'm just WTF ... LOL that I have to hoop jump. I can't even)
posted by Autumn Leaf at 5:29 PM on August 29, 2016


Second I think that the reason they do it is because (depending on state) they don't just elect political representatives but coroners, police chiefs, and judges.

Don't forget direct voting on laws (propositions) in some states. In California this year we have 17 specific propositions to vote on in addition to all the candidate races. Our ballots are pretty big...
posted by thefoxgod at 5:31 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yes, paper ballots are harder to hack, but note that the hack in question wasn't targeting the voting machines per se; it was targeting the computers that contain voter registration records. If voters don't appear on the rolls, the question of whether the ballot is paper or electronic becomes immaterial. All those registration drives and handy registration-verifying links are only as strong as the security of their databases.
posted by Westringia F. at 5:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [21 favorites]


Dr. Jill Stein, pandering to single-issue Harambe voters:
The killing of Harambe 3 months ago today reminds us to be a voice for the voiceless.
posted by chrchr at 5:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


The twitter parody account AP_Headlines is gone. Well that was a lot of fun while it lasted.
posted by cashman at 5:33 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


They changed the handle to @A_Headlines.
posted by Pope Guilty at 5:35 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Hey, man, it's hard enough to fit the parchment through the tubes in the first place, and that's before scrambling it up with encryption. Just ask some random dude to lend you his copy.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 5:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Only the name has been changed to protect themselves, because AP pays their lawyers better than they pay their reporters.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:38 PM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


CNN is shocked... SHOCKED that there is gambling in this establishment.
posted by drezdn at 5:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


... and meanwhile, hack attempts play right into legitimizing Trump's election-theft fearmongering. How long before we hear someone draw baseless parallels between unsecured voter registration databases and email servers?
posted by Westringia F. at 5:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


because AP pays their lawyers better than they pay their reporters.

It's crazy that we live in a world where a) this is true and b) it makes perfect sense.
posted by Mooski at 5:43 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


> Yes, paper ballots are harder to hack, but note that the hack in question wasn't targeting the voting machines per se; it was targeting the computers that contain voter registration records. If voters don't appear on the rolls, the question of whether the ballot is paper or electronic becomes immaterial. All those registration drives and handy registration-verifying links are only as strong as the security of their databases.

One of my (many, many) hobbyhorses is the idea that the use of computers should be strongly discouraged in anything connected to elections for any office that gives the officeholder real power. Every part of the process — registration, voting itself, tabulation — should be carried out on media big enough and clear enough to read with the naked eye. Once you start recording voting-related information as electronic charges on chips rather than as big, easily legible marks, you're opening up the possibility for all sorts of shenanigans.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 5:45 PM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]


why Americans don't just use the hack proof pencil and paper approach?

Most Americans do in fact vote with pencil (or pen) and paper. Unlike Canada, the ballots are counted with optical scanners (like scantron tests), which are more accurate than hand-counting for complex forms or ballots in addition to being way-the-fuck faster.

Direct-recording voting machines like you're thinking of do have a few real advantages. If you're using voting machines, how many ballots are in English? All of them. How many are in Spanish? Also all of them. How many are in Russian? Chinese? Tagalog? Lakota? All of them are in every available language, in large type if needed. Voting machines can also be configured to prohibit overvotes instead of just spoiling that ballot.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:45 PM on August 29, 2016 [14 favorites]


Steve
posted by drezdn at 5:50 PM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


Steve Stephenson cocked one ear, then his gun. "It's the dronebuggies" he growled, "Get in the trunk woman or I'll gong you unconscious and toss you in myself to protect you". Chelsea finally lowered the AR-15 and gulped raw fear. "Fine, but how did you find me anyway?"
"It was easy" spat-chuckled the ex-Coast Guard Ranger, itching his #NEVERTRUMP forehead tat, "you were cooking hummus. Bet you didn't even know it was illegal!"
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


Put in a hot falafel-in-the-shower scene and you're gold. You'll be discounted at Sam's Club in a heartbeat.
posted by delfin at 5:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


the literary critics support me in MeMail
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:58 PM on August 29, 2016 [26 favorites]


Anyway fon't forget to vote for Tivalasvegas for President of Metafilter Election Threads this Election night folks. No running mate yet but I'm sure she'll announce one soon.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:59 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's a state governor who fucked up an entire industry in his state and has no experience on the national stage. Heller probably isn't retiring in 2018. His next chance to contest a senate seat would be 2022 which would give him the standing to even contest a presidential nomination.

Four of the past six presidents entered the race as governors.
posted by one_bean at 6:05 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


I know this is relevant to hours-ago in this thread, but hey, at least I did catch up to the thread. Can someone educate the poor foreigner about what is meant by "going nuclear" about the filibuster? Is there some way, that invokes very extraordinary powers or whatever, that can deny or stop a filibuster?
posted by seyirci at 6:08 PM on August 29, 2016


Shitmittens was very popular for Romney in MeFi 4 years ago, so there is a bit of precedent here.

For the record, "shitmittens" has been part of the MeFi lexicon since 2003.



And then there's this.

posted by rabbitrabbit at 6:10 PM on August 29, 2016


The filibuster is a procedure governed by the rules of the Senate. At the start of the Senate's term, Senators can change the rules governing the Senate through a simple majority vote. Which cannot be filibustered. So the nuclear option is the Senate voting with a majority vote to change the rules allowing the filibuster of judicial nominees.
posted by Justinian at 6:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


The fillibuster is a rule of the Senate, it isn't part of the constitution. The Senate can, by majority vote, change its own rules. If the Democrats have the majority, they could eliminate the fillibuster, if they so chose.
posted by Chrysostom at 6:12 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Can someone educate the poor foreigner about what is meant by "going nuclear" about the filibuster? Is there some way, that invokes very extraordinary powers or whatever, that can deny or stop a filibuster?

Going nuclear means effectively eliminating the current filibuster rule. It's a long-standing tradition, so eliminating it is seen as drastic (plus it could come back and bite the party that did it in as little as two years.)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


It is called the nuclear option because the Senate at least pretends to be a professional deliberative body capable of negotiation, compromise and statesmanship; reducing the threshold to 51 blows all of that away and turns it into simple we-have-more-people-so-we-pass-whatever-we-want partisanship.

It is also called that because, like nuclear weapons, it carries with it mutual assured destruction as a deterrent -- the majority party will be a minority someday and subject to the same treatment.
posted by delfin at 6:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


A sufficiently motivated programmer with moderate skills and a bit of political/monetary incentive can almost certainly program a computer based voting machine to wait till a reasonable number of votes are cast for each candidate, then bias the count for a favored candidate by randomly changing votes (if necessary) with a sufficient bias to produce a win. (Except perhaps precincts with a very heavy slant against the favored outcome.) A bit more skill may be required to obfuscate the code enough to make it hard to detect, but not too much.

But obfuscation doesn't really matter as the makers of the voting machines/software will not allow anyone to audit their code anyway.
posted by Death and Gravity at 6:14 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


At the start of each new Congress, each house approves its rules by majority vote. Anytime after that, it takes a supermajority (often 2/3) to change or suspend the rules.

Except. If there is a question of the rules, the President of the Senate will make a ruling, and that ruling can be overturned by a majority vote. This is standard in most deliberative bodies, but still puts the lie to the idea that it takes 2/3 to change the rules.

The "nuclear option" is to outlaw filibusters by a majority vote. It would destroy the collegiality, assumptions of good faith, etc. (You know, assuming they were there in the first place.)
It would result in retaliation; the Senate rules are burdensome enough that pretty much any actual functioning business requires unanimous consent to get to the voting part, and we would be kissing that goodbye.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 6:16 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


A good Wikipedia article about the Nuclear option. Though the explanations here are kinda better.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 6:17 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The supermajority requirement was removed for confirmations other than the Supreme Court in 2013. Things moved along fairly well for a while...
posted by Surely This at 6:18 PM on August 29, 2016


Of course, many of those other rules could be eliminated as well. Blue slipping has been trimmed back, but there are still secret holds and the like.
posted by Chrysostom at 6:19 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The real problem is that if the majority party actually gets all the power, Senators will be no better than mere Representatives. The minority party in the House might as well not show up, most of the time.
posted by Huffy Puffy at 6:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The minority party in the House might as well not show up, most of the time.

But isn't that how it is now? The Republicans are so hell-bent on obstructing the President that they have the Senate frozen in gridlock. Ask Mr. McConnell about that...
posted by Surely This at 6:34 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


It would destroy the collegiality, assumptions of good faith, etc. (You know, assuming they were there in the first place.)

I think the Merrick Garland situation has demonstrated there is zero good faith remaining. Its down to simple partisanship already. Might as well make it official. There is no real bipartisanship or collegiality left (its been on a slide for years, but the SC stuff this year is a clear-cut demonstration).
posted by thefoxgod at 6:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Former Romney strategist Stuart Stevens meets with independent candidate

This meeting with choke-architect Stuart Stevens could be just the thing the McMuffin campaign needs!
posted by Cookiebastard at 6:37 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Is the McMuffin campaign still a thing? If you have less traction than Jill Stein maybe try something else as a hobby.
posted by Justinian at 6:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The 113th Congress (2013-2014) passed 212 substantive and 84 ceremonial laws. The 108th Congress (2003-2004) passed 368 substantive and 130 ceremonial laws. That is a phenomenal reduction in the People's business getting done.
posted by xyzzy at 6:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


This meeting with choke-architect Stuart Stevens could be just the thing the McMuffin campaign needs!

People are hungry for change!
posted by a lungful of dragon at 6:43 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


> The minority party in the House might as well not show up, most of the time.

I gotta admit, as a long-time admirer of the Westminster system, I actually kind of prefer it when legislative bodies are run along these lines. It clarifies the process of voting dramatically — if there is absolute party discipline among elected officials, you get to more or less vote for a party manifesto, rather than having to assess the individual qualities of individual candidates. In a real sense it's more small-d democratic than less partisan systems.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 6:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The trend in the last few years has been to return to paper ballots as equipment is replaced. According to The Hill 70% of voters used paper ballots in 2014 and the number is expected to be higher this year. The number of places using a pure computer solution with no paper audit is gradually going down.
posted by humanfont at 6:46 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


Can someone explain to this Canadian what the advantage of voting machines are, and why Americans don't just use the hack proof pencil and paper approach?

This question gets asked a lot by Canadians and it is because they have no idea of the crazy political system in the U.S. in which voters are asked to cast ballots for dozens of various government officials at different levels as opposed to a parliamentary system. A typical ballot looks more like a three-hour SAT exam than a voting form. Here are some officials that might appear on the ballot.

U.S. President
U.S. Senator
U.S. Congressman
State Governor
State Lt. Governor
Secretary of State
State Treasurer
State Auditor
State Attorney General
State Commissioner of Public Lands
State Superintendent of Schools
State Insurance Commissioner
State senator
State legislator
State Supreme Court Judges
County Sheriff
County Commissioners
County judges
City Mayor
City council members
City school board members
City judges
A dozen tax levies and bond issues at state, county and city levels
A dozen state ballot initiatives to change or enact various laws
... and many more.

It it totally nuts. Most people have no idea what or whom they are voting for. Most of these should be appointed positions -- you vote for the person at the top and they make the appointments. Legal initiatives and taxes should be handled by the legislature, not individual votes.

From the Canadians you hear "Hey, we just mark a couple of X's on a piece of paper and then we hand count them before midnight."
posted by JackFlash at 7:02 PM on August 29, 2016 [22 favorites]


From the Canadians you hear "Hey, we just mark a couple of X's on a piece of paper and then we hand count them before midnight."
To be fair, it's probably a lot easier to hand count ~16 million votes than ~125 million.
posted by xyzzy at 7:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


It is, but not that much easier since the votes are counted locally. The real issue is as JackFlash says; we're voting for so many things, many of which people have no clue about.

It would be vastly easier to count 125 million ballots voting for one or two offices than 16 million ballots voting for 30 offices and 12 ballot propositions.
posted by Justinian at 7:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


>> the hack in question wasn't targeting the voting machines per se; it was targeting the computers that contain voter registration records

> Once you start recording voting-related information as electronic charges on chips rather than as big, easily legible marks, you're opening up the possibility for all sorts of shenanigans.

On my way home I was mulling over what I would do if I were a Bad Actor [NB, NSA & FBI: I am not], and it goes something like this:

1. Sloppily "attempt" to hack right-leaning states (like, say, Arizona above), not so sloppily as to be an obvious ruse, not so slyly as to escape notice. The purpose here is not to succeed, but to get caught. Bonus points* for making it look like the attack is trying to force a buffer overrun with a SQL query to gather information (or delete) specifically R-registered voters. Call this the Propaganda Decoy Hack.

2. In a real hack, rather than removing any data, plant fictitious voter records with common minority--associated names and let Crosscheck do the dirty work of canceling the registration of voters whose names collided with the plants as "fraudulent". (Note that this strategy does not require specifically targeting D-leaning states, and possibly not even targeting states themselves; it may be enough to man-in-the-middle the Crosscheck list and let states' reliance on it do the rest. Who is crosschecking Crosscheck?) Ideally*, this attack should be launched from a US IP address in a heavily blue state (and better* yet, from a .edu address) as an insurance policy: if it succeeds undetected, the hacker will have successfully disenfranchised voters who statistically lean left; if it fails and is caught, it feeds the right wing with "Dems are trying to throw the election with voter fraud" talking points aplenty.

So that's my nightmare variation for the evening: vote delegitimization by appearance alone.

* "Bonus", "ideal", "better", &c from the Bad Actor's perspective, not mine.
posted by Westringia F. at 7:16 PM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


To give outsiders an idea of what it can be like in the USA... here are the ballot propositions we in California will be voting on in November. Note that this is only the statewide ballot propositions. It does not include any of the offices (such as President) that we will be voting for, nor any local or county issues.
  • Proposition 51: Authorizes issuance and sale of $9 billion in bonds for education and schools
  • Proposition 52: Requires voter approval of changes to the hospital fee program
  • Proposition 53: Requires voter approval for projects that cost more than $2 billion funded by revenue bonds
  • Proposition 54: Prohibits the legislature from passing any bill until it has been in print and published on the Internet for 72 hours prior to the vote
  • Proposition 55: Extends the temporary personal income tax increases on incomes over $250,000 implemented by Proposition 30
  • Proposition 56: Increases the cigarette tax to $2.00 per pack
  • Proposition 57: Increases parole chances for felons convicted of non-violent crimes and gives them more opportunities to earn credits for good behavior
  • Proposition 58: Repeals Prop 227 of 1998, thus allowing for bilingual education in public schools
  • Proposition 59: Indicates whether voters approve of California State Legislators using what influence they have over federal issues to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and "to make clear that corporations should not have the same constitutional rights as human beings."
  • Proposition 60: Requires the use of condoms in all pornographic films featuring sexual intercourse produced in California
  • Proposition 61: Prohibits state agencies from paying more for a prescription drug than the lowest price paid for the same drug by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs
  • Proposition 62: Repeals the death penalty in the state of California
  • Proposition 63: Prohibits possession of large capacity ammunition magazines and requires individuals to pass a background check and receive authorization from the Department of Justice in order to purchase ammunition
  • Proposition 64: Legalizes marijuana and hemp under state law and enacts certain sales and cultivation taxes
  • Proposition 65: Redirects money collected from the sale of grocery and retail carry-out bags to a special fund administered by the Wildlife Conservation Board
  • Proposition 66: Changes procedures governing state court appeals and petitions challenging death penalty convictions and sentences
  • Proposition 67: Ratifies SB 270, thus prohibiting plastic single-use carryout bags
It's insane. Do you know what "requires voter approval of changes to the hospital fee program" means? Of course you don't. Neither will 98% of people voting on it. And apparently it is a good use of the state's time and money for us to vote on whether people boning on camera have to wear jimmies. For fuck's sake.
posted by Justinian at 7:22 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


rorgy: "What is the Alt Right? A report by The Onion."

[ostensibly fake, but hard to disagree with them on any particular point]
posted by schmod at 7:22 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't live in a state with direct democracy, so my ballots are reasonably free of cruft. However, I can only thank states that allow their citizens to vote blatantly unconstitutional crap into law so that the rest of the country can benefit from the inevitable SCOTUS decisions.
posted by xyzzy at 7:23 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


At least I'm going to get to vote us some awesome weed so that I'm less depressed by the voting system.
posted by Justinian at 7:25 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


According to The Hill 70% of voters used paper ballots in 2014 and the number is expected to be higher this year.

Unless they are counting punch-card type systems as "paper ballots," I find that 70% number hard to believe.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:25 PM on August 29, 2016


Why do Americans even bother electing officials, if you have so many fucking referendums (sorry, proposals)

You clearly aren't down with representative democracy.
posted by Yowser at 7:25 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


You clearly aren't down with representative democracy.

Forget it, Jake, it's California.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:26 PM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


I can see the point of the proposition system for things where the legislature has trouble, particularly controversial issues. Its a lot easier to let the public legalize marijuana than to vote on it yourself, from the point of view of a legislator. Broad questions like that or repealing the death penalty I can kind of get behind as propositions (admittedly largely because legislators are not very bold on changing these things out of fear, but I don't see a way to change that).

And these broad questions are fairly easy for voters to understand. Death penalty? I'm voting to repeal. Marijuana? Voting to legalize. Easy.

But voting on the amount of the cigarette tax? Or hospital fees? Thats what I elect my reps to do. I don't want to spend my time researching the details of hospital fee structures, I literally pay someone (representatives) to do that for me.
posted by thefoxgod at 7:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


> And apparently it is a good use of the state's time and money for us to vote on whether people boning on camera have to wear jimmies.

Harm-reduction measures that improve public health are a good use of the state's time and money. But more critically, this comment has now ruined sundaes for me forever.
posted by Westringia F. at 7:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


By the way, Pastor Mark Burns' twitter account (referenced up here, in regard to an apparently offensive and racist cartoon) has apparently now been deleted entirely.
posted by yhbc at 7:30 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


who calls them anything but "sprinkles"

really it's like you want to ruin america
posted by stolyarova at 7:30 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


If Prop 64 passes when does the Weedocalypse happen? Right away? Asking for a friend.
posted by Justinian at 7:30 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Apparently.
posted by yhbc at 7:31 PM on August 29, 2016


So what I've done is set myself a reminder to check my voter registration status a little bit before early voting begins in my state. Here is a chart someone provided in the last thread, that shows early voting for each state. Don't let yourself get 'magically' unregistered!

I challenge everyone here to do these 3 simple things:

1) Right now, look up your state's deadline for registering for this election.

2) Set an alarm on your phone right now for 3 weeks before that date

3) When the alarm goes off, check your status on this website. If you're been invalidated, fight like hell to get squared away and let everybody know.
posted by msalt at 7:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [31 favorites]


California is admittedly the worst example of ballot silliness. But it stems from early state history where the elected officials were caught in all kinds of corrupt shenanigans. And it's hard to undo because so much of it is constitutional now. :(
posted by R343L at 7:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Proposition 51: Authorizes issuance and sale of $9 billion in bonds for education and schools

The craptastic thing about putting these referendums to the voter is that the vast majority of said voters have no goddamn clue what shit costs on the scale that city, state and national governments have to operate at. They see a number like "$9 billion" and they go insane. It's illogical to ever put such issues to a popular vote.
posted by Thorzdad at 7:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


I wonder how many people will vote simultaneously to end the death penalty in CA (Prop 62) AND make it easier to kill people on death row by limiting due process (Prop 66). Also, would that be Order 66?
posted by xyzzy at 7:34 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Just a point of order, Prop 60 has the primary effect of making it super easy and rewarding to harass adult film workers
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 7:34 PM on August 29, 2016 [15 favorites]


Just a point of order, Prop 60 has the primary effect of making it super easy and rewarding to harass adult film workers.

Wasn't there a DFX shop working on digitally retouching the condoms out of the videos?
posted by Thorzdad at 7:38 PM on August 29, 2016


Thank you, Rainbo Vagrant! I didn't understand those ramifications before. (And here I serve as an example of why putting every last question to a popular vote is a horrible idea....)
posted by Westringia F. at 7:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Phone banking for the local congressional race tonight. Young staffers seemed down- lots of their volunteers going back to school, uphill climb to Election Day but they've already been working like dogs for a long time. Moral: give your local campaign some attention if you can. Even one night a week will really help them out.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 7:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


Yeah, amazingly the Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian parties ALL oppose Prop 60. Not sure how the polling looks but how often do all 3 agree on something?
posted by thefoxgod at 7:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh my god, Justinian. My face was just :| reading through that long ass list. I'm...I'm going to have to start reading up now if I want to be a Responsible Voter, aren't I.
posted by yasaman at 7:47 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


Pastor Burns's Favorite Cartoonist is Consistently Terrible
This is what folks on the other end of the political spectrum think is brilliant political commentary. I throw up my hands.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:52 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Is the McMuffin campaign still a thing? If you have less traction than Jill Stein maybe try something else as a hobby.

Some really savvy Mefite whose name I unfortunately forget pointed out that Gary Johnson and Evan McMullin's vote, combined, approach near Hillary Clinton's share of the vote in Utah, where Trump is currently leading. If #neverTrump had only one combined candidate (Johnson), it would take something like I want to say 10% of the people currently voting for Clinton to flip the EV to Johnson, and take it away from Trump. I'm willing to buy this is a Deep Republican ploy to avoid Utah flipping.
posted by corb at 7:53 PM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


If you're in California, Vote by Mail is the only way to handle these long ballots. No extra requirements to sign up and you get to sit at home to figure out which propositions directly conflict with other ones. Still not a lot of fun, but better than making an uninformed decision at the polling place because both are worded as confusingly as possible.
posted by downtohisturtles at 7:56 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


I look at this piece by Pastor Burns's favorite cartoonist and I'm like "yeah! take that, eagle! take that, flag! the land itself rejects you! full geological communism now!" which is probably not the intended message.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:57 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


It's not that bad - you take the info pamphlet they send you, read up on all the stuff that's not slam-dunk one way or the other and mark everything down ahead of time, take that to your polling place (you're kind of expected to anyway), and copy your marks from earlier. Having been out of California the last few years, I really miss those info pamphlets.
posted by LionIndex at 7:59 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


Well I mean it's not like you have wait until you're at the ballot booth to decide, California even mails out sample ballots and the text of the propositions ahead of time.
posted by ckape at 8:00 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


And arguments for and against various propositions, and rebuttals to the arguments, and candidate info statements for all the waaaaay downballot folks you never heard of.
posted by LionIndex at 8:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wasn't there a DFX shop working on digitally retouching the condoms out of the videos?

That creates its own headache for the people involved because Prop 60 includes a rebuttable presumption that any film without visible condoms was in fact not using condoms and is therefore illegal. Anybody who uses that VFX would be subject to lawsuits where they'd have to prove they really did use condoms and VFX, over and over -- it's an invitation to nuisance suits.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:08 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


What's the procedure for an obvious invalid election? Like Westringia F. was saying, it seems like more long-term damage could be done by hacking badly and getting caught after the point of no return. What then? Same administration hangs over until a new election can be arranged? That might involve nuking the registration rolls completely and rebuilding from scratch, which would take a long time. Probably also involve many lengthy legal challenges.
posted by ctmf at 8:11 PM on August 29, 2016


What's the procedure for an obvious invalid election?

I think it goes like this:

Sue in the county/state where the problem occured -> take it to the supremes -> 4-4 deadlock -> constitutional crisis -> military coup -> war with russia
posted by dis_integration at 8:19 PM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


No, no, no, no. It's a Federal issue. You have to sue in the Federal district court for the district in which you reside.

Then proceed as above.
posted by yhbc at 8:23 PM on August 29, 2016 [9 favorites]


Mark Burns' twitter feed is alive and well. Although he's posted an 11-minute apology for the cartoon, which I cannot be bothered to listen to.
posted by mochapickle at 8:25 PM on August 29, 2016


Also, he called it a Twit instead of a tweet. So.
posted by mochapickle at 8:26 PM on August 29, 2016


From the inbox files...

[Name]--

Calling all young professionals and millennials!

You're invited to join DC for45 -- the group of young professionals and millennials for Hillary -- for a Happy Hour with Tim Kaine!

I hope you will join us the evening of September 10th in Washington, DC, in support of Hillary and the Hillary Victory Fund.

I can't promise Tim Kaine will play his harmonica, but we are very excited to announce that world-renowned DJ Cassidy will provide the tunes.


"Aw, dad...!! Not in front of DJ Cassidy!"
posted by zennie at 8:31 PM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]



Yeah, amazingly the Democratic, Republican, and Libertarian parties ALL oppose Prop 60. Not sure how the polling looks but how often do all 3 agree on something?


Because the measure is fully funded by Michael Weinstein of AHF, the one douchebag to rule them all. Anti-PrEP, slut-shaming, sex negative, money grubbing son of a bitch.
posted by Sophie1 at 8:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [13 favorites]


At the start of the Senate's term, Senators can change the rules governing the Senate through a simple majority vote. Which cannot be filibustered. So the nuclear option is the Senate voting with a majority vote to change the rules allowing the filibuster of judicial nominees.

This is one way. I'd need to go look at the Oleszek bible but IIRC the Senate doesn't normally vote on its own rules at the beginning of the session. As a "continuing body," it just keeps on with the existing rules unless someone changes them. So one way of using the nuclear option would be for someone to make a motion with respect to adopting the rules, even though this isn't normally done.

The way I've more commonly seen this described though is that the Senate would, basically, violate its own rules and then ex post declare that violation to be the rules. Because the Senate's rules mean whatever the Senate says they do, no matter how contrary-to-fact that is.

The way this would work is that someone would be filibustering and MajorityMember would make any of several different motions that would end the filibuster. The most obvious would be to move the previous question, which is parliamentary-ese for "Fuck it, let's vote." THEN MinorityMember would say, nicely, "Fuck you, that's against the rules and you can't do that." And the person presiding at the time would issue a ruling one way or the other. THEN THE NUCLEAR OPTION HAPPENS when that ruling is challenged. If the person presiding at the time said "You're right, that's against the rules," then a member of the majority party would challenge that ruling... and they would win, because the majority has more votes. If the person presiding said "No, MajorityMember's motion is totally in order and MinorityMember can go and perform anatomically impossible acts," then someone in the minority would challenge that ruling, and they would lose because a minority is less than a majority. Either way, a precedent gets established that the Senate can use $PROCEDURAL_TOOL against dilatory tactics.

I live for shit like this. Not this exact shit because state legislatures not Senate, but still, I am a bad person.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [29 favorites]


/disappointed at lack of Prop 69.
posted by Artw at 8:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


I can get to the @pastormarkburns timeline, but the Clinton blackface tweet URL posted earlier here returned "Sorry, you're not authorized to view these Tweets" hours ago (and still does). Maybe the tweet was deleted?
posted by salix at 8:38 PM on August 29, 2016


I believe Prop 69 is "Ferengi are not responsible for the stupidity of other races."

Prop is short for property, right?
posted by Joey Michaels at 8:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


re vote hacking :
So I guess the solution is that we need to vote twice, and compare the results. Once in the voting booths, once after the fact, and pinkie swear that we say the same thing. And then compare the difference.

(I'm in TX, and every election I've voted in here has been the completely-unverifiable digital vote with no receipt, since 2006. The first time I went into a voting booth, with my mom in 1988-- I'll always remember the billet stylus that satisfyingly punched through the selection on a paper ballot. (this was in Ohio) The fact that it's not that goddamn simple is infuriating.)
posted by rp at 8:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


The tweet was deleted, the account was not. There are copies of the original tweet out there, though, and it's pretty gross.
posted by mochapickle at 8:40 PM on August 29, 2016


He deleted the tweet and apologized after defending it on MSNBC or CNN or something.
“I’m apologizing for the offensive picture,” Burns said. “But I’m not apologizing for the message that it was carrying … I still believe that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party do pander at the black people.”
posted by xyzzy at 8:40 PM on August 29, 2016


/disappointed at lack of Prop 69.

Mark one:
[ ] Yea
[ ] Nay
[ ] Niiiiice.
posted by ctmf at 8:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [10 favorites]


I apparently pointed that out earlier, but apparently I didn't know the difference between the twitter account and the specific tweet. Apparently.
posted by yhbc at 8:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


take it to the supremes -> 4-4 deadlock -> constitutional crisis -> military coup -> war with russia

Christ, is this the longgame for not confirming Garland? I'm never sleeping again, thanks.
posted by corb at 8:41 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Yeah, unfortunately, Bush v. Gore was decided 5-4, so a 4-4 deadlock would not be out of the question.
posted by xyzzy at 8:44 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


He deleted the tweet and apologized after defending it on MSNBC or CNN or something.
And then retweeted the fake Hillary Clinton in blackface photo. Class act, this guy.
posted by dumbland at 8:46 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


In San Francisco, making sense of the local ballot propositions (which are often as numerous as the state ones) is simple: Go through your voter guide, find anything with an argument or a rebuttal by Terence Faulkner or the San Francisco Libertarian Party, and then vote the opposite way.

I for one am a Terence Faulkner superfan. Combined with bourbon on the rocks he makes going through the voter guide bearable. It is hard, however, to decide whether his greatest hit is "VOTE NO ON PROPOSITION J - IT'S JIVE LOGIC!" or the time he referred to the Broderick-Terry duel in an argument against the creation of an Office of Citizen Complaints to investigate police shootings (because Lord knows he couldn't possibly have found any recent, relevant examples to draw on for THAT one).
posted by sunset in snow country at 8:53 PM on August 29, 2016 [11 favorites]


The Democratic caucus has 25 Senate seats up for reelection in 2018, to the Republicans' 8. If they nuke the filibuster, payback could be swift.

But, there's the chance to cement progressive control of SCOTUS for a generation, which could limit the damage of future GOP majorities.
posted by HumuloneRanger at 8:54 PM on August 29, 2016


/disappointed at lack of Prop 69.

We had Prop 69 in 2004. It authorized... ahem, collection of DNA samples... from people arrested for certain crimes (whether convicted or not).

(Terrible proposition, but amusing name/content at least)
posted by thefoxgod at 8:58 PM on August 29, 2016


Go through your voter guide, find anything with an argument or a rebuttal by Terence Faulkner or the San Francisco Libertarian Party, and then vote the opposite way.

Is that your Tim Eyman?
posted by Artw at 9:10 PM on August 29, 2016 [12 favorites]


Josh Marshall again: We're getting the first advance word about what's going to be included in Trump's big immigration policy speech on Wednesday. And it sounds like he's going Full Jeb!, or at a minimum Total Marco. ... It's nonsense on its own terms. But it also means Trump has adopted wholesale the position he won the nomination by ridiculing as "weak". I'm skeptical that this new position even makes it to the Wednesday speech ...
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:15 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


There's still 18 hours, plenty of Internet Time to send out trial balloons.
posted by rhizome at 9:44 PM on August 29, 2016


Well I mean it's not like you have wait until you're at the ballot booth to decide, California even mails out sample ballots and the text of the propositions ahead of time.

The way I do it is to fill out my sample ballot ahead of time, bring it in to the voting booth, and simply copy the sample ballot. After a brief check to make sure the sample ballot matches the election ballot of course.

I am able to vote very quickly that way. Preparing to vote takes rather longer.
posted by Justinian at 9:47 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Please, there might be only one thing, politically, that will make my blood boil more than reading about the Donald's assholery, and that's reading about Tim Eyman's assholery (he lives in my town).
I'm having trouble not envisioning a black hole swallowing Everett tomorrow if the two of them touch.
posted by OHenryPacey at 9:51 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm still sad about Internet Time.
posted by bongo_x at 10:05 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh, speaking of Tim Eyman, in case you missed it, the WA Attorney General has been investigating him for potential violation of state campaign finance laws. Here's a press release from a few weeks ago.

Kind of hoping some state AG's office somewhere is able to & similarly looking into that knockoff Trump PAC scam linked earlier.
posted by cdefgfeadgagfe at 10:05 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


There’s only one way for us to win this

Who is "us"? That's in the post title. *boggles*

I don't follow U.S. presidential politics much (or at all), but Donald Trump seems unelectable. Are "we" sure that the major media outlets (with a VERY vested interest in a close race) aren't pulling "our" chains here?

The best choice is not to look. Ever. If "we" just stopped looking at Donald Trump last year, he would be gone. Every Democratic Party Member who clicks on a Donald Trump story is also partly to blame for this sad sack of shit presidential race.

Those of "us" who know (the betting oddsmakers) and whose fortunes depend on knowing have Clinton at a huge advantage. Clinton has it wrapped unless she has actually ever done anything illegal (or sexual) and it is exposed ... and then whomever the Dems pick to replace Clinton (Biden?) should win easily as well.

Don't waste your time on it (he says futilely).
posted by mrgrimm at 10:10 PM on August 29, 2016


Irony is dead: Trump says that "if QB Colin Kaepernick doesn't like America, he should try to find a better country."

Called it.
posted by msalt at 10:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


this comment has now ruined sundaes for me forever.

There is almost certainly sundae/sprinkle porn

I mean, we could google for it, but that would almost be like insulting the internet, because of course there is
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:13 PM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Tim Eyman has cost us so much taxpayer money on his bullshit initiatives...

Couldn't he just be found guilty of something felonious and sent away?
posted by Windopaene at 10:27 PM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


How many millions of taxpayer money have been wasted by the House on their multiple Benghazi investigations, plus all of their wrangling against Obamacare, etc.

They continually rail against funding basic government operations, then also saddle those operations with the burden of frivolous expenditures.

The cost of government would be a hell of a lot lower if Republicans weren't constantly interfering with running it well.
posted by yesster at 10:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [30 favorites]


Are "we" sure that the major media outlets (with a VERY vested interest in a close race) aren't pulling "our" chains here?

This is the horseracery mentioned above. I think it's the entire system that is pulling our chains. Trump doesn't want to get specific, Hillary will be fine to match him in slow-rolling her details (though she's certainly still producing policy talk), Congress is all "sure I'll answer some hard-hitting questions from US Magazine while evading the need for a Supreme Court Justice," and the media is fine to record the tick-tock and throw in their hot takes while they figure out how to make money on the Internet.
posted by rhizome at 10:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Who is "us"? That's in the post title. *boggles*

It's a Hamilton reference. It's a riff for titles of election threads this season.

> I don't follow U.S. presidential politics much (or at all), but Donald Trump seems unelectable. Are "we" sure that the major media outlets (with a VERY vested interest in a close race) aren't pulling "our" chains here?

The best choice is not to look.


Over the decades, "we" have elected any number of racist/sexist/nationalist demagogues. I would love it if "ignore the trolls" actually worked when it comes to people like that, but when they are white, male, wealthy, and have power, pretending they don't exist is really not an option. Or would you have "us" also pretend that the (many many) people who support people like them also don't exist?

I don't know what the silver bullet is - or if there is one - but silence in response to the kind of rhetoric they produce ain't it.

Also, if your disclaimer is ignorance of the process and you then proceed to give "advice," maybe...refrain from both disclaiming and advice-giving in future.
posted by rtha at 10:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [32 favorites]


Whoever runs the PPP twitter feed is ruthless.

@DrJillStein: The killing of Harambe 3 months ago today reminds us to be a voice for the voiceless.
@ppppolls: Harambe has more support for President than you
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:40 PM on August 29, 2016 [57 favorites]


> There's still 18 hours, plenty of Internet Time to send out trial balloons.

So I had forgotten about Swatch Internet Time. And like at the time I definitely made a lot of fun of Swatch Internet Time. But now, looking at the description? It seems... it seems...

it seems like a good idea.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 10:42 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


Those of "us" who know (the betting oddsmakers) and whose fortunes depend on knowing have Clinton at a huge advantage.
The "oddsmakers" called it for "Remain," right? I think I'll just keep trying to get Clinton elected.
They continually rail against funding basic government operations, then also saddle those operations with the burden of frivolous expenditures.
Like how the Republicans tried to attach measures that would massively defund Obamacare and prevent related funding from going to Planned Parenthood clinics to the Zika bill? Then the Republicans gleefully turned around and said that the first American microcephaly baby picture would feature in every single anti-Democratic political ad because the Democrats don't care about Zika babies.
posted by xyzzy at 10:43 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Jill Stein invoking Harambe is too perfect on the heels of Trump and Dwyane Wade.

Hillary for Meme Queen
posted by rhizome at 10:47 PM on August 29, 2016


After all the horribly racist alt-right bull shit in the last few weeks from Trump. Let's pause and look at this photo of an old white lady getting help from some young black men as she tries to catch Pokemon in Memphis, TN.
posted by humanfont at 11:01 PM on August 29, 2016 [44 favorites]


One of my (many, many) hobbyhorses is the idea that the use of computers should be strongly discouraged in anything connected to elections for any office that gives the officeholder real power. Every part of the process — registration, voting itself, tabulation — should be carried out on media big enough and clear enough to read with the naked eye. Once you start recording voting-related information as electronic charges on chips rather than as big, easily legible marks, you're opening up the possibility for all sorts of shenanigans.

I nearly agree, except I think that tabulation may actually be better computerized, and there are some good use-cases for electronic voting (e.g., voters with certain disabilities). My version of this hobby horse is that as much as possible, votes should be cast on human-readable media, but counted electronically. I think that humans counting ballots actually introduces more opportunities for shenanigans and even simple errors than a computer system. But if questions arise, humans should always be able to recount ballots manually, and audit the voting process for accuracy. (My view on this is strongly influenced by my experience as a scientist dealing with both human and computer systems for quantifying animal behavior, which is subject to similar problems.)

Punch cards and optical scan systems seem like pretty much the idea voting systems to me, and black-box touchscreen systems (which I have voted on for almost every election since I turned 18) are basically the worst system possible. Optical scan systems have the advantage that at least two or three generations of Americans have been basically trained in their proper use for twelve years of schooling, thanks to Scan-Tron multiple choice tests, and so most voters are immediately familiar with their use.

Ideally, human audits of a randomized subset of precincts would be performed as a matter of course, as a two-factor method for confirming that the computerized systems are working properly and haven't been tampered with. If there are shenanigans due to hacked voting machines, these should be able to catch it and trigger a larger-scale manual recount. Also, any computer systems used for voting should be required to be open source code, and each system should be validated by the FEC (not Diebold or any other private company) as running the intended version of the software. (Actually I think this should be true for almost all software used by government.)
posted by biogeo at 11:17 PM on August 29, 2016 [18 favorites]


[A few comments deleted. Cut out the super dumb Harambe/bro slapfight, and seriously, take a break if this is how you think you should be participating here.]
posted by taz at 11:20 PM on August 29, 2016 [7 favorites]


In completely unrelated news, the new Wow expansion goes live tonight and both new faction leaders are more qualified than Trump, even though they're fictional rpg characters.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:26 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump visits Everett, WA tomorrow. Everett is about 30 mins north of Seattle, if traffic is decent. It's also easily accessible via Sound Transit public transit, from downtown Seattle.

They're expecting a packed house, as "Thousands of free tickets have been distributed for the event. In fact, far more are being given out than can fit in the arena. By Sunday, about 13,000 had been reportedly distributed. The maximum capacity inside the arena for Tuesday night's rally will be about 10,000, the arena's general manager said."

Well, *that* sounds like a recipe for success!

(I'm going to Everett to watch the shenanigans. There's also an anti-Trump rally/protest/march scheduled in Everett as well. DumpTheTrump: United Against Hate.)
posted by spinifex23 at 11:28 PM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Protesters are already there: Please, PLZ don't vote Trump PLZ.
posted by spinifex23 at 11:32 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


For Trump's Everett visit there's also a Clinton campaign-associated protest event which is likely to have a few speeches by local Dems then some kind of protest aspect.
posted by R343L at 11:34 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


By Sunday, about 13,000 had been reportedly distributed. The maximum capacity inside the arena for Tuesday night's rally will be about 10,000, the arena's general manager said.

Well sure; gotta keep up the "people being turned away at the doors" narrative.
posted by tzikeh at 11:36 PM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


If you go to Everett, I cannot recommend enough El Paraiso Mexican Grill. I used to live in Everett, and they have a decent sized Latinx community. This is some of the best Mexican food I've had in the entire Puget Sound region. It's at 2801 Colby Ave, and within walking distance to all the Trumpian goings on tomorrow.

It also may not be affected by street closures, like some of the closer places.
posted by spinifex23 at 11:39 PM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


... about 13,000 [free tickets] had been reportedly distributed. The maximum capacity inside the arena for Tuesday night's rally will be about 10,000, the arena's general manager said."

Well, *that* sounds like a recipe for success!


I think if you give out 10k+ free tickets, you should expect that not every single one of them will be used. Is it irresponsible to plan for 25% no-shows? It seems like it could be reasonable.
posted by aubilenon at 12:00 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I tried to read that Mother Jones article (and I'm 200 comments behind, so pardon me if I'm repeating anyone) but I had to stop because I was getting so upset.

The problem with this whole "the government is letting people cut in line" idea is that it's NOT TRUE. Fundamentally untrue. Disability isn't being given to masses of able-bodied people. It's really hard to get. I should know, I'm freaking disabled and can't get approved for benefits, and I can SHOW you a picture of my disability. I also was a case worker for hundreds of severely mentally ill clients and I know how hard it is for them to get benefits. (If you'd like to get approved the same way my clients usually did, enjoy having multiple involuntary hospital stays at your friendly local state psychiatric hospital in a year.)

I don't know where this idea really comes from, because on the ground that's just not what things look like. I had someone complain to me that their cousin gets disability because they have allergies. FUCKING REALLY? YOU BELIEVE THAT?

But ok, let's just accept that the SSA approves people for disability based on nothing but their say-so. So someone who has never worked gets SSI, you know how much that is a month? About $700. $700 a month to live on. Who of these people in trailer parks with their teeth rotting out getting $700 a month are cutting in front of ANYONE? They are BARELY SUBSISTING. They are at the back of the fucking line. Fuck they're not even IN line. Meanwhile welders making $100K a year are complaining about these people.

It's not that there aren't real economic problems in the country. There are. Corporations have spent decades doing everything they possibly can to screw their workers over. But this idea that somehow WELFARE is to blame for the economy's state is just....the biggest con job of all time. This is an idea that has been SOLD to people and they've bought it.

I think I need to take a break from these threads and do something cheerful like shoot a bunch of monsters in a video game.
posted by threeturtles at 12:11 AM on August 30, 2016 [125 favorites]


Join me in Azeroth, threeturtles. The Legion looks terrifying.
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:27 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Hello MetaFilter! I just got back from a day spent phonebanking. I'm an Australian, briefly passing through LA on my way to my brother's wedding in Mexico. Thanks to these threads, I realised there isn't anything I'd rather do during my One Day In America than make some calls for Hillary, meet some nice folks, and contribute (however microscopically) to defeating the racist pile of wet Cheetos.

Some of the people I called were slightly bemused that an Australian was volunteering for the campaign, but all was forgiven as soon as they realised how fun it is to hear an Australian call Donald Trump a fuckwit.

P.S. I've been a lurker here since 2007, and haven't commented since 2011. A lot of people have said that these threads help keep them sane, but I don't know that I can justifiably say the same thing, given that this isn't my country and the saner thing would probably involve being less obsessed with this election in general. But we cannot choose our obsessions, only find comrades with which to share them. Thanks to everyone who contributes to these threads; you are all delights.
posted by Rumpled at 12:28 AM on August 30, 2016 [207 favorites]


Rick Perry is joining Dancing with the Stars so I guess from now on the GOP standard for mounting a future presidential run is starring in a reality TV show. Can't wait to see Chris Christie and Marco Rubio sprinting through Jakarta on The Amazing Race.
posted by PenDevil at 12:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Today is the day when I felt bad about myself because an Australian dude in the country for one day has done more to defeat Donald Trump than I have.
posted by Justinian at 1:31 AM on August 30, 2016 [49 favorites]


They have more experience dealing with venomous creatures.
posted by sebastienbailard at 1:33 AM on August 30, 2016 [95 favorites]


But we cannot choose our obsessions, only find comrades with which to share them.

one of us, one of us
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:37 AM on August 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


re: crowd control and tickets - I guess I was just surprised that venues were allowed to give out ticket amounts that were higher than the occupancy of the building.
posted by spinifex23 at 1:46 AM on August 30, 2016


angry turned-away supporters outside the venue
+ protestors from liberal city near the rally
= bloody media spectacle!
posted by Harvey Kilobit at 2:28 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


That creates its own headache for the people involved because Prop 60 includes a rebuttable presumption that any film without visible condoms was in fact not using condoms and is therefore illegal. Anybody who uses that VFX would be subject to lawsuits where they'd have to prove they really did use condoms and VFX, over and over -- it's an invitation to nuisance suits.

Surely they can just keep the original footage for audit purposes. They could even add it to the DVDs (as a bonus feature or camera angle), just so that they can laugh at the people who phone in the complaints.
posted by acb at 3:52 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Justinian, if you're in the US, the Clinton website makes it super-duper easy to find volunteer opportunities--even from home. Not too late!
posted by Sublimity at 4:22 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah, Justinian, do it!

I've been feeling increasingly burnt out doing the volunteer thing, partly because after a week or two of showing up every day I've been hit with requests to show up virtually every day of the week. I left after two hours on Sunday and got a "Leaving already?" from somebody as I went, which... yeep, probably oughtta look into self–preservation a lil bit.

What I'm saying is, you should let us cheer you on into volunteering, so I can feel better about myself.
posted by rorgy at 4:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


The NYTimes has a piece about the candidates and their debate prep, there's not much new until the article ends with this pithy setup and punchline:
Around the Clinton campaign, the question of whom to cast as Mr. Trump has become something of a running parlor game. Mrs. Clinton’s allies have floated several options: Representative Joseph Crowley of New York, who is from Queens, where Mr. Trump grew up; James Carville, Mr. Clinton’s chief strategist in 1992, who has a gift for lacerating banter; or Mark Cuban, another billionaire businessman. All three are viewed as unafraid to say some humiliating things to Mrs. Clinton’s face, as Mr. Trump may.

At least a few old Clinton hands have suggested enlisting professional entertainers, like Jon Stewart or Alec Baldwin.

Mr. Trump’s search so far seems to be less exhaustive: He said his daughter Ivanka could end up playing Mrs. Clinton.

“Wouldn’t she be great at that?” Mr. Trump asked. “Maybe.”
So one candidate is going through a deliberate process with multiple qualified candidates, and the other candidate is seeking approval for nepotism.
posted by peeedro at 4:57 AM on August 30, 2016 [25 favorites]


I don't know where this idea really comes from, because on the ground that's just not what things look like. I had someone complain to me that their cousin gets disability because they have allergies. FUCKING REALLY? YOU BELIEVE THAT?

I don't know that it matters where it comes from--there are stupid, noxious ideas all over the place--just that when it comes into contact with a certain kind of person it finds a nurturing, welcoming place to take root and grow.

And that isn't a static quality; like it's not necessarily some deep, unchanging truth about that person that makes them feel , deep down, that ideas like that are true (although I suppose it can be). It's that at that moment it speaks to a way they feel, and a way they *want* the world to be, right now, in order to explain...well, something. The uncharitable interpretation is that they like these ideas because they explain what they perceive to be their failures and disappointments in a way that not only relieves them of any personal responsibility, but provides them with a convenient villain to blame -- "those people."

I know we've had discussions about people reacting to changing social norms with bewilderment and then anger, or disconnection -- things are so different now, and so much of their world view has become problematic in ways they don't understand, that they just shut down. But the thing is...that's not really the problem. I discover ways I've been an unintentional asshole with some frequency (thankfully decreasing), and my reaction when that happens isn't to throw up my hands and be like well I don't understand they must be wrong that I've been an asshole to them. It's to go, "oh shit, I have to work on that.

The problem is an unwillingness to face change, to admit mistakes, and to take responsibility for those mistakes and one's ability to adapt to change.

There's always going to be some number of people like that. I mean, what I just described is a lot of work. It's emotional labor. I view it as the ongoing labor you have to do to be a good and responsible person, but I also think it can be pretty emotional labor intensive, depending on where you start from, and people have limited reserves.
posted by schadenfrau at 5:19 AM on August 30, 2016 [29 favorites]


There's always going to be some number of people like that. I mean, what I just described is a lot of work.

This is something I wanted to comment on in the previous thread - doing this work is difficult, and I would argue that it's especially difficult for cis men because masculinity is all about not admitting that you are wrong.

Honestly, it took me quite a lot of internet reading to learn the emotional trick where you talk yourself down from being all "I'm sympathetic but this time [their!!!] complaints have gone too far!!!" And I observe that for different values of "they", this mindset is just as common on the left as on the right - any time a group marginlized in relation to you speaks up for itself, it can be very uncomfortable. I'm not saying I've got it down now, either, just that I can generally recognize and dial back the feeling.

This is why when someone says "I was wrong about [issue] and didn't realize it until [it affected someone I cared about]" I differ from many mefites - I think that's very good actually. For every parent who belted up and joined PFLAG or became an AIDS activist, for instance, there were probably ten who just disowned their kids and/or left them to die. For every person who changes their mind on abortion when their daughter needs one, there's lots who think "well, it's all right for my daughter because she's a good girl, but not for those awful slutty other women". Something affecting you personally doesn't mean that you always take it to heart or change.

This is particularly significant, I think, when the person is generous in their interpretation. Not just "I guess I can accept homosexuality, sort of, because I love my son" but "I was wrong, gay is good, proud parent of...." etc.

I'm not saying that someone who changes their mind deserves a trophy and their name in lights, but I also don't think that dismissing them reflects the choices they generally make.

Perhaps I am biased because it affects me personally - I am actually pretty proud of my dad, for instance, because he has found it in himself to become much more supportive of trans people after a family friend came out (and spontaneously dissed TERFs once I explained what they were) and also, after years of being casually against gay marriage, has changed his mind.

It's a metafilter truisim that people don't really change much, you can't change people, etc. So I actually think that when people do produce a real and measurable change in attitude and behavior, that is significant, no matter what prompts it.
posted by Frowner at 5:33 AM on August 30, 2016 [115 favorites]


So I actually think that when people do produce a real and measurable change in attitude and behavior, that is significant, no matter what prompts it.

People are fond of saying "garbage in, garbage out" without really absorbing the fact that the reverse is also true.
posted by Mooski at 5:52 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Clinton should mock-debate half a dozen different Trumps. Let them do everything they can think of to rattle her.
posted by EarBucket at 5:54 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Clinton should mock-debate half a dozen different Trumps.

My brain just imagined a slew of funhouse mirror trumps. One short and squat, one large and lanky, one just a floating sentient toupee that each embody the six aspects of his personality.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 6:02 AM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


I'm almost hesitant to post this because the interesting part isn't "but Colin Powell did it too!" but rather it's pretty telling how the idea that Clinton is guilty of something shapes the media's coverage both in the topics they choose to pursue to the context their stories are presented in: Colin Powell’s foundation and Hillary Clinton’s are treated very differently by the media.
posted by peeedro at 6:09 AM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


...doing this work is difficult, and I would argue that it's especially difficult for cis men because masculinity is all about not admitting that you are wrong.

This is even more true when you realize many of these people do not read at all. I mean they are capable of it, but don't read anything much beyond phone texts or facebook quips. They don't have a clue how to engage with alternative forms of information since no one they know of does that and it would require a whole new set of learning skills they've never developed. (This isn't that far off from some of the different conspiracy beliefs in minority communities in some regards, when there is a gulf in information processing.)

These kinds of people believe strange things because they are hearing it from people they have a trusting relationship of sorts with, people they know first hand basically. All the rest is noise since they have no good way to tell truth from fiction to a large extent since they haven't developed critical skills required to do so.

That doesn't make it all right, but it does require some level of understanding and engagement to combat should we wish for a better society.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:14 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


> How is CNN the last to know about this?

Me: About what?
*scrolls up*
Me: Russian hackers??
*scrolls up*
Me: Bowser?!
*scrolls up*
Me: Ah, here it is: Cory Lewand...smh.
posted by Room 641-A at 6:14 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]




I mean, the rise of ISIS didn't happen in a vacuum. Now, these are genuinely, insanely awful people, but that's a selling point for them. Because they position themselves as being at war with something worse -- the west -- and when you're at war with the best, it helps to present yourself as being the worst thing ever. The Nazis didn't shy away from imagery that made them terrifying, even though it made them look like baddies. And we're over here telling Muslims that they don't have a place here, which doesn't give them much choice.
posted by maxsparber
this is from a ways upthread, but i'm kind of at a loss here. what exactly does this say? muslims are forced to join isis because trump says offensive things?
posted by p3on at 6:24 AM on August 30, 2016


After all the horribly racist alt-right bull shit in the last few weeks from Trump. Let's pause and look at this photo of an old white lady getting help from some young black men as she tries to catch Pokemon in Memphis, TN.

[to self] Don't read the comments. Don't read the comments. Dammit, I read the comments.

Can't wait to see Chris Christie and Marco Rubio sprinting through Jakarta on The Amazing Race.

Thank you. Now I can't get the image of Christie sprinting - in the tropics - out of my head.
posted by zakur at 6:24 AM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Thank you for that fantastic comment, Frowner. You've articulated so well something I've been struggling for years: A way to push back against... I guess I'll call it excessive self-righteousness on the progressive side of the fence. No, Uncle Herbert [1] does not “deserve a cookie” for, say, realizing that his decades-long unexamined racist assumptions were wrong. But Uncle Herbert very much does not deserve being viciously scorned for not having come to the realization earlier, nor still being lumped together with the thousands who have not come to the same realization and would actively double down on their bigotry if that realization became a possibility for them.

(Of course there's the question of Uncle Herbert's actions during the time of his previous beliefs and how much active harm they caused, and what, if anything, he's doing to make amends; and nothing is ever that straightforward; but at the end of the day Uncle Herbert isn't one of the Racist Sexist Uncles on Facebook Brigade [2] anymore, and that should make a difference.)

[1] With apologies to Actual Uncle Herberts and nephews/nieces of Actual Uncle Herberts.
[2] We'd come up with an acronym for this last thread, but I can't for the life of me remember it, or even what to search for...

posted by seyirci at 6:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


I guess I was just surprised that venues were allowed to give out ticket amounts that were higher than the occupancy of the building.

This is fairly standard for big political rallies. I can't find a news article to back me up, but when Obama came to Portland two years ago to campaign for the (failed gubernatorial) Mike Michaud campaign, there was a lot of grousing because people had tickets but ended up outside anyhow.
posted by anastasiav at 6:26 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


The "ticketing" for free events is at best just a way for organizers to get an approximate head-count/know in advance that they have woefully overestimated interest in the event, and more realistically just a way to drive clicks and engagement in the event. It's completely meaningless.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:32 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wouldn't "ticketing" also be an easy-peasy way for the campaign to collect people's contact info for fund raising or get out the vote drives?
posted by peeedro at 6:38 AM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


This is particularly significant, I think, when the person is generous in their interpretation. Not just "I guess I can accept homosexuality, sort of, because I love my son" but "I was wrong, gay is good, proud parent of...." etc

I think you may have missed the point that this is a qualitatively different thing from the "the only good abortion is my abortion" mindset because it requires that openness and willingness to do work and admit to having been wrong.
posted by schadenfrau at 6:45 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


WSJ: Donald Trump’s New Ad Reflects Uncertainty in Tax Plan
Besides deep tax cuts, what’s in Donald Trump’s tax plan? Mr. Trump hasn’t filled in all the details, and his own campaign ads don’t seem to know.

The Republican candidate released a 30-second spot on Monday that touts his proposed tax cuts and their economic benefits. But the footnotes in the ad cite Mr. Trump’s 2015 tax proposal, which he revised and left incomplete this month, along with a House Republican tax plan that he hasn’t fully embraced.
This is what happens when you don't bother with solid policy-- you wing it and then you have to keep winging it, changing whatever, whenever you like. I'm not sure why they bothered spending $10 million to run an ad that touts an economic plan that is so blurry but I guess they have nothing else positive to say. I wonder if this ad was test driven? Maybe it is based on "feelings" versus "facts."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:49 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump's opening speaker calls on Sanders to convert to Christianity

even if he did, he'd probably just convert back after the election
posted by ryanrs at 6:51 AM on August 30, 2016 [62 favorites]


Trump came up here to Burlington during the primaries. Presumably to try to stir up sh*t with Bernie supporters, because there is no other way Vermont could be considered in any way relevant. Our local venue (where I volunteer as an usher) is the Flynn Theater and only has a bit over 1,400 seats. Tickets were available and free.

Predictably, the first I heard of it was all my liberal friends 'snatching' up tickets to deny Trump a crowd. As noted above, the campaign didn't limit tickets. My understanding is that they electronically issued about 7,000 tickets. They did turn away obvious protesters/Bernie supporters, too-hippy or goth looking folks at the door, but mostly the Trump supporters stayed on their side of the street in line and pretty much all got inside and the protestors (under 1,000?) stayed on the other side of the street and felt very good about themselves for sending whatever message they had clearly sent. (There were a lot of political views on display on the protest-Trump side, most of which I mostly support.)

So, in the end, of the tickets issued, only about 1/3 even showed up at the venue. Again, this is Vermont and probably an extreme case of this, but I'd expect pretty par for the course.
posted by meinvt at 6:52 AM on August 30, 2016


Today there are Primaries in Florida and Arizona. John McCain, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Marco Rubio are fending off challengers.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:54 AM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


No, Uncle Herbert [1] does not “deserve a cookie” for, say, realizing that his decades-long unexamined racist assumptions were wrong.

I mean, so much of how one responds to Uncle Herbert (and almost all of us will be Uncle Herberts about something) is about manners and appropriateness. It would be bad manners and inappropriate to expect that Uncle Herbert gets centered and treated better than actual marginalized people, or that marginalized people need to be extra nice to him, or that the Story of Uncle Herbert should eclipse actual stories of the people in question, or that he gets a pass on anything rude or wrong that he says. It would be rude and wrong to expect that people who were hurt by Uncle Herbert's previous wrongness should just forget about it and be best buddies like nothing happened.

But people who actually know Uncle Herbert personally are allowed to feel good about how he's changed, and IMO people shouldn't respond to the mere fact of "Uncle Herbert used to have a bad idea but he changed" with "well, fuck him, does he want a cookie". I think UH has to actually want a cookie before people get mad at him for wanting one, for one thing.

For another - look, when I'm talking to my dad about trans stuff, I positively reinforce. I am all about, "gee, it's so great that you've been supportive to Clelia, some of her friends have been such jerks" and "not everyone understands why TERFs are so wrong, unlike you!". I don't expect other trans people to dole out the delicious cookies of approval, but because he's my dad and I know him, I will provide cookies.

For a third: my dad isn't doing nothing but the bare minimum - every day when he's supportive, he's bucking the trend in his conservative town. I live around a bunch of groovy gender radicals of various kinds - it's easy for me to say "yes, I support sex workers" and "asexuality is a thing, actually" and so on. My dad lives in Trumpland.

The difficulty of changing your views depends a lot on who you are and where you live.

I guess I'd say that how we treat people who change their minds depends on the setting and the social relationships, basically.
posted by Frowner at 6:55 AM on August 30, 2016 [89 favorites]


It occurs to me that it must be much harder work now to reexamine and reject your previous beliefs as wrong because of social media. Like, I have had some dumbass beliefs in my time. And the people that I expressed those beliefs to I could probably count on one hand, there is no permanent record of it, and I don't have any contact with those people any more anyway (I unfacebook). But if you've spent 5 years on Facebook shitposting about gay people to your friends list of 100 people, it's a lot harder to be like, "Whoops actually guys I was totally wrong about that one, my bad." No one wants to be wrong in front of that many people.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:56 AM on August 30, 2016 [32 favorites]


Chris Cousins: LePage on his 2nd term: "I'm not going say I'm going to finish it; I'm not going to say I am not going to finish it."

Well allrighty then. That clears things up.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:00 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


What will be interesting is what configuration Xfinity Arena is in this evening. See, you can set the stage up in back and use all 10,000 seats (including 2,000 on the floor). Or... you can set it up roughly at center ice and have around 6,000 seats.

Now, given Trump's appeal in the northwest part of the state, I think they can mostly fill the 10,000 seats, but if you really wanted to make it full, you'd use the smaller config and turn a few thousand away. The Everett press would notice, but no one else will.
posted by dw at 7:01 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Maybe LePage thinks he might not finish his 2nd term because D. Trump has said
"I’ll tell you what. I don’t know that he would want that but he is a very talented guy, he is also a great person, a tremendous person and if he were available I would certainly find something for Paul because he’s done a great job up here, he’s not only popular, he’s done an unbelievable job so I would certainly say that he would be a candidate."
So maybe LePage dreams of being Secretary of the Interior?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:06 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Maybe it is based on "feelings" versus "facts."

This pretty much summarizes his entire campaign, right?

Anyone that's still ardently backing him at this point has convinced themselves that their feelings are basically as good as facts, so it doesn't matter if Trump switches his immigration plan 4 times in one week. As long as they feel like he's their guy that's enough to satisfy whatever political decision-making machinery they have left.

The wanton disregard for facts from his camp (and the media's failure to excoriate them for it) is rage-inducing.
posted by strange chain at 7:07 AM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


So maybe LePage dreams of being Secretary of the Interior?

We're talking about Paul LePage here. He probably dreams of being a fire truck.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:23 AM on August 30, 2016 [33 favorites]


WaPo: ‘Trump Revealed’: The reporting archive
The Post is making public today a sizable portion of the raw reporting used in the development of “Trump Revealed,” a biography of the Republican presidential nominee published August 23 by Scribner. Drawn from the work of more than two dozen Post journalists, the archive contains 397 documents, comprising thousands of pages of interview transcripts, court filings, financial reports, immigration records and other material. Interviews conducted off the record were removed, as was other material The Post did not have the right to publish. The archive is searchable and navigable in a number of ways. It is meant as a resource for other journalists and a trove to explore for our many readers fascinated by original documents.
The 397 documents can be filtered in a number of different ways such as "Fred Trump" and "Aberdeen Golf Course."

I am just skimming the "State of New Jersey Casino Control Commission 4/15/91 to 4/18/91. Report on the Financial Position of Donald J. Trump" On the last page his total assets are listed at $3.6 Billion and his total liabilities are listed at $3.4 Billion. The conclusion that the report reaches is that Trump has not provided clear and convincing evidence of his financial stability which he needs to do in order to renew his Taj Mahal casino license.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:24 AM on August 30, 2016 [42 favorites]


Today there are Primaries in Florida and Arizona. John McCain, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, and Marco Rubio are fending off challengers.

I hope McCain wins and then having fended off the challenge, he turns against Trump, but I'm not counting on it.

It would be such good popcorn to see Rubio lose his Senate seat.

(Indifferent to DWS. The focus should be shaving off GOP house seats, but primary challenges are good to keep long serving congresscritters on their toes)
posted by dis_integration at 7:24 AM on August 30, 2016


Mock debates - they should definitely get Melissa McCarthy to play Trump. Oh yes, she could go there. And well beyond.

*said in admiration*
posted by glasseyes at 7:24 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


Rick Perry is joining Dancing with the Stars so I guess from now on the GOP standard for mounting a future presidential run is starring in a reality TV show. Can't wait to see Chris Christie and Marco Rubio sprinting through Jakarta on The Amazing Race.

Join Chris Christie this week on "Taverns, Truckstops, and Tollbooths!"
posted by flarbuse at 7:27 AM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Trump African-American Numbers Abysmal: Poll | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC

African Americans hold bubonic plague in better esteem. [real]
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:29 AM on August 30, 2016 [21 favorites]


From yesterday morning's Politics in the News on NPR (now with a transcript):
GOLDBERG: ... I don't think [Donnie is] a devotee of this sort of hardcore racist, alt-right crowd. I think he just thinks a lot of his supporters are, and so he wants to play footsie with them, which is almost as bad.
Way to tap-dance around calling him a racist for pandering to racists. He's not flirting with hardcore racists, he's blowing their dogwhistles.

[And I'll call myself on it: PHRASING!]

The coverage of Hillary:
MONTAGNE: Well, let's turn to Hillary Clinton and - what else? - emails. Last week, a judge ordered the State Department to release more of them. And if there is indeed smoke but no fire, Cokie, as Donna Brazile just suggested, what will the effect be?

ROBERTS: I think just more of the same unless there's some, you know, really outrageous thing in there, which I suspect we would have seen by now, since the FBI has gone through these emails and said there's no basis for a charge. But it just adds to this sense of her as somebody who's untrustworthy. And those numbers keep going up, not down. And, you know, it is this troubling sense of both paranoia about the media and her opposition and entitlement. And people don't like that.
UGH! Listen, NPR: you're just as much a member of the media as other outlets. So by covering - what else? - Hillary's email non-scandal, you're feeding into the feelings of distrust. I get it, she really doesn't have any story the same level of Donny's flip-flop-flub on immigration, so you have to latch onto something, and this piece is specifically news commentary, which limits what you can say. Then why not do some more unique reporting in the rest of your program?

Instead, we hear more from Donnie's loyalists, including a nice seeming lady who supports him but only listens "to half of what Trump says." To which I say, if you only listen to half of what he says, why not find someone who doesn't disgust you 50% of the time.
posted by filthy light thief at 7:44 AM on August 30, 2016 [20 favorites]


Trump's opening speaker calls on Sanders to convert to Christianity

Yeah, that happened during the primaries.

Mark Burns: "Listen, Bernie got to get saved, he got to meet Jesus. I don't know, he got to have a coming of Jesus meeting."

Ironically, Bernie Sanders' life and career exemplifies Jesus' teachings far more than Trump's.

Or apparently Pastor Burns.
posted by zarq at 7:46 AM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


If they nuke the filibuster, payback could be swift.

Good thing the electorate, generally speaking, could give a shit about procedure.
posted by PMdixon at 7:53 AM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Of all the goofball black preachers they could have trotted out as obvious suckers but also sheisters themselves, I guess I didn't expect one this goofy.
posted by cashman at 7:55 AM on August 30, 2016


Of all the goofball black preachers they could have trotted out as obvious suckers but also sheisters themselves, I guess I didn't expect one this goofy.

The ones who are good at it know that most of their audience is made up of Democrats who are never going to vote for a Republican. To coin a phrase, Democrats buy shoes too.
posted by Etrigan at 8:00 AM on August 30, 2016


If they nuke the filibuster, payback could be swift.

Good thing the electorate, generally speaking, could give a shit about procedure.
posted by PMdixon at 7:53 AM on August 30 [+] [!]


SERIOUSLY. After the last gajillion years of Congress not doing their jobs *on purpose*, you could do away with the pretension to deliberation in the Senate entirely, get a bunch of shit done, and then just point to that record. "Democrats do the job."

No one outside of the political junkie sphere gives a flying fuck about Senate tradition.
posted by schadenfrau at 8:00 AM on August 30, 2016 [22 favorites]


No one outside of the political junkie sphere gives a flying fuck about Senate tradition.

You don't mind if I put this on a t-shirt, do you?
posted by Mooski at 8:09 AM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


you wing it and then you have to keep winging it, changing whatever, whenever you like

...and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!
posted by kirkaracha at 8:12 AM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


The ones who are good at it know that most of their audience is made up of Democrats who are never going to vote for a Republican. To coin a phrase, Democrats buy shoes too.

I don't understand what you're saying here, but I don't understand why you drafted Kwame either.

Unrelated, I just learned that there's a senior advisor for the Trump campaign named Sarah Huckabee Sanders. Okay seriously, who's making this stuff up? This is all some kind of Truman show thing we're living through.
posted by cashman at 8:13 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


there's a senior advisor for the Trump campaign named Sarah Huckabee Sanders

That's just lazy writing.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:16 AM on August 30, 2016 [47 favorites]


There are treatments for bubonic plague.
posted by srboisvert at 8:16 AM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the daughter of former-AZ governor Mike Huckabee.
posted by zarq at 8:17 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


African Americans hold bubonic plague in better esteem. [real]

Bubonic plague outbreaks often raised the wages for surviving workers in affected European countries. Trump has no such record of success.
posted by jaduncan at 8:18 AM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]


Sarah worked on Huckabee's campaign, and then switched to Trump's.
posted by zarq at 8:19 AM on August 30, 2016


Switching gears again, does anyone know when the moderator(s) for the debates will be announced?
posted by cashman at 8:21 AM on August 30, 2016


We're talking about Paul LePage here. He probably dreams of being a fire truck.

Because I live in Maine, we've all been discussing that radio interview all morning. I want to be clear up front that I think LePage is a terrible, terrible Governor and I'm embarrassed to have him representing my state.

That being said, Paul LePage is a land of contrasts. He survived an absolutely horrific, abusive childhood, and was a homeless teen. He had trouble getting into college because his first language was French and his English was poor until he was an adult.

I honestly, sincerely believe that LePage is a man who wants to do the right thing, but his childhood left him without a framework for healthy ways to deal with conflict, so we end up with this. His formative experience was as one of eighteen (yes really) children growing up in extreme poverty and abuse. In those kinds of situations, either the kids work together or its every kid for himself, and by all accounts this was an "every kid for himself" situation. He's stuck inside the cycle of abuse, and continues to perpetuate it because he just doesn't have the emotional tools to break out. He is the embodiment of the Republican "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" story, and (despite the fact that he alone of his surviving siblings managed to get out and build something of a middle class life for himself) can't understand why others can't do the same.

I'm not saying that he's fit to be Governor. He's an embarrassment, he doesn't have the right professional tools to do the job, and I pray he resigns, but there is more to his story than just "ignorant racist is ignorant." I have a tremendous amount of compassion for him and the very real pain I suspect drives pretty much his every action.

What really struck me in that radio interview is how sincerely contrite he sounds -- something we have not heard from him previously. There has been a longstanding rumor that he, like his father, drinks heavily (I have never met him, so I have no idea if this is truth or slander), and the public behavior you see does fit that pattern. With any luck, this will be a "rock bottom" moment for him, and will inspire him to -- somehow -- find within himself the courage to admit that he needs help, and the strength to go through the process of getting that help.
posted by anastasiav at 8:24 AM on August 30, 2016 [132 favorites]


Trump in everett: I live near everett, and I got out of town yesterday for a couple of weeks, purely coincidentally. This atheist is rethinking the existence of a benevolent diety.
posted by maxwelton at 8:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


anastasiav - thank you so much for that backstory. I did not know that and I know what kind of pain that kind of childhood can create. Thank you for creating a little space for compassion in his story. I'll be honest, I didn't have a shred of it previously.
posted by Sophie1 at 8:32 AM on August 30, 2016 [45 favorites]


Switching gears again, does anyone know when the moderator(s) for the debates will be announced?

They were originally planned to be announced in 'late summer 2016,' but, per CNN, that's been unofficially pushed back until 'after Labor Day,' with no firm date yet (officially) set for the announcement.
posted by cjelli at 8:33 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


anastasiav - thank you so much for that backstory. I did not know that [...]

Seconding that.
posted by LobsterMitten at 8:33 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Thank you cjelli!
posted by cashman at 8:37 AM on August 30, 2016


Nthing Sophie1. Thank you, anastasiav. I never thought I'd feel any compassion for Paul LePage.
posted by zarq at 8:39 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


there is more to his story than just "ignorant racist is ignorant." I have a tremendous amount of compassion for him and the very real pain I suspect drives pretty much his every action.

I tend to find almost all cases of belligerent racism are built on childhood traumas; I don't think he's unique in this way.
posted by Miko at 8:54 AM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


I never thought I'd feel any compassion for Paul LePage.

From the "Even a stopped clock" files: Pretty much every progressive in Maine has extensive praise for LePage's work on domestic violence issues. Last year, he gave a program-changing $50,000 gift to a wonderful Teen Center that works hard to combat the very same issues that he faced as a child, and then spent hours with the kids there, talking with them personally and candidly about his own story and their lives, and letting them know that their future is theirs for the taking.

So, when you're wondering how 48% of Mainers could vote for him, this is why. He gets some things so right and then so many other things so very, very, VERY wrong.

PS: That same Teen Center ended up canceling his upcoming controversial post-voicemail town meeting because they couldn't withstand the impact of the media circus that would come with it, and they're taking some blow back for it. If you're inclined to break the cycle, throw them a few bucks. They'll put it to good use.
posted by anastasiav at 8:57 AM on August 30, 2016 [39 favorites]


Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the daughter of former-AZ governor Mike Huckabee.

Er (not to nitpick, but) that's former-AR governor Mike Huckabee.

Imagining Huckabee as gov of Arizona rather than Arkansas was just making my brain completely explode--can't exactly explain why. Both AZ and AR definitely have their share of nuts, but they are each a very distinct form of nut.

Huckabee is very definitely in the mold of an AR-nut, and just as definitely not AZ. Probably at least 90% of this is Southern U.S. vs Western U.S. thing, and Huckabee is very definitely Southern.

posted by flug at 9:02 AM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


You can listen to the LePage radio interview here.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:03 AM on August 30, 2016


Who of these people in trailer parks with their teeth rotting out getting $700 a month are cutting in front of ANYONE? They are BARELY SUBSISTING.

That taps into the "secret welfare system" narrative that Atrios among others has discussed, epitomised by Craig T. Nelson's "I've been on food stamps and welfare, did anyone help me out? No."

I found the MoJo article interesting because of how it focused on the difference between the person at the heart of the narrative -- a Tea Party true believer -- and the people attracted to Trump who essentially want a more expansive welfare state that is defined by excluding minorities and rewarding white people for their whiteness. It's a kind of travesty reparations argument -- "we'll take demographic change, but at a price" -- but at its core is a subconscious understanding of how America has always had generous forms of white-people welfare.
posted by holgate at 9:12 AM on August 30, 2016


Trump’s strategy has shifted to sabotaging Clinton’s eventual presidency

This is why Ryan/McConnell et al will never walk away, even a complete Trump wipeout works towards their goal for the next 2-4 years, which continues to be complete obstruction if not outright destruction of a Clinton presidency and functioning federal government.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:13 AM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

I thought press conferences were to discuss news breaking events like, someone resigning, a plane goes missing, a bombing of a government place etc... And by that logic, as far as I can tell the reason Trump has so many is because his campaign is a dumpster fire with shit happening all the time that he has to explain. Hillary, not so much because she's just you know, running a campaign.

Is the media expecting her to have a press conference to just take random questions from the audience? Why is it a bad thing Trump has had 17 and she hasn't had one? And do people (that aren't Trump fans) actually care about this?
posted by like_neon at 9:19 AM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm not saying that he's fit to be Governor. He's an embarrassment, he doesn't have the right professional tools to do the job, and I pray he resigns, but there is more to his story than just "ignorant racist is ignorant." I have a tremendous amount of compassion for him and the very real pain I suspect drives pretty much his every action.

Without wanting to be too combative about this, the most I'll give you in this direction is that it would be cruel and churlish to make fun of him if he were just some guy on his porch or were the produce manager at your local supermarket. But he isn't. It would be cruel and churlish to make fun of him if his past had led him into a series of bad decisions that were trapping him in a dead-end life whose indignities fed another cycle of bitterness, anger, and self-defeat. But that's not where he is.

So, when you're wondering how 48% of Mainers could vote for him, this is why.

I really doubt that there are very many people who reluctantly support him because domestic violence is such an important issue for them. As in, I would be surprised if there were more than 100 adults in Maine for whom that were true. Just like very few people reluctantly voted for Rob Ford because children's physical fitness was so important to them and very few people will reluctantly vote for Trump because... shit, I don't even know what his "positive thing in spite of himself" thing is, but surely there's something.

Instead, I would put money that 48% of Mainers voted for him because they like that he's a violent, combative ignoramus whose antics are sort of entertaining if it's not your ox getting gored, just like Ford and Trump and Arpaio and so many others. Something seems to have gone wrong with conservatism more or less globally. This is a sad and terrible thing, and I wish we had reasonable and serious-minded conservatives back as an honorable opponent.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:19 AM on August 30, 2016 [21 favorites]


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

If she does press conferences and reporters keep asking her bullshit questions about why nobody likes her, maybe eventually one of those reporters will get to be the person who made Hillary Clinton cry on camera.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:20 AM on August 30, 2016 [39 favorites]


Welcome back, Rumpled!
posted by languagehat at 9:22 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

Press conferences are the only time when presidential beat reporters get to be on TV. They like to be on TV.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


Surrogate Confirms Donald Trump ‘Will Build A Wall’ | MSNBC

Manages to slip in a blackface reference.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 9:26 AM on August 30, 2016


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

Keepin It 1600 covered this last week. Their view is that press conferences are more about the journalist asking the question than the question itself or the answer the candidate gives. It's an opportunity for individual journos to get on camera and be seen asking a question. So, journalists like them because it gives them a rare opportunity to be seen doing their job and looking like a badass confronting a powerful person with a deep question. But really as far as actually getting real information out of candidates, the one-on-one face-to-face interview with a single journalist is far, far superior.
posted by soren_lorensen at 9:26 AM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


Or what T.D. Strange said.
posted by soren_lorensen at 9:27 AM on August 30, 2016


Instead, I would put money that 48% of Mainers voted for him because they like that he's a violent, combative ignoramus whose antics are sort of entertaining

Well, I live here, and vote here, and volunteer in politics here, and I'd say it was a mix. Are some of his supporters Tea Party "burn it all down" racists? Sure. But a lot of the others are people who just see a reflection of their own lives in him and the things he says. I mean, I'm SURE there are people who voted for LePage in 2010 because Mike Michaud is gay and they "didn't want to condone that" but that isn't the whole story by a longshot.

In the article I linked above, LePage talks about how his own experiences in having his siblings think of him as "the Bank of America" have affected his view of what public assistance should look like:

“In generational poverty there is a mind-set that everyone wants to get what everyone else has as quick as possible. … So what they do, the minute they get a few bucks, they go buy a smartphone or they go buy something of status, and that stereo was an item of status,” LePage said. “If you help without tough love, they’re going to take advantage. And it’s my family. I’m not trying to be a ding-a-ling and be tough on people. I’m trying to do it the right way, because if you don’t do it the right way, and I have 50 years’ experience, it won’t work.”

In my experience, this resonates with a lot of rural Mainers who have lived this exact experience. They are the one kid in the family who made it out of poverty, and now are living with a constant pressure to provide for everyone who didn't make it out. That resonates. His entire story resonates with people living in rural, generational poverty. And so they voted for him, because they see their own stories reflected in him -- both in his successes and in his gaffes. You see them in the comments section even today "Well, he's trying" they say. Because that's what they see.

I think he's dead wrong, and they are dead wrong, but I understand how we got here.
posted by anastasiav at 9:39 AM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]


as far as I can tell the reason Trump has so many is because his campaign is a dumpster fire with shit happening all the time that he has to explain.

He has so many because he's a grotesque circus act / insult comic.

Basic test for journos who want a Clinton press conference: what would your question be? And no, you're not tipping off the candidate by letting us know: if it's that magnificent, then it'll survive a sneak preview.
posted by holgate at 9:41 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


James West: Former Models for Donald Trump's Agency Say They Violated Immigration Rules and Worked Illegally
Each of the three former Trump models said she arrived in New York with dreams of making it big in one of the world's most competitive fashion markets. But without work visas, they lived in constant fear of getting caught. "I was pretty on edge most of the time I was there," Anna said of the three months in 2009 she spent in New York working for Trump's agency.

"I was there illegally," she said. "A sitting duck."

According to three immigration lawyers consulted by Mother Jones, even unpaid employment is against the law for foreign nationals who do not have a work visa. "If the US company is benefiting from that person, that's work," explained Anastasia Tonello, global head of the US immigration team at Laura Devine Attorneys in New York. These rules for immigrants are in place to "protect them from being exploited," she said. "That US company shouldn't be making money off you."

Two of the former Trump models said Trump's agency encouraged them to deceive customs officials about why they were visiting the United States and told them to lie on customs forms about where they intended to live. Anna said she received a specific instruction from a Trump agency representative: "If they ask you any questions, you're just here for meetings."
posted by zombieflanders at 9:41 AM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


More or less by definition, the proportion of people who are the one in their extended family that made it out of poverty can only be a small minority.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I enjoy examples of the Clinton campaign's ruthless competence, such as that evinced in the NYT debate prep article that was linked above:
They contacted Tony Schwartz, the “Art of the Deal” co-author, to give them advice about Mr. Trump this summer — even though Mr. Schwartz’s 18-month immersion in Mr. Trump’s life and homes ended in the mid-1980s. But Clinton advisers said Mr. Schwartz and other writers who had observed Mr. Trump up close, as well as unnamed psychology experts they had spoken to, were critical to understanding how to get under Mr. Trump’s skin.

These Clinton advisers agree with Mr. Trump’s belief that the debate will not be remembered as pitting a policy expert against a Washington outsider. Instead, her campaign is preparing ways for her to unnerve Mr. Trump and provoke him to rant and rave.

The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman, and those are the areas they are working with Mrs. Clinton to target. [emphasis added]
posted by palindromic at 9:44 AM on August 30, 2016 [52 favorites]


Each of the three former Trump models said she arrived in New York with dreams of making it big in one of the world's most competitive fashion markets. But without work visas, they lived in constant fear of getting caught.

Annnnnd we're halfway to human trafficking, if not there already.
posted by Artw at 9:45 AM on August 30, 2016 [22 favorites]


No, Uncle Herbert [1] does not “deserve a cookie” for, say, realizing that his decades-long unexamined racist assumptions were wrong.

For me it comes down to the fact that, in some cases, being right and being effective are mutually exclusive. Uncle Herbert doesn't deserve a cookie but if giving him one will cement that change in his heart while scorn for his past misdeeds or other, current, offensive views will walk that change back, you better believe that I'll give out those cookies and encourage continued development.

I don't really even care if the change is internal. If all I accomplish by giving Uncle Herbert his cookie is that he no longer says or supports racist things, even if he still thinks them, give him the damn cookie. Less racism in the world is always good and it should always be encouraged.
posted by VTX at 9:47 AM on August 30, 2016 [40 favorites]


Everybody deserves a cookie.
posted by maxsparber at 9:47 AM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


"made it out" is a relative term, though. Maybe they have a steady job and their siblings don't. Maybe they own a mobile home and their parents still rent. Again, my point is this: there is a lot more to the story than "terrible racist Mainers elect ignorant racist Governor."

People like LePage don't get elected in a vacuum. If we're more open about the reasons people might agree with LePage, then we'll go a lot farther in defeating people like him in the future.
posted by anastasiav at 9:48 AM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Everyone needs a hug.
posted by Sophie1 at 9:50 AM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


Everybody deserves a cookie.

Guaranteed minimum cookies
posted by beerperson at 9:51 AM on August 30, 2016 [54 favorites]


These Clinton advisers agree with Mr. Trump’s belief that the debate will not be remembered as pitting a policy expert against a Washington outsider. Instead, her campaign is preparing ways for her to unnerve Mr. Trump and provoke him to rant and rave.

yessssssssss

WRECK HIM.
posted by yasaman at 9:56 AM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


cookies from each according to their ability, cookies to each according to their need.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:58 AM on August 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


>> Everybody deserves a cookie.
> Guaranteed minimum cookies.

Universal Basic Cookie Jar.
posted by RedOrGreen at 9:59 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


For me it comes down to the fact that, in some cases, being right and being effective are mutually exclusive.

This sounds pretty closely related to the advice Tim Kaine attributed to his mom: if you want to be right, be a pessimist, if you want to do right, be an optimist.
posted by wildblueyonder at 9:59 AM on August 30, 2016 [31 favorites]


Again, my point is this: there is a lot more to the story than "terrible racist Mainers elect ignorant racist Governor."

Okay, but I don't know who you're arguing against because nobody in this thread has said that.

"made it out" is a relative term, though.

Sure, but the only way you can be the one in your extended family that did anything is that the other people in your extended family didn't. Which necessarily implies that you cannot be part of more than a small minority, because the number of people in an extended family is far more than 1.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:01 AM on August 30, 2016


A cookie in every jar and a cupcake in every lunchbox.
posted by downtohisturtles at 10:01 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


I don't know who you're arguing against because nobody in this thread has said that.

Ok, that's fair.

Honestly, I'm arguing against all the people I've seen over the last few days who judge the entire state by this, and seem to assume that because we have a super high percentage of white people living here we're somehow all racist trolls. I'm getting sick of that.
posted by anastasiav at 10:04 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

I thought press conferences were to discuss news breaking events like, someone resigning, a plane goes missing, a bombing of a government place etc...


Etc. includes seeing an interesting butterfly, eating a very good sandwich, or being disappointed that it is 2:00 already, at least if you're former mayor Pamela Winchell.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:05 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


We got two chickens in every garage.
In my country the medium IS the massage!

The Tubes
Proud to Be an American
posted by BentFranklin at 10:05 AM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


This WaPo article provides the perspective of the creator of the cartoon portraying Sec. Clinton in blackface. About all I can say is that it's a viewpoint. He sounds as though he's rationalizing at this point.
posted by Silverstone at 10:07 AM on August 30, 2016


In other news: Meg Whitman, a Republican who had backed Chris Christie for president during the primaries, will take to the hustings in Denver today to campaign for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. (Fortune, 8/30/2016)

Whitman will meet with Colorado business leaders for breakfast at the Crawford Hotel to discuss Clinton’s jobs plan, which includes investing in technology companies and helping small businesses succeed. (Denver Post, 8/29/2016)
Whitman ran unsuccessfully for governor of California in 2010 and was a finance co-chairwoman for Mitt Romney’s presidential run in 2012. Like Romney, she has been one of Trump’s chief critics within his own party, likening him to a fascist who lacks the temperament to be president.

Clinton rolled out her jobs plan during with a speech in Denver on Aug. 3.

“Her vision for an America that is stronger together and her plans to create jobs and help businesses succeed comes as Trump continues to avoid discussing his long record of bankruptcies, failed businesses, and unpaid contractors,” the Clinton campaign stated Monday.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:09 AM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


The Toronto Star: Philadelphia’s black voters outraged by Donald Trump’s ‘outreach’
PHILADELPHIA—Donald Trump says “inner-city” African-Americans will vote for him because of how miserable their lives and neighbourhoods are. The African-Americans of North Philadelphia say Donald Trump is an ignorant bigot.

Trump’s campaign has described his recent rhetoric about black people as outreach. With actual black people, it seems to have produced little but outrage. Trump, Philadelphians said in interviews this weekend, is offering blacks not a helping hand but a slap in the face.
...
[Some interviewees] took Trump’s generalizations as personal affronts. No homes? Virginia Whitaker, 76, bought her beloved house in Brewerytown in 1962. No education? Businessman Brandon Ford, 30, graduated from Penn State University. “I haven’t been shot. I got an education,” said Donte, a 17-year-old high school student. “Or — I have an education. Just in case he hears this.”
posted by cjelli at 10:11 AM on August 30, 2016 [36 favorites]


Annnnnd we're halfway to human trafficking, if not there already.

As I've said in previous threads wrt Melania's visa status, it's more of a reflection on the institutional shittiness of the modelling industry. Trump Model Management was already one of the top applicants for model H-1Bs (that models ended up covered by that visa is a weird legislative anomaly) and though a civil suit was recently dismissed, it provides an insight into how H-1B models can end up in situations that are the functional equivalent of human trafficking.
posted by holgate at 10:13 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman, and those are the areas they are working with Mrs. Clinton to target.

Oh no! The NYT shouldn't have printed this! This lays out Clinton's strategy in detail! If Trump or anyone from his campaign reads.........oh, never mind.
posted by Cookiebastard at 10:14 AM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Clinton 2016: cookies for all, hugs for some
posted by Joey Michaels at 10:14 AM on August 30, 2016


“I haven’t been shot. I got an education,” said Donte, a 17-year-old high school student. “Or — I have an education. Just in case he hears this.”

Meta-code-switching!
posted by dersins at 10:15 AM on August 30, 2016 [89 favorites]


Ugh, why do Trump's chances keep going up on 538? I can't wait till this nightmare of an election season is over! But of course the shit that Trump has ridden/unleashed/exposed will still be around...
posted by overglow at 10:19 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


whitman knows also about jobs, she's eliminated thousands of them
posted by entropicamericana at 10:19 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


I can't wait till this nightmare of an election season is over!

Stay alive ‘til this horror show is past! We’re gonna fly a lot of flags half-mast.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 10:28 AM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


Raise a glass!
posted by anastasiav at 10:29 AM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman,

I think I know why.
posted by bongo_x at 10:29 AM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Because of his freakishly tiny hands?
posted by dersins at 10:34 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Or is it because he's an idiot, a fraud and a failure?
posted by dersins at 10:36 AM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


So for all your Clinton Foundation concern trolls it is time to point out the absurd double standard in play.
-George W. Bush raised millions for his personal foundation during his Presidency
-Colin Powell had his spouse run his foundation during his term as Secretary of State.
-George Bush Sr had the Points of Light Foundation during his Presidency
-Reagan raised millions for his Presidential Library and immediately after his Presidency gave speeches for millions.
-The history of Presidential Charities goes back at least as far as FDR. In fact FDR's March of Dimes was so highly regarded that we put his face on the Dime.

All these charities took money from big donors, yet none of them resulted in the level of accusations we've seen against the Clintons.
posted by humanfont at 10:37 AM on August 30, 2016 [135 favorites]


More or less by definition, the proportion of people who are the one in their extended family that made it out of poverty can only be a small minority.

Well, see, that tiny minority escaped from New York City where LePage says all the drug dealers are, and then they all settled in Maine where they now form a majority of voters. It's just math.
posted by JackFlash at 10:38 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


None of those people was a woman.
posted by OmieWise at 10:38 AM on August 30, 2016 [27 favorites]


Can we give up on NPR now? They can't or won't do the right thing.
posted by petebest at 10:40 AM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


Guys that discussion about LaPage was fascinating, and then Hillary's debate prep trolling, and then kids in Philadelphia burning Trump, and now I'm gonna run out of goddamn favorites again, aren't I?
posted by schadenfrau at 10:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


None of those people was a woman.

IOKIYAM
posted by dersins at 10:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


So for all your Clinton Foundation concern trolls it is time to point out the absurd double standard in play.
-George W. Bush raised millions for his personal foundation during his Presidency
-Colin Powell had his spouse run his foundation during his term as Secretary of State.
-George Bush Sr had the Points of Light Foundation during his Presidency
-Reagan raised millions for his Presidential Library and immediately after his Presidency gave speeches for millions.
-The history of Presidential Charities goes back at least as far as FDR. In fact FDR's March of Dimes was so highly regarded that we put his face on the Dime.


My mom is furious about this.

I ordered a set of Hillary buttons on Jul 30 for her birthday (which was yesterday) and they still haven't come. :(

She also knows what the alt-right is (she's 83) and says there a lot of them in Arizona. She also thinks McCain will win a second term (she hates him).
posted by maggiemaggie at 10:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


Trump will fire KellyAnne, blame push back he is getting now on her. He will make Katrina Pierson campaign chief.

Oh holy shit, that would definitely prove that his campaign has not hit rock bottom yet. Pierson would be worse than three kids in a trenchcoat.
posted by Halloween Jack at 10:50 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Also from the NYT debate prep article:
“I know who I am, and it got me here,” Mr. Trump said, boasting of success in his 11 primary debate appearances and in capturing the Republican nomination over veteran politicians and polished debaters. “I don’t want to present a false front. I mean, it’s possible we’ll do a mock debate, but I don’t see a real need.”
First, the Clinton campaign should imply that she's afraid of such a powerful and invincible debater. 11-and-0! He can't be beat!

Second, he did well in the primary debates because he could play off the crowd and he was one of 4-10 people on the stage. In a presidential debate it'll be one-on-one and the crowd will be told to be quiet during the debate.

Trump has no experience in one-on-one debates--ever?--and Clinton does, including some tough debates with Sanders. She handled Sanders' interruptions fine, she handled the 11-hour latest Benghazi hearing fine; she'll handle Trump.
posted by kirkaracha at 10:53 AM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


Honestly, I'm arguing against all the people I've seen over the last few days who judge the entire state by this, and seem to assume that because we have a super high percentage of white people living here we're somehow all racist trolls.

Fair 'nuff. FWIW I don't think anglos in Maine are very different from anglos elsewhere in the US.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 10:53 AM on August 30, 2016


> Oh holy shit, that would definitely prove that his campaign has not hit rock bottom yet. Pierson would be worse than three kids in a trenchcoat.

Look I know Vincent - many people are talking about Vincent, and the wonderful work he has done with my business. My last manager was tremendous, but Vincent is at least three times better and look - nobody, and I'm serious, I mean nobody is better at relationships than Vincent. Really good, really incredible.
posted by Tevin at 10:55 AM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


"Clinton should mock-debate half a dozen different Trumps."

- My brain just imagined a slew of funhouse mirror trumps. One short and squat, one large and lanky, one just a floating sentient toupee that each embody the six aspects of his personality.
posted by C'est la D.C.


So it's like a sequel to Pixar's Inside Out?
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:56 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Second, he did well in the primary debates because he could play off the crowd and he was one of 4-10 people on the stage. In a presidential debate it'll be one-on-one and the crowd will be told to be quiet during the debate

Eh, he'll try and do the same thing. Interaction with her or the moderator will be minimal, he'll just being doing his usual show. Nobody will notice he's not answering the questions, though if the moderator brings it up you'll be hearing about bias for weeks. Media will commend his strong performance and pay no attention to it being absolute nonsense.
posted by Artw at 10:57 AM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


“Her vision for an America that is stronger together and her plans to create jobs and help businesses succeed comes as Trump continues to avoid discussing his long record of bankruptcies, failed businesses, and unpaid contractors,” the Clinton campaign stated Monday.
Ahahaha I fucking love this. This is what I expect out of a Hillary Clinton presidency: ruthlessly parsing out endorsements to Republicans looking to flee the sinking ship in exchange for their taking her side and doing what she wants.

It's a vicious cycle—or a virtuous one, depending on how you look at it. The more Republicans side with her, the more effective she becomes—and the more her opponents look like they're on the wrong side of a losing proposition. Meanwhile, the ones who jump for her approval will be burdened with their public and prominent support of progressive and decidedly un–Republican policies, which means they'll have a vested interest in the country suddenly deciding they like those policies, and in deciding that politicians who work towards them ought to keep getting elected back in office.

This is how you play the game: reach across the aisle, yank out the opposing side's support, and make all the people you yank dependable allies. Mitch McConnell can oppose her all he'd like (and I'm even a bit skeptical that he'll continue that strategy once his party crumbles); it won't work and he can go fuck himself. When your party's fucking up as terribly as they are now, deadlock only serves to fuck you over more.

Riskier forecast: who wants to bet that Hillary pushes initiatives to loudly aid Trump's broadest demographic of supporters, in ways that take effect well before, oh, autumn of 2019? Early enough that she can use their benefits to fuck with the next wave of primary challengers? I wouldn't fully stake the future on it, but if she has it in her to break deadlock and pressure her opponents into bipartisan support, that seems like the smartest move going forward—and there's no way Hillary hasn't been thinking about the 2020 election since at least 2008.
posted by rorgy at 10:58 AM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


boasting of success in his 11 primary debate appearances

Out of 12. Remember that he skipped one because he's afraid of Megyn Kelly.
posted by Etrigan at 11:00 AM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


I sincerely hope that either the moderator or Hillary asks Trump to repeat an answer because it is incomprehensible and they can't parse what he is trying to say. Because I have the problem a lot when I'm listening to his word-curry.
posted by Tevin at 11:00 AM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


I tried to read that Mother Jones article (and I'm 200 comments behind, so pardon me if I'm repeating anyone) but I had to stop because I was getting so upset.

The problem with this whole "the government is letting people cut in line" idea is that it's NOT TRUE. Fundamentally untrue.


Yet to them, it feels true. That is what matters to them, as Prof. Hochschild points out, for their worldview's "deep story". It's not based in their own experience - they simply don't know very many "line cutters", if any at all - but it's in reaction to their experience. Talk radio, cable news, tabloid web sites, etc. play into that and then play it up, a feedback cycle that's great for capturing an audience demographic but not for maintaining a political party's cohesion.

The other problem in this worldview is its underlying anxiety, as opposed to actual experience of hardship: It's the fear of losing (jobs, status, etc.), not the reaction to having lost.
Consider this: Two-thirds of Hillary Clinton’s supporters think the next generation will be in better shape than we are today, or least the same, according to Pew Research. The reverse is true for Trump’s camp. Sixty-eight percent of his supporters think the next generation will be worse off. What’s more, the vast majority of Trump voters say life is worse today for people like them than it was 50 years ago. Only two percent —two!— think life is better now and that their children will also see improvement. [...] Rothwell’s work suggests it’s the communities that have seen the least societal change that are most likely to support the New York billionaire—by and large, they have fewer immigrants, fewer lost jobs, fewer impacts from global trade. People who have lost something aren’t voting for Trump, at least not uniformly. It’s the people who think they’re about to lose something.
Remember how Obama's optimistic "Hope" campaign was relentlessly mocked from the Right. That appeal may not work at all on a portion of the electorate because of purely psychosocial factors.
posted by Doktor Zed at 11:01 AM on August 30, 2016 [32 favorites]


I mean not to make her sound like she's guiding us towards the Golden Path or anything but it WOULD explain why she covered her body in sandworms last week and readied that Tim Kaine axolotl tank post–convention
posted by rorgy at 11:02 AM on August 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


@ppppolls: 31% of Trump supporters want a wall built along the Atlantic Ocean to keep Muslims out from the Middle East:

From the link:
It's widely known that Trump voters support building a wall on the border with Mexico to keep undocumented immigrants out of the country. We find that 31% of them also support building a wall along the Atlantic Ocean to keep Muslims from entering the country from the Middle East. 52% are opposed to that idea.
posted by Existential Dread at 11:03 AM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


"Why don't you just put the whole world in a bottle, SupermanTrump?"
posted by J.K. Seazer at 11:04 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


From the NYT article:
But Clinton advisers said ...
These Clinton advisers agree ...
The Clinton camp believes ...


This illustrates perfectly the worthlessness of today's journalism. This is all unsourced speculation -- he said, she said garbage.

Who are these unnamed advisors? Do they really know what they are talking about or are they outsiders just talking rumors? There is no way to know because they aren't named. There is no way for readers to evaluate these claims. There is no way to determine if people are just blowing smoke.

There is no excuse for the NYT using anonymous sources for this type of article. Get people on the record or ignore them. These aren't national secrets. These aren't whistle blowers at risk of prosecution. This is just useless rumor mongering and the NYT shouldn't be doing it.

And "the Clinton camp believes". What kind of garbage is that? How can a camp have beliefs? Even if there are certain individuals speaking those words, there is no way to know their true beliefs. You can only report what they say. You don't know what is in their heads. They may be lying. They may be deliberately misdirecting. They may be talking up their game. But you don't know their beliefs and shouldn't be reporting them as such. And certainly not anonymously.
posted by JackFlash at 11:05 AM on August 30, 2016 [35 favorites]


In completely unrelated news, the new Wow expansion goes live tonight and both new faction leaders are more qualified than Trump, even though they're fictional rpg characters.

Sylvanas is an undead atrocity against life itself with a history of murdering enemy civilians as a military recruiting strategy and she STILL is probably less dangerous to humanity than Trump.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:06 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


I hate to push on the tiny hands thing, but I happened to be at Madame Toussaud's in Hollywood over the weekend (yeah...) and they had a wall of hand impressions, and what do you know, Trump's was on there. I'm giving it to you first hand, so to speak: it's totally true. I had about a knuckle on him on each finger and I don't have unusually large hands. I seriously regret not taking a picture.
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:07 AM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


I customized the HuffPost Pollster general election chart to show composite polls since July 1. Clinton's had a slight decline from a high of 47.8% to her current 46.8%. Trump's had a slight increase from a low of 39.4% to his current 40.3%.

Only look at composite polls and stop freaking out about individual polls and 538's whackadoodle forecast.

If you are still experiencing anxiety, consult the NYT Upshot's simulator of possible outcomes. Clinton has 1,011 ways to win; Trump has 10 ways to win. Click Democratic on either Florida, Ohio, or Pennsylvania. She wins the election if she wins any one of those three. Switch all of them to Trump and she still has 115 ways to win and he has 10.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:07 AM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Yeah, and 538's polls plus (most conservative) hasn't really moved from 26.0% chance of a Trump win. The Nowcast is useless and should be ignored.
posted by Existential Dread at 11:12 AM on August 30, 2016


but I happened to be at Madame Toussaud's in Hollywood over the weekend (yeah...) and they had a wall of hand impressions, and what do you know, Trump's was on there.

My husband works across the street. I might have to make him go, for research...
posted by Sophie1 at 11:13 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


For great good!
posted by filthy light thief at 11:15 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Can someone please explain to me this obsession with press conferences?

In the minds of many reporters, only they are the tough-minded, experienced interviewers who can press the candidate to admit or at least confront uncomfortable truths. And a candidate who does not willingly subject themselves to that is showing weakness, fear or must have something to cover up.

It's an outdated idea, since candidates have long since figured how to dance out of danger's way and reporters aren't nearly as skilled or aggressive as they think they are. As others have mentioned, it's also tied up with the ego of the questioner, appearing on TV and possibly showing off for their colleagues.

But it could happen and sometimes still does, though more often in non-political situations (notably sports). I'm biased because I am a sportswriter and press conference questioner, but I do think my colleagues fit this concept more than political writers as a rule.
posted by msalt at 11:15 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


The handprint thing was covered in this delightful article.
posted by snofoam at 11:20 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


I hope Secretary Clinton calls the Trumpsterfire a "millionaire" and a "game show host" to his face in the debates.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 11:21 AM on August 30, 2016 [26 favorites]


candidates have long since figured how to dance out of danger's way

or you know, just duck that shoe.
posted by zutalors! at 11:23 AM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman

Today in "Signs that your candidate is fundamentally unsuited to be President of the United States," we bring you:

#367. There is genuine debate as to which of his many insecurities he is most sensitive about (and thus leaves him most vulnerable to needling).
posted by dersins at 11:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump has no experience in one-on-one debates--ever?--and Clinton does, including some tough debates with Sanders. She handled Sanders' interruptions fine, she handled the 11-hour latest Benghazi hearing fine; she'll handle Trump.

I think she should be super nice. Like, at the start of their second debate say

"I think it's wonderful to have this opportunity to discuss the issues as respectful opponents. You know, after the last debate, Donald and I shook hands and it was a wonderful moment. You know what though? I think my hand was a little larger. (crowd reacts)
No, no, shame on you. Don't be like that. I don't believe for one second that my opponent would let a little thing like that bother him. That would be childish. No, no."
posted by msalt at 11:26 AM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Once Again, For the Media, “Working Class” Means White Men
The New York Times decided to run a long profile of workers in Youngstown to get at the appeal of Donald Trump. It’s the typical article of angry workers who see Trump as a way to lash out and angry workers who see Trump for what he is. But there’s one really big problem here. [...]

Once again, for the media, working class means white guy. Not only is this a huge blind spot that reinforces the idea of “real voters” as working class white men, but it also completely ignores Youngstown. That city is 47 percent white and 45 percent African-Americans. Are black people in Youngstown not working class? I think we know the answer to this question.
posted by tonycpsu at 11:28 AM on August 30, 2016 [58 favorites]




Riskier forecast: who wants to bet that Hillary pushes initiatives to loudly aid Trump's broadest demographic of supporters, in ways that take effect well before, oh, autumn of 2019?

I don't think that would be a good idea. Trump's supporters emphatically don't want aid from the government, or at least don't want to admit that they want aid from the government. Meanwhile, progressives and young people are still having a really difficult time trusting Hillary, and with her low favorables, she needs the Democratic base to turn out in 2018 and 2020. If she spends her energy and influence pandering to angry white people instead of pursuing the progressive goals of the Democratic platform, I think she will be trading votes she needs for votes she has no chance of getting anyway.
posted by J.K. Seazer at 11:32 AM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


humanfont, do you happen to have a single source for the Clinton Foundation "double standard" issue? I can think of a few people I would like to show those facts to, but I'd rather not link them to here, and would love to see whatever other contextual material may be around. Is there somewhere you found that collected? Thanks.
posted by Miko at 11:33 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


there's plenty of progressive goals whose benefits will extend to angry white people
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:34 AM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump's supporters emphatically don't want aid from the government, or at least don't want to admit that they want aid from the government.

I think that's been shown to be an incorrect assumption. They don't want anyone else getting aid from the government. They're more than happy to take it themselves. The shame is in getting the same aid that "those people" get. If there was White Guy Aid only for sooper speshul hardworking but down on their luck white dudes, they'd be all over it.
posted by soren_lorensen at 11:37 AM on August 30, 2016 [29 favorites]


No thay ain't 'causer ain't no truck-drivin'-Jesus in it.

Mmm hmm.
posted by petebest at 11:37 AM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't think that would be a good idea. Trump's supporters emphatically don't want aid from the government, or at least don't want to admit that they want aid from the government.

I think that's inaccurate- it's pretty easy to get right-wingers to be okay with government aid as long as you a) don't phrase it explicitly as a cash transfer and b) don't let black/Latin@ people have any.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:38 AM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


get your government hands off my medicare
posted by farlukar at 11:41 AM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


In a presidential debate it'll be one-on-one and the crowd will be told to be quiet during the debate.

If the audience does indeed stay quiet, that will definitely throw him off his game a bit. A lot of the crazy shit he says comes from responding to the crowd. The thing where he said Obama "literally founded ISIS" - if you watch the clip, he kinda throws it out there, obviously an off-the-cuff piece of hyperbolic speaking. But then the crowd reacts and it's like "oh, they liked that?" - so he repeats it. And again. And you can see the feedback loop and how his voice tone changed with each repetition until he's not using the "this is metaphoric speaking" tone anymore but "this is a factual statement" tone.

Without crowd feedback he could start flailing and tossing out any random thing in his head, unsure of which things are "sticking."
posted by dnash at 11:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


Once again, for the media, working class means white guy. Not only is this a huge blind spot that reinforces the idea of “real voters” as working class white men

Even worse, it reinforces the idea that white men do all the hard work while black folks just sit around sponging off the government.
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:43 AM on August 30, 2016 [20 favorites]


get your government hands off my medicare

That's one of the big ones, yeah, but also guess how many people get a tax break for their mortgage and think they aren't using government aid?
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:44 AM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


FTdelightfulA:
The bronze model of Trump’s hand is located near the exit of Madame Tussaud’s, opposite a penny-pressing machine. It is displayed next to a picture of a stern-looking Trump. As visitors flowed out of the wax museum only a few noticed the exhibit.

“Oh, look it’s this asshole,” said Maribel Ocampo, a 39-year-old New York City resident.
posted by wenestvedt at 11:44 AM on August 30, 2016 [27 favorites]


If Cliinton's hands are anywhere close in size they should take a picture of her with her hand over his handprint.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:47 AM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Miko, Vox put out a detailed piece on the double standard.
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:49 AM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Riskier forecast: who wants to bet that Hillary pushes initiatives to loudly aid Trump's broadest demographic of supporters, in ways that take effect well before, oh, autumn of 2019? Early enough that she can use their benefits to fuck with the next wave of primary challengers?

I wouldn't count on this being too effective. Obamacare, and the Medicaid expansion in particular, is hugely helpful for this demographic, and they hate it and Obama with the fiery passion of a thousand burning suns.
posted by Aizkolari at 11:55 AM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


So for all your Clinton Foundation concern trolls it is time to point out the absurd double standard in play.

I'm sad for personal reasons about the attacks on the Clinton Foundation, because I know people who work or have worked for, this program or that under their umbrella - mostly Clinton Health Access Initiative folks. I had thought I might work with them at some point, as they have had a presence in every country where I have done research/public health work since 2010. Their office was next to ours on the grounds of a public hospital in rural Malawi, and the workers there seemed well-informed and interested in learning more about whichever particular health issue each was focused on.

I certainly understand arguments that the Clintons should have been prepared for this line of attack and shifted leadership of the foundation away from the family and this and that. I do think that even if they had done so, the attacks would have just become how stepping away was a sign of their corruption, or that the new leadership board is just a front for the Clintons, or...

The Clinton Foundation seems to be a good non-profit that is genuinely working to make the world a better place, and I can imagine that it would be hard to pre-emptively stop doing it just because some people will find wrong in literally anything they do. It would be even more difficult to make that decision if one was confident that she had genuinely done nothing unethical, let alone illegal, as is obviously the case in the non-stories about (the lack of) donor access to HRC as Secretary of State.
posted by palindromic at 12:03 PM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


538's whackadoodle forecast.

Amen. I do not understand how their forecast (polls only) can use data to show that Clinton has well over 270 electoral votes, and then assign her a 80% chance of winning. I can't figure the reasoning out at all.
posted by OmieWise at 12:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


80%.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:11 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


If you are still experiencing anxiety, consult the NYT Upshot's simulator of possible outcomes.

The electoral map is still somewhere between 2008 and 2012.

Nate Silver recently noted the difference between a close election and a volatile one: 2012 was close (national polling more or less tied throughout) but the state polling consistently reflected the final result. A lot of additional volatility in 2016 comes from third-party candidates and the degree to which supporters may or may not "come home" in November, but on a state-by-state level, not much has changed even as the national numbers have tightened a little.

Still, it's August.
posted by holgate at 12:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


[Deleted a few comments. Yeah, for the sake of non-mouseover-enabled people, please label your links.]
posted by LobsterMitten at 12:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Amen. I do not understand how their forecast (polls only) can use data to show that Clinton has well over 270 electoral votes, and then assign her a 20% chance of winning

It's a probabilistic model. They run a theoretical election thousands of time within the confidence intervals for each state. Some state's confidence intervals tip over into red territory, so there are some model runs where Trump wins that state. So basically, given all those polls, weighted as 538 explains in detail, Trump wins in 20% of the model runs.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:15 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


80%.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 3:11 PM on August 30 [+] [!]


Fixed, thank you.

Nate Silver recently noted the difference between a close election and a volatile one: 2012 was close (national polling more or less tied throughout) but the state polling consistently reflected the final result. A lot of additional volatility in 2016 comes from third-party candidates and the degree to which supporters may or may not "come home" in November

I know there is some room to disagree with the choices analysts make, but Sam Wang just wrote about why he thinks this is not a year with high volatility. And I have to say that from a lay perspective, just looking at the RCP data, the polls are pretty consistent and haven't moved much at all, either nationally or at the state level.
posted by OmieWise at 12:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


How about a reassuring second opinion from Sam Wang, the Avis of election forecasters? ("We're #2 so we don't pundit.")

His Princeton Election Consortium currently gives Clinton a 92% chance of winning via the random drift method, 95% via Bayesian.
posted by msalt at 12:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


The Clinton Foundation seems to be a good non-profit that is genuinely working to make the world a better place, and I can imagine that it would be hard to pre-emptively stop doing it just because some people will find wrong in literally anything they do. It would be even more difficult to make that decision if one was confident that she had genuinely done nothing unethical, let alone illegal, as is obviously the case in the non-stories about (the lack of) donor access to HRC as Secretary of State.

There is actually a semi-legitimate appearance of corruption at The Clinton Foundation. This isn't because it's corrupt - anything but. It's because the whole of Washington is on Pay for Play (the DCCC says four hours a day fundraising, the RNCC thirty hours a week for Congresscritters) and Hillary Clinton basically did everything short of putting up a sign saying "If you want to try and bribe me put the money here." And then almost certainly made sure she didn't know who had actually donated.
posted by Francis at 12:18 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Do any of the other foundations (Powell's et. al.) provide the degree of transparency that the Clintons' does?
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 12:18 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Do any of the other foundations (Powell's et. al.) provide the degree of transparency that the Clintons' does?

Nope.
posted by Francis at 12:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


2016 has a way of making the most far-out, savage satires seem like they were actually just fortune telling.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 12:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


I do not understand how their forecast (polls only) can use data to show that Clinton has well over 270 electoral votes

Well, right now she has 0 electoral votes. Nobody has any electoral votes until after the polls close in November, which is still a depressingly long time away.
posted by Roommate at 12:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


I do not understand how their forecast (polls only) can use data to show that Clinton has well over 270 electoral votes, and then assign her a 20% chance of winning. I can't figure the reasoning out at all.

Because the polls show probabilities, not certainties (okay, except for DC). That's what the margin of error means: the latest Ipsos poll shows that Clinton will get 61% in California, but what that really is saying is that there is a 95% chance that she'll get somewhere between 58% and 64% (or whatever the margin of error is). That other 5% is because it's possible that Ipsos managed to talk to 518 people who aren't actually representative of all Californians.

So if you add up all the 5% chances that each of the various polls is wildly off (or rather, the slightly-less-than-2.5% chance that each of the various polls is wildly off in Clinton's favor), then there's still a 20% chance that a lot of them are off and Trump actually has more people who are going to end up voting for him in enough states that he'll get 270 electoral votes.

It's more complicated than that, based on individual poll's historical accuracy and some other home-brewed factors that 538 et al plug into their own algorithms, but it all pretty much comes down to "These polls are informed guesses, not actual vote counts."
posted by Etrigan at 12:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


It's a probabilistic model. They run a theoretical election thousands of time within the confidence intervals for each state. Some state's confidence intervals tip over into red territory, so there are some model runs where Trump wins that state. So basically, given all those polls, weighted as 538 explains in detail, Trump wins in 20% of the model runs.

Yes, thanks, that's an important way to make sure the description is accurate. I guess I am taking issue with the probabilities used. The chance for winning is very narrow for Trump, in part because the ways to win are narrow. If you look at PEC, which I understand uses different methodology, Clinton is above 90% just on random drift, let alone a bayesian model. Things skew the opposite in 538's model (polls +). It seems to me, again, untrained and just looking at the raw data, like 538's map does not very well describe the territory. This is not to say that Trump has no chance, but his major chance seems to be from an unexpected event, not something that is factored into the models.
posted by OmieWise at 12:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


2016 has a way of making the most far-out, savage satires seem like they were actually just fortune telling.

This year, cirrhosis has become an occupational hazard for Onion editors.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


> Things skew the opposite in 538's model (polls +). It seems to me, again, untrained and just looking at the raw data, like 538's map does not very well describe the territory.

From what I understand - based on listening to all the 538 podcasts and not any actual expertise - their model is conservative because it factors in Clinton's high unfavorability, the (supposedly) large number of undecided voters, and smoothing out Clinton's post convention bounce.

They also seem to think there is a good chance that something damning toward Clinton could be released in September (like the Romney video from 2012) though I'm not sure if some kind of surprise is actually built into the model or not.

Anyway, I think they learned a lesson from primaries and are doing their best to predict their reputation. They'll still be right if (or when, IMO) Hillary wins but they could still claim "well we said this was possible" if something truly insane happens and Tump comes out on top.
posted by Tevin at 12:29 PM on August 30, 2016


Part of Sam Wang's higher probability of Clinton winning is that he "sharpened" his forecast on August 21st, once the convention bounces had passed.

He concluded that this election fits the pattern typical of post-1996 elections, which are much more stable than those in the 1952-1992 period. Leads like this one are just not very likely to go away.
posted by msalt at 12:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


How about them downticket races? Any chance of unseating [disgusting Republican stooge] in [your state here]?
posted by petebest at 12:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


In the PA senate race, Toomey is slightly up over McGinty after a week of heavy advertising in the Philadelphia area. The TV ads were almost exclusively about reaching across the aisle to try and close firearms background check loopholes. McGiny hasn't aired any ads I've seen but at least one pro-choice PAC is airing anti-Toomey ads.
posted by cmfletcher at 12:41 PM on August 30, 2016


Do any of the other foundations (Powell's et. al.) provide the degree of transparency that the Clintons' does?

Here's a article from last year (when Jeb! was the presumed frontrunner) comparing the transparency between the Clintons' foundation and the Bush foundations. Short answer is what Francis said above, nope.
posted by peeedro at 12:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


OmieWise: The polls-plus model mixes the poll results with the pattern you'd expect based purely on economic statistics (with the weighting towards the economic forecast decreasing to zero as the election approaches). The main reason polls-plus has typically had a lower forecast success for Clinton is because that economic forecast isn't far from a 50-50 race.

Both the polls-only and polls-plus models incorporate the possibility of major changes in the race (an October Surprise or otherwise), based on what's happened in past elections. This is treated as having some probability for a swing that affects all states at once similarly (though not uniformly). That has a much larger effect on the win probability than independent drifts from all the states would.

For all the details, see this link.

Conveniently, Nate Silver recently posted a summary comparison of many of the poll-based forecasts out there.
posted by janewman at 12:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]




Only look at composite polls and stop freaking out about individual polls and 538's whackadoodle forecast.

I don't think the anxiety is about how those forecasts relate to the actual outcome of the election, those numbers are pretty solid and have been for a good long while. The thing that the now-cast illustrates is that the people who are polled are capable of changing their minds about Trump.

Donnie bottomed out at 3.6% and from our perspective, I think that makes it look as though all but 3.6% people have finally figured out who Cheeto-Jebus really is, seen the light, and made their decision.

But the reality is that people are horrible. Some of the other 96.4% aren't okay with a total racist scumbag but they are okay with a mostly racist scum-pouch. Or maybe they're okay with a total racist scumbag, just not one who is so loud about it. So, as soon as he pivots just a little bit, those people are going to decide that he is now a palatable flavor awful that they can vote for.

Now-cast doesn't tell you much about the odds of various outcomes of the election but it does tell you a lot about how horrible people can be and the reminder that there is a wide spectrum of horribleness is a little sickening.
posted by VTX at 12:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Top House Dems Seek FBI Investigation of Possible Trump Connections to Cyber Attacks
Reps. Elijah E. Cummings, John Conyers, Jr., Elliot L. Engel, and Bennie G. Thompson, the Ranking Members of the House Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and Homeland Security, sent a detailed letter to FBI Director James Comey requesting that the FBI assess whether connections between Trump campaign officials and Russian interests may have contributed to cyber attacks against the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in order to interfere with the U.S. presidential election.
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:46 PM on August 30, 2016 [33 favorites]


New Monmouth Poll in Pennsylvania:

Clinton 48-40
McGinty 45-41


This, I like.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


"Donnie bottomed out at 3.6% and from our perspective, I think that makes it look as though all but 3.6% people have finally figured out who Cheeto-Jebus really is, seen the light, and made their decision."

I think those numbers are odds of winning, not percentage of votes.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 12:49 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Miko, Vox put out a detailed piece on the double standard.

Thanks - that was good, but it dealt only with the Powell foundation. I thought the argument was especially powerful with Points of LIght, etc., included. Maybe that was humanfont's compilation and it hasn't all been gathered together elsewhere.
posted by Miko at 12:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman, and those are the areas they are working with Mrs. Clinton to target.

I'm guessing that Clinton's most effective tactics in the debates will be based on Trump's reaction to Secretary Clinton not having a penis and Donnie not being able to control the conversation. The debates will test how much awful misogyny America will tolerate. Knowing that will be useful for the Republicans' post-election plans for opposing President Clinton.
posted by rdr at 1:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


The debates will test how much awful misogyny America will tolerate.

I think I already know the answer to this.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


This is even more true when you realize many of these people do not read at all.

A couple of stories from the depths of redneck territory. My husband was sitting outside on a lunch break reading a novel and one of his coworkers comes up and is all... "Reading, huh? We've got a book at my house . . . the phone book."

We had a yard sale that included a small pile of books. Trashy bestsellers, stuff we didn't even know how we had... So this woman comes up to pay for a stack of 3 books. "I have a friend who reads," she says in explanation for her purchase.
posted by threeturtles at 1:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [25 favorites]


I think those numbers are odds of winning, not percentage of votes.

My bad, you are 100% correct. But it is based on polling data so my point still stands. The idea that people would sour on Trump makes sense to us. As the majority of people who don't really pay that much attention are exposed to DJT, his odds go down. But then his numbers start going back up and we don't understand why. It's because some people are terrible.
posted by VTX at 1:13 PM on August 30, 2016


People. Enough with the stereotyping of people from certain geographic areas. We have had this discussion already and it is not cool.
posted by Sophie1 at 1:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


rdr: The debates will test how much awful misogyny America will tolerate.

soren_lorensen: I think I already know the answer to this.

More ... weight hate ... *dying breath*
posted by filthy light thief at 1:15 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


As the majority of people who don't really pay that much attention are exposed to DJT, his odds go down. But then his numbers start going back up and we don't understand why. It's because some people are terrible.

But this is assuming that either people were less terrible for a while, and now they'll get more terrible, or either candidate will do something to significantly narrow the probability gap.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:19 PM on August 30, 2016


More like the media will do something to significantly narrow the probability gap.
posted by dersins at 1:22 PM on August 30, 2016


For every example given to me of a rural, "redneck" person who doesn't read, I can counter with an anecdote of an affluent, educated person who does not read, or of a woman who smilingly encourages their young sons to harbor misogynistic beliefs, or any other shitty thing. So let's not go down that road, because number one, it's gross and classist and I'd like to believe that we can be better than that, and number two, I've got other things I'd rather be doing today.
posted by palomar at 1:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [78 favorites]


Hillary Clinton basically did everything short of putting up a sign saying "If you want to try and bribe me put the money here."

On what do you base this statement?

And then almost certainly made sure she didn't know who had actually donated.

How do you know that -- given that you, I and anyone else can find out who donated in three clicks of the mouse.

These seem to be some shaky suppositions. Any other thoughts from out of the blue?
posted by JackFlash at 1:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


On the "Uncle Herbert" thing...

I don't think we always fully recognize the extent to which attitudes have changed in the last few decades and how deep people's prejudices go in past generations.

My mom is in her 70s and so are her friends. But my mom's always been pretty hip, sexually liberal, she explored feminism and taught university, even if she voted Republican. So even she was fairly shocked when one of her best friends of almost thirty years confessed that she didn't have much contact with her son because he was gay. This woman told my mom this in strictest confidence because she felt my mom was one of the only people she knew who wouldn't judge her son. And she was considering trying to be more accepting and build a relationship with her son again. But she needed someone to hold her hand and actually go with her to meet with her son and his partner.

And my mom was pretty gobsmacked by the whole thing, but ended up becoming friends with the woman's son and helping her friend feel ok with having this relationship with her own son. (Her husband would NOT even see him.) And we're talking a not particularly religious woman who drank and partied and had a career, but this was still this deep shameful secret for her she couldn't tell any of her friends about.

So basically yes, I think it's important to support people who want to change their attitudes and ideas, even while judging them pretty hard for their past behavior. Changing is a difficult thing, especially when it means going against your peer group or family, so compassion is warranted.
posted by threeturtles at 1:29 PM on August 30, 2016 [46 favorites]


There is actually a semi-legitimate appearance of corruption at The Clinton Foundation. This isn't because it's corrupt - anything but. It's because the whole of Washington is on Pay for Play (the DCCC says four hours a day fundraising, the RNCC thirty hours a week for Congresscritters) and Hillary Clinton basically did everything short of putting up a sign saying "If you want to try and bribe me put the money here." And then almost certainly made sure she didn't know who had actually donated.

Wait a minute. I can't parse this. If there is a "semi-legitimate appearance of corruption" at Clinton Foundation because Congressmen/women have to spend x amount of time campaign fundraising, then every Congressman/woman who has a charity has a "semi-legitimate appearance of corruption". "Everyone is corrupt" is a lazy argument, and it certainly isn't an argument based on evidence.

You say she did "everything short of of putting up a sign...", but don't explain what you mean by "everything", leaving it purposefully vague. You say she worked to make sure she didn't know who donated, but how in the hell can you quid-pro-quo with people who donated if you don't know who they are?
posted by Groundhog Week at 1:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


will the debates be aired with a seven-second profanity delay in case Hillary's provoking is successful?
posted by strange chain at 1:32 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now-cast doesn't tell you much about the odds of various outcomes of the election but it does tell you a lot about how horrible people can be and the reminder that there is a wide spectrum of horribleness is a little sickening.

So don't borrow trouble. We've had plenty enough evidence of people being terrible during this election--with more in the mail--without having to go looking for it.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:36 PM on August 30, 2016


will the debates be aired with a seven-second profanity delay in case Hillary's provoking is wildly successful?

She gets him beeped and I swear I'll cancel cable so I can donate fifty more a month.
posted by Mooski at 1:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


Well the point of my reading stories was (1) I think they're funny. And (2) when I lived in a major metropolitan area an hour from here I didn't ever hear these kinds of "oh you're a reader" comments. There really and truly is an anti-reading, anti-education pride in these rural areas. I mean, SOME people certainly read anyway. But reading a book is enough to mark you as "other" among the working class here in a way that never came up in a city.

Which is not to say that rural people are stupid or whatever. (And redneck is a term of pride people use about themselves here, in case people found that offensive.) But I think it's important to note that to a lot of people reading is one of those things other people do. It's almost to the point of what someone's reaction would be if you said your favorite music was opera and you have season tickets to the ballet. It's a class marker.
posted by threeturtles at 1:37 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm guessing that Clinton's most effective tactics in the debates will be based on Trump's reaction to Secretary Clinton not having a penis and Donnie not being able to control the conversation.

Friendly reminder that neither the lack of a penis nor the presence of a uterus makes one a woman.

Why does this small bit of wording matter? Because if a woman with a penis were running for President, she would be treated even worse than Hillary Clinton is now. #TransAndShameless

N.B. A penis is not a requirement for being a man. Sometimes men have uteri, as well.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 1:38 PM on August 30, 2016 [44 favorites]


shocked i am shocked that money gives one access to washington insiders
posted by entropicamericana at 1:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Team Trump is putting out these stories about lack of preparations for the debate in an attempt to lower his expectations. I'm not buying it for a minute.
posted by humanfont at 1:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Not The Onion: Watch John Boehner Drive An RV Because Life Could Be Worse Right Now
With little explanation or prompt, former House Speaker John Boehner on Tuesday posted a video on Twitter and to his YouTube account of him driving what appears to be an RV named "Freedom One."

The YouTube video is captioned, "Former U.S. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) at the wheel of Freedom One, out somewhere upon America's asphalt prairie."
I can only imagine there are a number of current Republican representatives wathcing Boehner's stress-free view of the open road with envy, and contemplating their own choice to hitch their train-car to the Trump train, to mangle that metaphor.
posted by cjelli at 2:01 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


I love me the hell out of a good road trip, but "asphalt prairie" gives me a sad.
posted by dersins at 2:03 PM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]




Trump hammers Clinton for FBI's discovery of 30 Benghazi emails
Donald Trump's campaign on Tuesday seized on revelations that the FBI has recovered an additional 30 emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server relating to the 2012 terrorist attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, saying the alarming development makes one wonder “what is contained in the other emails she attempted to wipe from her server.”
WTF, Hills?
posted by kirkaracha at 2:06 PM on August 30, 2016


Hear me out: Real-Life Boehner and Onion Biden in a Thelma & Louise reboot. It wouldn't be the weirdest thing to come out of this election season.
posted by cjelli at 2:06 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


That's some grade A trolling from Boehner.
posted by octothorpe at 2:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]




reading a book is enough to mark you as "other" among the working class here in a way that never came up in a city.

Must have been a nice city. I live in a Northeastern city and I could probably find five people meeting your description within 500 yards of me right now. Seriously, your perceptions are limited, this isn't a rural-only, South-only or "redneck"-only attitude, and you're feeding a systemic bias. It would be great not to do it.
posted by Miko at 2:11 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


"Using broad search terms

Let's discuss the relationship between precision and recall.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:18 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


WTF, Hills?

Media: Did someone say emails? Trump said EMAILS, did everyone hear him say emails? Oh they "found" more emails, EMAILS. CLINTON SENDS EMAILS. EMAILGHAZI! This means his campaign is back on track! Because of the emails.
posted by T.D. Strange at 2:18 PM on August 30, 2016 [22 favorites]


Donald Trump's campaign on Tuesday seized on revelations that the FBI has recovered an additional 30 emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server relating to the 2012 terrorist attack against the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, saying the alarming development makes one wonder “what is contained in the other emails she attempted to wipe from her server.”

An impressive collection of half-truths and outright fabrications for a single sentence.

These are not "additional" newly recovered emails. They are part of the batch turned over to the FBI months ago, which formed the basis of Comey's report in July.

The State department got them from the FBI, and, in going through them, has recently found (as prize bull octorok notes above), that 30 of them might be related to Benghazi. They might also just be duplicates of the same old shit everybody's already beat to death in the, what, 8(?) investigations.
posted by dersins at 2:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [20 favorites]


> Without crowd feedback he could start flailing and tossing out any random thing in his head, unsure of which things are "sticking."

Maybe he'll wear an earpiece with a sound link to Breitbart HQ so he can hear all the bros hooting and hollering at his "zingers."
posted by The Card Cheat at 2:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Which is why the debates will be a wash. HC will win (so did Kerry) and El Cheeto's minions will whoop and woof at every available opportunity to the semi-anguished and ineffective flopitude of the MSM moderator.

Note to Jim Lehrer - you are on vacation. Whenever it is.
posted by petebest at 2:26 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Maybe found more emails, maybe not. Let's make a public announcement.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 2:26 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


10 weeks to the election? This is what we call"getting it out of the way". Not likely to be remembered by anyone not eager to hear juicy lies about Clinton, and they're long lost.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:26 PM on August 30, 2016


GOP senators running scared?
Grassley Says Lame Duck Hearings for Garland Are a Possibility
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


> "Team Trump is putting out these stories about lack of preparations for the debate in an attempt to lower his expectations. I'm not buying it for a minute."

With literally any other candidate, I would be certain of that as well, but ... Trump's Razor.
posted by kyrademon at 2:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Trump doesn't have the attention span or the discipline to prepare for the debate. He figures he'll go in and play it by ear and trust his gut, same as everything else.
posted by Pope Guilty at 2:50 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


> "Grassley Says Lame Duck Hearings for Garland Are a Possibility"

"Grassley Says All Stated Reason for Not Giving Garland a Hearing Are Obvious, Ludicrous Lies" [fake, but on the other hand, kind of what that actually means]
posted by kyrademon at 2:54 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


Flake explicitly stated that he would support lame duck hearings only if “we lose the election in November.” In that case, the senator explained, “we ought to approve [Garland] quickly” given his moderate record: “I’m certain that he’ll be more conservative than a Hillary Clinton nomination, come January.”

Flake might be closest to the fence of sanity, but forget that. He ought to have been saying this months ago when it was completely obvious that Garland was a perfectly acceptable nominee for the Republicans by any reasonable standard, but no, rather than accept any kind of reasonable compromise, they decided to screw around with the whole country. It's like it's a theme.

If the Senate goes blue, the best thing for the country is to simply give them what they thought they wanted: have the next President make the appointments. When they yell and scream about that (and they will) remind the country that they had close to an entire year in which they could have chosen another route.
posted by wildblueyonder at 2:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


GOP senators running scared?
Obama gave them a GIFT with Garland and they spat it back in his face. Now they're finally understanding that. I'm sure it's tough to figure these things out with their tiny brains.
posted by xyzzy at 2:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [27 favorites]


In other news: Meg Whitman, a Republican who had backed Chris Christie for president during the primaries, will take to the hustings in Denver today to campaign for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. (Fortune, 8/30/2016)

Well, given the rumors that she's about to sell HP Enterprise to private equity, maybe she's thinking of a job in a "unity" cabinet.
posted by dw at 3:11 PM on August 30, 2016


Provided that Hillary wins the election and the dems secure a Senate majority I would loving nothing more than GOP senators desperately trying to start hearings on Garland but then Garland suddenly withdraws from the nomination and Hillary nominates Obama instead as soon as she takes office.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 3:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]


Obama gave them a GIFT with Garland and they spat it back in his face. Now they're finally understanding that. I'm sure it's tough to figure these things out with their tiny brains.

I like the idea that Obama give them a deadline in mid-September. If they don't hold hearings by then and start moving the confirmation process forward, he withdraws the nomination.

Pick your poison -- certainty or risk. Can't have it both ways.
posted by msalt at 3:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


> Well, given the rumors that she's about to sell HP Enterprise to private equity, maybe she's thinking of a job in a "unity" cabinet.

When GWB took office after an election so close that the Presidency was awarded through a Supreme Court ruling split on partisan lines, the only Democrat he named to his cabinet was Norm Mineta as Secretary of Transportation.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 3:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]




I kind of hope Garland withdraws himself and Obama nominates someone even more liberal.
posted by VTX at 3:25 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


I like the idea that Obama give them a deadline in mid-September. If they don't hold hearings by then and start moving the confirmation process forward, he withdraws the nomination.

Meh. Withdrawing the nom would be exactly what the Republicans want, and it will get spun as "Obama was never serious about Garland, and this proves it." or "Obama's playing cynical, divisive political games" or "Obama caves to Republican pressure" or somesuch. And the news orgs will lap it up and regurgitate it.
posted by Thorzdad at 3:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Poor Garland. I bet he's not exactly checking Zillow for nice homes in the DC suburbs these days.
posted by Countess Elena at 3:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


Selections from the 21 best exchanges in The Washington Post's Trump interviews:
The announcement 'speech' was more of an 'outline'
Speaking to Dan Balz and Jenna Johnson, Trump remarked that he did not necessarily want to do the speech that was sent out prior to his June 16, 2015, announcement at Trump Tower.

"Because I really view that, again, never having done this before, I viewed that as an outline, not necessarily something that I would have to follow. So I gave out to you what was called an outline. Little did I know that's very unusual that somebody would give out a speech and then go totally off speech," Trump said. "Because I didn't go off speech on Mexico; I want off speech on virtually everything."

Hanging up
Boburg: "Mr. Trump, we just have two more questions and then we’ll let you run. The story today about John Miller. Did you ever employ someone named John Miller as a spokesperson?"

Boburg: "I think he hung up. I’m pretty sure he hung up."

O’Harrow: "Yeah, he hung up. That’s the end of the interview with Donald Trump.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I like the idea that Obama give them a deadline in mid-September. If they don't hold hearings by then and start moving the confirmation process forward, he withdraws the nomination.

Pick your poison -- certainty or risk. Can't have it both ways.


Problem is, the only reason this would work is because their nominee is a near lock to crash and burn in November. If Trump were winning, then McConnell's shitty obstructionism would be an unqualified success. There's still the unresolved issue of whether or not the Senate has the power to sit on nominations indefinitely. How does that get resolved?
posted by Existential Dread at 3:37 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Er (not to nitpick, but) that's former-AR governor Mike Huckabee.

Oh, that's a really stupid typo on my part. Thanks for correcting me!
posted by zarq at 3:42 PM on August 30, 2016


They have been lining up all day in Everett. The rally starts at 7:00 pm. That's 10:00 EDT so I'll be tucked up in bed watching TV. But I will check the Blue before turning out my light to see if anything exciting was said.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump's new DC Hotel could not find any celebrity Chefs to fill the restaurant space so he had to go with a chain.
Cathal Armstrong, Fabio Trabocchi, Stephen Starr, Richard Sandoval and Eric Ziebold were all named in the documents as chefs who liked the project, but considered the association with Trump to be “too much to swallow.”

“All the chefs know each other, and I think they were just staying away from it at the time this was all going down… They were all very politically correct and said, ‘We’re avoiding it for political reasons,’” said Jeffrey Pollak, the man charged whose company Streetsense was hired to help fill the space, in a deposition.

Ultimately, Trump settled for the high-end steakhouse chain BLT Prime to fill the space left by Andrés. That might look like a win until you consider that BLT already has restaurants in several of Trump’s properties (and has nowhere near the cachet of the celebs they were hoping to pull in), and they own a second BLT property just a few blocks away
Yes. Trump is "too much to swallow" and I certainly would not be able to choke down a meal in a building that he owned.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Wait Obama on the Supreme Court ? Is this real or fake?!?
posted by mgrrl at 3:53 PM on August 30, 2016


It's wishful thinking, mgrrl
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Wait Obama on the Supreme Court ? Is this real or fake?!?

I think it counts as [wish].
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:54 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


In case of a landslide I think it's actually a possibility.
posted by Hairy Lobster at 3:54 PM on August 30, 2016


Wait Obama on the Supreme Court ? Is this real or fake?!?
Not real, yet. I would love love love to see that happen though.
posted by Golem XIV at 3:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I remain convinced that Michelle Obama would wreak a terrible vengeance on anybody keeping her and Barack in DC a second longer than it takes for their kids to graduate.
posted by Pope Guilty at 3:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [58 favorites]


Trump lifts ban on media outlets, at least for pool duty
Four of the news organizations that Trump has blacklisted from covering his campaign events -- The Post, BuzzFeed, Politico and Huffington Post -- are all listed on the September rotation for a new print press pool that will cover Trump.

"We are pleased to announce that after some start-and-stop negotiations with the Trump campaign, we are debuting our full print pool this week, starting with BuzzFeed today in Washington," read an email to the pool, first obtained by Politico.

News outlets use press pools to streamline the reporting process: Each day, a reporter from one outlet provides the others with a running summary of the candidate's activities and remarks on the campaign trail.

This year, Trump and his campaign have placed bans on Univision, BuzzFeed, Politico, The Daily Beast, The Huffington Post, The Washington Post and The Des Moines Register because he took issue with their reporting or believed they had an anti-Trump bias
Jesus, I hadn't realized the banned list had gotten that big.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:57 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


There's still the unresolved issue of whether or not the Senate has the power to sit on nominations indefinitely. How does that get resolved?

I hope that the blocking senators come to their senses or that they're replaced by senators with more sense. If the worst came to the worst you would have a constitutional crisis: no quorum for the Supreme Court and serious unresolved issues to be determined. In that case, I think the only way out would be for the President to force the Senate to confirm sufficient justices to fill a quorum. There's historical precedent for this sort of thing, and the alternative is basically civil war anyway, so …
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:57 PM on August 30, 2016


[whisper of a dream]
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:57 PM on August 30, 2016


Obama? Do you not have actual judges to appoint? Is it just a fantasy about sending a fuck you to the Republicans?
posted by knapah at 3:59 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


He was a Con Law professor at one of the top law schools in the country. He's got the chops.
posted by dersins at 4:00 PM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


[Wish] will do for me. Barely resurfacing after brexit and I could do with some hope and dreams.
posted by mgrrl at 4:01 PM on August 30, 2016


I don't actually think Obama would be a liberal choice for the Supreme Court, given his views on execution and habeas corpus.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


Nobody’s Buying Donald Trump’s Immigration Lies:
Every utterance and position that helped Trump win the primary is proving to be a complete and utter disaster for him in the general, because the voters who put Trump over the top in the primaries are a bunch of enraged white people with very deep suspicions and prejudices, while the bulk of Americans are fair-minded human beings who aren’t governed by fear and anger.

Romney almost convinced the latter group because, however conservative, he was fundamentally one of them. Trump is not.

Despite the fact that every word that comes out of his mouth is a lie, he nevertheless managed last year to tell us exactly who he is. We should believe him.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:03 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


I relish the thought of Scalia, somewhere deep down in Very Allegorically On-The-Nose Catholic Hell, being given the news that Barack Obama turned out to be his replacement.
posted by prize bull octorok at 4:04 PM on August 30, 2016 [34 favorites]


Wouldn't he need to recuse himself from any cases involving decisions that he, as president, was involved in? Seems like a crazy idea.
posted by knapah at 4:06 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Obama would be a liberal choice for the Supreme Court, given his views on execution and habeas corpus.

I'm not sure we know what those views actually are. We know what Obama the President's views are, but those may well be different from the views of Obama the person or Obama the Justice.

I'm not trying to be cute. My reading of Obama, in which I could well be wrong, is that he's a thoughtful guy who is also a contextual realist. I really don't think that all of the choices he's made as President represent the positions he most deeply holds. I don't think that hypocritical, I think it relates to his pretty deeply held pragmatism.
posted by OmieWise at 4:09 PM on August 30, 2016 [47 favorites]


Wouldn't he need to recuse himself from any cases involving decisions that he, as president, was involved in? Seems like a crazy idea.

It is crazy and there are a whole lot of practical and perfectly rational reasons why it wouldn't be a good idea, including the likelihood that he just wouldn't want to do it.

From a purely fanfic, whatif speculation, it being an 'omg people would freak out and lose their minds' poke at the idiot Right and all the hilarity and schedufreude the would come from watching it all happen, it is an awesome idea.
posted by Jalliah at 4:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


If we're doing fanfic about the justice that would freak out the republicans the most I would like to suggest an extremely socialist Pomeranian with a little bow tie
posted by Greg Nog at 4:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [34 favorites]


Regarding the Trump rally in Everett, WA: Apparently the protest demonstration is being led by none other than the mayor of Everett.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 4:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [29 favorites]


If we're doing fanfic about the justice that would freak out the republicans the most I would like to suggest an extremely socialist Pomeranian with a little bow tie

So, this guy?
posted by dersins at 4:23 PM on August 30, 2016


that is not a pomeranian he is not even nearly cute enough
posted by burgerrr at 4:27 PM on August 30, 2016


who the fuck is that fucking biped
posted by Greg Nog at 4:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Pomeranian, Belgian, tomayto, tomahto.
posted by dersins at 4:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Con law professor and editor of Harvard Law Review. And 8 years as president. I'd say he has the bona fides.
posted by Sophie1 at 4:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Saturday morning Trump will be in Detroit to be interviewed by Bishop Wayne T. Jackson at the Great Faith Ministries Church. This interview will be aired on Christian Television Network.
"People have asked why hasn't he come to a black church or university and so forth and so on; why hadn't he come and spoke to us about what his policies are?" Jackson said. "He's going into white venues and talking about what he wants to do for black people and he needs to come to our neighborhood. He's doing that and people are criticizing that, so I don't know what you could do."

The bishop has already started preparing his questions for Trump.

"You saying you're going to make it better for us, then I want to know, and African-Americans want to know, well what are your policies? What are you going to do if you are elected?" Jackson said.
1. Make America great again
2. Bring Law and Order to the streets
3. Close the border so there will be more jobs for everyone
4. What have you got to lose?
Their interview will be private, and will be broadcast on the network about a week later.
Hmmm. Why does it need to be private and kept secret for a week?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:29 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


Can I make a confession?

I have no idea what the BENGHAZI!!! thing is about. I mean, I could take a stab at explaining the very broadest outlines of the incident in question, and I'd probably get it at about half right. Something something Libya something embassy something people died (and it's Clinton's fault because she ignored someone's advice or something).

But I've failed to absorb anything beyond that, because my eyes glaze over as soon as I see the word. Because it's always, always part of some unhinged shrieking diatribe from someone who's obviously invested in smearing Clinton regardless of the merit (or lack thereof) of the smears.

Ditto for Vince Foster, or any of the other allegations of theatrically sinister acts by Clinton. For all I know, they're all true, and I'm just ignorant of the evidence because my eyes reflexively roll away from the spittle-flecked screeds it tends to come embedded in.

I'm not proud of myself for this. I'm just sayin'.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 4:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [41 favorites]


personally this dog would be my dream supreme court canine nominee
posted by burgerrr at 4:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]




Why does it need to be private and kept secret for a week?
That's about the same amount of time NBC used to edit each episode of "The Apprentice" to make The Donald look halfway human. Sounds fair.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


escape, I feel the same way. How do I know what the hell Hillary might even have actually done wrong anymore? I read the Wikipedia article on Benghazi and called it a day.
posted by Countess Elena at 4:35 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Why does it need to be private and kept secret for a week?

That's about the same amount of time NBC used to edit each episode of "The Apprentice" to make The Donald look halfway human. Sounds fair.



Yeah that's what I thought. Someone is going to be monkeying around with the interview to make him more palatable or something but why? Why would Bishop Jackson want to do this for Trump? Big donation to the church?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:35 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Selections from the 21 best exchanges in The Washington Post's Trump interviews:
Trump: “And then I immediately thought of the Vatican with the massive walls. I said, well, wait a minute, he’s got the bigger walls. He's got walls like you couldn't even dream of. So it was sort of strange..."
It's an oldie but goodie. This is a google street view of the massive wall that separates Vatican City from Italy. Hint, it is the structure in the foreground. No word on a possible virtual wall.
posted by peeedro at 4:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


. . . would be exactly what the Republicans want, and it will get spun as . . .

Should the Democrats still care about spin? The GOP nom for POTUS is literally retweeting nazis and the MSM is still "Gosh these darned candidates, am I right white people?!?"

Let's not Tom Daschle around. Zig for great justice!
posted by petebest at 4:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Do you not have actual judges to appoint?

There's a really, really good argument that "judges" are over-represented on the Court compared to other legal backgrounds. Some of the best Justices in history have been politicians, legal activists, public intellectuals, labor lawyers, and Senators. It's only in the last 40 years that being a federal appellate judge became a prerequisite for SCOTUS, not coincidentally at the same time the Court became the most hyper-partisan it's ever been, and a track record of voting according to the President's political alignments became more important than judicial ability, intellectual integrity or legal vision. Like most things, SCOTUS has suffered greatly from the hardening of American politics.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [31 favorites]


Yeah that's what I thought. Someone is going to be monkeying around with the interview to make him more palatable or something but why? Why would Bishop Jackson want to do this for Trump? Big donation to the church?

Maybe just waiting to see if the check actually clears.
posted by rp at 4:39 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


> If we're doing fanfic about the justice that would freak out the republicans the most I would like to suggest an extremely socialist Pomeranian with a little bow tie

One of the key factors to keep in mind when selecting a Supreme Court justice is how long you can expect them to stay on the court before they die or retire. Pomeranians, with their lifespans of 12 to 16 years, are therefore not a good choice.

A better choice might be an anarchosyndicalist Greenland shark. Given the Greenland shark's extremely long lifespan, an anarchosyndicalist Greenland shark could end up shaping American jurisprudence for literally centuries. The only tricky thing would be keeping them away from Icelanders, as they may try to gut, behead, and then eat them, after of course letting them ferment for several months to neutralize the antifreeze in their blood.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 4:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [61 favorites]


Wouldn't he need to recuse himself from any cases involving decisions that he, as president, was involved in?

Nobody can force a Supreme Court Justice to recuse themselves. They only do so voluntarily.

Famously, for example, Scalia did not recuse himself from a case before the court involving Dick Cheney even though he rode with Cheney on his plane and spent a week with him on a duck hunt at a private resort in Louisiana while the case was pending.

Now that I mention it, the court ruled that news media were not entitled to a list of meetings Cheney had with oil industry CEOs for his Energy Task Force. Now the news media are given access to all of Clinton's meetings with private and government leaders. Funny how that works.
posted by JackFlash at 4:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


I'm not proud of myself for this. I'm just sayin'.

In my case I have taken the time to listen and read the arguments they're making. I know at one time I read all about what the Vince Foster thing was about. None of it seems to have stuck over time. If someone asked I would only be able to talk in really broad terms. Probably because what they're saying is so obviously BS to me that my brain just doesn't bother to file it away as something important enough to stick around for the long term.

I probably should know enough to at least be able to have some good counters for the biggest snippets of BS but experience has also lead to feeling this is mostly a waste of time because people that spout this nonsense act like they're in a cult.
posted by Jalliah at 4:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


And Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself from the Obamacare cases, when his wife was deeply involved in lobbying against it.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


I did at one time have a grasp on Benghazi and what happened but it has slowly leaked out of my brain. The only thing I can remember is that the Republican-controlled congress had refused to increase funding for Embassy security detail.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I have no idea what the BENGHAZI!!! thing is about.

In fairness, neither do the people selling it as a big deal. Feelings over facts again, they just feel that she did something bad.
posted by Artw at 4:48 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


The only tricky thing would be keeping them away from Icelanders, as they may try to gut, behead, and then eat them, after of course letting them ferment for several months to neutralize the antifreeze in their blood.

Pronoun trouble...
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:50 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


This whole derail about appointing an animal to the Supreme Court is really really dumb guys. Everyone knows if you have the choice you pick a tree, specifically a redwood or giant sequoia who will bring some much needed Native American perspective to the bench and whose knowledge of climatology is second to none.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 4:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [25 favorites]


don't you think it's a little gruesome to put a tree behind the bench, though? like, it might have been someone the tree knew...
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 4:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [59 favorites]


threeturtles, the data on rural/urban book readers is not as stark as your anecdotes make out. According to http://libraries.pewinternet.org/2012/04/04/part-2-the-general-reading-habits-of-americans/ 71% rural vs 80% urban read at least 1 book per year. Strangely a later survey http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/01/16/a-snapshot-of-reading-in-america-in-2013/ narrowed that to 76% vs 77%.

(My own anecdotes: Little free libraries deep in hollers that also have eggs for sale, and country stores with their own little libraries and book clubs.)

You could still be right that lack of reading is being used as a class marker, but it's more strongly correlated with education level or ethnicity than location.
posted by joeyh at 4:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


No trees. No silent immovable ancient objects. We already have Justice Thomas.
posted by downtohisturtles at 4:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


I have no idea what the BENGHAZI!!! thing is about.

Troops were poised to go in and rescue the Ambassador, but Clinton, in her role as Commander in Chief of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines, called it off because her staff assistant is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. [Need I say Fake?]
posted by JackFlash at 4:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Wait a second, that is actually [Real] because that is actually what the Republicans are saying.
posted by JackFlash at 5:01 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


you know with that tree/bench joke I think I may have made myself very slightly more qualified to be the Democratic nominee for Vice President.

also I do a brilliant Trump impression. Brilliant. Believe me!
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 5:05 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Wait a second, that is actually [Real] because that is actually what the Republicans are saying.

We need a word to describe this phenomenon.
posted by Jalliah at 5:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Benghazi also started up as a thing because there were initial mistakes about whether it was a riot over an offensive film or if, as it turned out, it was an actual planned attack. Statements and corrections up through the next cycle of Sunday morning talk shows were a little inconsistent. That's what started the whole narrative of it being some awful conspiracy or cover-up.

It's kinda like how the Clintons losing some money on a real estate deal before getting into the White House led to investigations, which in turn led to the discovery of Billl's affair with Monica Lewinsky. Mistakes and bad calls were made during the attack (none by HRC), but ultimately there was obviously nothing going on.

Republicans hyped Benghazi up so they could go on a fishing expedition in the hopes of finding something, anything to use against HRC. The mere existence of the investigations was damaging enough ("Where there's smoke, there's fire (so let's make lots of smoke)!!"). And later, several Republicans have been caught saying the whole thing was about dragging down HRC's numbers all along.
posted by scaryblackdeath at 5:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


Everyone knows if you have the choice you pick a tree, specifically a redwood or giant sequoia who will bring some much needed Native American perspective to the bench and whose knowledge of climatology is second to none.

I am proud to nominate this somehow-sentient lump of tellurium-128 with a half-life of around seven septillion years.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


We need a word to describe this phenomenon.
[kayfabe]?
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [20 favorites]


There's still the unresolved issue of whether or not the Senate has the power to sit on nominations indefinitely.
Presidents can make recess appointments that are active until some point in the next session (I can't recall if it is the beginning or the end.) Chief Justice Warren was one of three recess appointments by Eisenhower, iirc. (Eisenhower later said that Warren was his greatest mistake as President.)
posted by xyzzy at 5:11 PM on August 30, 2016


Wait a second, that is actually [Real] because that is actually what the Republicans are saying.

We need a word to describe this phenomenon.


Kayfabe.
posted by dersins at 5:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Dammit, oneswellfoop.
posted by dersins at 5:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


And later, several Republicans have been caught saying the whole thing was about dragging down HRC's numbers all along.

No doubt, but cite plz? Would be handy.
posted by petebest at 5:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Presidents can make recess appointments that are active until some point in the next session

Not if the Senate never formally recesses.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Let's try not to get too cute with our [real/fake] tags, please. We seem to be slipping in that direction. it would rather undermine their purpose.

If a simple [real] or [fake] doesn't suffice, a brief aside (e.g. "not factually true of course, but this is what X faction claims") should do the trick.

my $0.02
posted by escape from the potato planet at 5:15 PM on August 30, 2016 [21 favorites]


Not if the Senate never formally recesses.
That's true, but Presidents have some power to play games with the session themselves. I mean, it wouldn't be unheard of for these Republicans to do literally insane things, but I don't see them forcing a Constitutional crisis out of pique. There's plenty of room for me to be wrong.
posted by xyzzy at 5:19 PM on August 30, 2016


Republic Rep Kevin McCarthy:
“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.”
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


No doubt, but cite plz? Would be handy.

Kevin McCarthy (R--Calif) "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.”

Richard Hanna (R--NY) "This may not be politically correct, but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton. After what Kevin McCarthy said, it's difficult to accept at least a part of it was not. I think that's the way Washington works. But you'd like to expect more from a committee that's spent millions of dollars and tons of time."
posted by chaoticgood at 5:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [28 favorites]


Three men stand in a field.

One always tells the truth and labels with [real].
One always lies and labels with [fake].
The third may lie or tell the truth, but will label with the opposite tag.

Whose tax returns do you need to figure out who is who?
posted by 0xFCAF at 5:25 PM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


Whose tax returns do you need to figure out who is who?

Steve's.
posted by tonycpsu at 5:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [26 favorites]


As far as the SC recusal, it didn't prevent Taft from serving as president and then as Supreme Court justice.
posted by Chrysostom at 5:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Whose tax return? The cat with the brick in its mouth.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 5:29 PM on August 30, 2016


Whose tax returns do you need to figure out who is who?


All of them.
posted by spitbull at 5:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Kevin McCarthy (R--Calif) "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened, had we not fought.”

Well Congressman, you're incompetent if you can't actually bring any charges or findings against someone who did such terrible harm, yet is the current front runner for President of the United States. Why do you even have your job?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:38 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


WikiLeaks offers reward for leaks relating to the US Presidential election.

But of course: At the time of writing, an online poll accompanying the WikiLeaks post showed a heavy leaning towards the leaking of material relating to the Democratic Party candidate.

This follows their reward offer for info on Seth Rich.

Assange says he is focused on Clinton because Trump gets too much attention: Most recently, fighting off criticism that the leaks are biased against the Democratic Party, Assange claimed WikiLeaks does indeed have data on Donald Trump but that it's difficult to make a splash with it due to the increasingly outspoken nature of the GOP nominee.
posted by thefoxgod at 5:39 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm not caught up on the thread, but I just want to note that I'm in Everett, having dinner at El Paraiso per spinifex's recommendation. I'll report back if I manage to get into the rally (the line is several blocks long.) I'm wearing a light blue tshirt with a red octopus on it if any Mefites want to say hi.
posted by fermion at 5:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


Most recently, fighting off criticism that the leaks are biased against the Democratic Party, Assange claimed WikiLeaks does indeed have data on Donald Trump but that it's difficult to make a splash with it due to the increasingly outspoken nature of the GOP nominee.

So a "I'm not trying to influence the election I'm just more interested in publicity than in what I'm actually publicizing" kind of defense.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


...Assange claimed WikiLeaks does indeed have data on Donald Trump but that it's difficult to make a splash with it due to the increasingly outspoken nature of the GOP nominee.

Oh, bullshit. All this really says is Assange is a gigantic publicity whore. That, or actively working in Trump's interest for some unfathomable reason.
posted by Thorzdad at 5:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [26 favorites]


As far as the SC recusal, it didn't prevent Taft from serving as president and then as Supreme Court justice.

Eight years later, not in the next Administration.
posted by Etrigan at 5:46 PM on August 30, 2016




Trump considering last-minute meeting in Mexico with country’s president

I assume it's about their contributions for the Taj Mah Wall. Or the amnesty program he's announcing tomorrow ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]




All this really says is Assange is a gigantic publicity whore. That, or actively working in Trump's interest for some unfathomable reason.

If you were a certain stripe of fight-the-power, disrupt-the-system, or even burn-the-whole-thing-down person, you might well be either supporting Trump in hopes that this is what really pushes things over the edge into chaos (out of which, of course, better order will will naturally spontaneously arise), or you might be already interested in undermining Clinton's legitimacy and political capital so as to limit the power of the executive when she wins.
posted by wildblueyonder at 5:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Augh! What a tease. A WaPo reporter wouldn't use the word "explosive" unless the news is, like, explosive, right?
posted by escape from the potato planet at 5:52 PM on August 30, 2016


Trump considering last-minute meeting in Mexico with country’s president

What the blazes?
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Robert Costa: Standby... the Post has confirmed an explosive development in the campaign tonight... expected to happen, tho details still being sorted out

This could be literally anything.


Including a tweet that doesn't exist. Interesting...
posted by Francis at 5:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't know if "explosive development" is a good phrase to use this cycle.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 5:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


If Trump does go to Mexico, how quickly could we get that wall up?
posted by DanSachs at 5:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [98 favorites]


Why does it need to be private and kept secret for a week?

To encourage church membership/as a benefit for current top donors. No other reason than that, and this sort of thing is done routinely for major speakers at private orgs.
posted by Miko at 5:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Isn't Pena Nieto the guy who said he wasn't going to pay for "his fucking wall"? And he's inviting Trump to a meeting? It's a trap.
posted by klarck at 5:59 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


He's going to Mexio?
posted by schadenfrau at 6:00 PM on August 30, 2016


I just...what?
posted by schadenfrau at 6:01 PM on August 30, 2016


Vicente Fox was the president who dropped the nope on DTs wall.
posted by Sophie1 at 6:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


I know Chris Hayes is no Joy Reid, but I'm loving him this cycle.

On Mexico: "Maybe they told him there are electoral votes there."
posted by zutalors! at 6:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


Well, that's the last time I believe Robert Costa when he tells me he has explosive news about something.
posted by Spathe Cadet at 6:03 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trump considering last-minute meeting in Mexico with country’s president

time for mexican customs and immigration to practice their extreme vetting
posted by murphy slaw at 6:04 PM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]



I'm not caught up on the thread, but I just want to note that I'm in Everett, having dinner at El Paraiso per spinifex's recommendation. I'll report back if I manage to get into the rally (the line is several blocks long.) I'm wearing a light blue tshirt with a red octopus on it if any Mefites want to say hi.


I hope you enjoyed it!

The line is super long; I'm sitting by the end of it. They're definitely going to be over capacity.

I've also been giving Mexican restaurant recommendations to random Trump supporters all afternoon.
posted by spinifex23 at 6:05 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Most recently, fighting off criticism that the leaks are biased against the Democratic Party, Assange claimed WikiLeaks does indeed have data on Donald Trump but that it's difficult to make a splash with it due to the increasingly outspoken nature of the GOP nominee.

So Assange says he has Trump data and he's sitting on it? Says it all, doesn't it?
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:06 PM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


Is the trip to Mexico the "explosive development"?

Weaaak. I mean, it's weird, yes - but Trump has been vomiting seventeen flavors of weird before breakfast for months. This doesn't even make the top 10.

"Explosive" would be, like, hard evidence of Trump's complicity with Russia, or a leaked copy of his tax returns with clear evidence of shenanigans, or medical records showing that Clinton has terminal boneitis. By 2016 standards, an inexplicable last-minute trip to Mexico is just Tuesday. THANKS A LOT, ROBERT COSTA, NOW ALL THIS POPCORN IS GOING TO GET COLD AND STALE
posted by escape from the potato planet at 6:09 PM on August 30, 2016 [21 favorites]


So I have a family member who's a US citizen but lives more or less permanently outside the country. Is she eligible to vote in the presidential election, and if so, where does she request a ballot from?
posted by arcolz at 6:09 PM on August 30, 2016


Washington Post: Trump Considers Meeting in Mexico
posted by kingless at 6:11 PM on August 30, 2016


By 2016 standards, an inexplicable last-minute trip to Mexico is just Tuesday.

Donald Trump is M. Bison? That explains so much!
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


The US consulate should be able to help with that, arcolz.
posted by peppermind at 6:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Rubio wins Florida Senate primary, but fight ahead to keep seat
Florida Sen. Marco Rubio won the Republican nomination for Senate on Tuesday night, a result that enhances Republicans chances of retaining that seat and the Senate majority.

The former presidential candidate easily beat businessman Carlos Beruff in early GOP returns and will face Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy in November, according to Associated Press projections. Murphy dispatched fellow congressman Alan Grayson in the Democratic primary, the AP reported.

In the banner House primary, Florida Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz was leading college professor Tim Canova in early returns. Canova raised $3.3 million in mostly small-dollar donations from supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign who were aggrieved over Wasserman-Schultz’s handling of the presidential race in her former role as Democratic national chairwoman.
Now might be a good time for Democratic leadership to start giving these newly minted Republican primary victors a nice heavy Donald shaped necklace.
posted by Excommunicated Cardinal at 6:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Expats are eligible to vote, if they're American citizens. There's a mail-in process. No doubt somebody around here has first-hand experience to share. But yeah, visiting a consulate or embassy would be a good first step. Also, I bet Googling "American expatriate voting [location]" would get them a .gov with some information.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 6:16 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I suppose he's just keen to get some sort of Mexican agreement to even just talk about this wall, so he can make it sound something less than one hundred percent prime Trumpcray in his big immigration policy speech. Perhaps with a side order of 'doing prez things'.

Which is, um, well. mildly entertaining?
posted by Devonian at 6:17 PM on August 30, 2016


Expats are eligible to vote, if they're American citizens. There's a mail-in process.

Sometimes it's a web process. Which is worrying with the hacking, lately.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:18 PM on August 30, 2016


Now might be a good time for Democratic leadership to start giving these newly minted Republican primary victors a nice heavy Donald shaped necklace.

It's interesting. Here in Indiana, pretty much every ad for Republicans hang Hillary around the necks of their Democratic challengers. As far as I can tell, none of the Democrats' ads ever mention Trump.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Hahahaha, the press probably killed his Big Presedential News Cycle by leaking the story of his trip before it was finalized, and now we've apparently killed a major Isis commander, and you just know that's gonna be the thing that sets him off into a temper tantrum.
posted by schadenfrau at 6:22 PM on August 30, 2016


arcolz, you piqued my curiosity so I poked around a little and found this government page on overseas voting, which seems like a good place to start poking more directedly.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 6:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


So someone who has never worked gets SSI, you know how much that is a month? About $700. $700 a month to live on. Who of these people in trailer parks with their teeth rotting out getting $700 a month are cutting in front of ANYONE? They are BARELY SUBSISTING. They are at the back of the fucking line. Fuck they're not even IN line. Meanwhile welders making $100K a year are complaining about these people.

So there's two things I think are really important to understand about this. First - at least when I was doing social service/homeless services work, the majority of people I saw who had SSI (who had regular social workers) were often able to get SSI for the kids as well. So more common than one person alone with 700$ SSI, was a family of three or four, collecting between 2K and 3K a month.

Why does that matter, you ask? Well, because it brings into the second point - 2-3K a month begins to approach not just entry but post-entry wages for the skilled blue collar professions. -25K to 35K a year. That welder who is making 100K a year didn't start out like that. While learning the trade, they get shit pay, and only if they jump through all the hoops the union demands and work for quite a while do they start seeing even working-class money, much less serious money.

So it's definitely not jumping the line straight to the 100K place, but it's jumping over that time of maybe making 1K a month while you learn the trade, straight to the "post immediate entry" wages area. And it's important to note that for a lot of people, those starvation wages while they learned the trade are an important part of their narrative - it's how they sacrificed and sweated and why they now feel they deserve to make what they're making.

So if you envision their narrative as a line - Step 1, starvation wages, Step 2, barely past dirt poverty wages, Step 3, comfortable working/middle class, it's more like jumping to Step 2, rather than cutting all the steps out. And even though there's no way to get from Step 2 to Step 3, I think it often seems like you're calling Step 3 Welder a shmuck for sacrificing through Step 1 and working hard for Step 2, because he could have got it, instead, in his eyes, by holding out his hand.

From what I've seen, at least it's not really the guys who went straight into 100K a year who have issues with people collecting SSI/welfare. Those guys know they live better, and the gulf feels huge. It seems to, largely, be the guys who are immediately above on the ladder, who clawed themselves out of poverty by the sweat of their brow, who are mortally offended more often.

And that's kind of the thing I don't really know how to describe about Trump voters. We've seen stuff that shows that they're not all working class now, but I'd love to see this broken down into things like "Have you ever made less than 35K in a job?"
posted by corb at 6:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [53 favorites]


Expat American here. I vote as an expat through the last place I was registered to vote in America. They send me a ballot and I do it by mail. I set it all up before leaving, though, and you're required to vote in the last place you were registered (for me that's Colorado, which luckily is a swing state, but if you were last in CA then that's where your vote will be counted).

If you hadn't set it up before you left America I'm sure there's a way to do so from overseas, but probably the thing to do would be to check with the embassy for how.
posted by forza at 6:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


And that's kind of the thing I don't really know how to describe about Trump voters

Huh. I hadn't thought of it this way before, but I think people are usually most contemptuous of the things closest to them--the last stage they out grew, the last bad relationship they avoided, the last obstacle they overcame.

Well, that's depressing.
posted by schadenfrau at 6:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


Wasn't somebody on these threads involved with campaigning in West Virginia?

If so, could you MeMail me?

I've tried searching the threads but can't find you.

Thanks!
posted by kristi at 6:29 PM on August 30, 2016


It's interesting. Here in Indiana, pretty much every ad for Republicans hang Hillary around the necks of their Democratic challengers. As far as I can tell, none of the Democrats' ads ever mention Trump.

It's a deliberate strategy from the Clinton campaign directed down. They want to make Trump into the other, uniquely terrible, so that "reasonable Republicans" have a reason to back her. Even now they're unwilling to tie Trump to every Republican policy that he's merely repeating with more stupider words, in hopes that someday, Paul Ryan will give her the bipartisan hug she's always wanted.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:29 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, as expected, has been declared the winner of her primary.
posted by spitbull at 6:29 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


kudos to those of you braving the rally tonight... i thought about it for a while and decided i'd rather tear off my own leg and beat myself to death with it.
posted by palomar at 6:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Also, I bet Googling "American expatriate voting [location]" would get them a .gov with some information.

Thanks, Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The, that was the perfect suggestion! I found the U.S. Embassy website for her location which linked to the Federal Voting Assistance Program. It has state by state links for absentee voting.
posted by arcolz at 6:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Everett Rally Livestream (I can't remember if this particular channel is the stream with the guitars or the Wagner...)
posted by mochapickle at 6:31 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh by the way guys - I had to go to the doctor today, and they were playing Fox News. It was legitimately horrifying. Things like "What will Hillary Clinton do? I mean, Trump is giving a speech on immigration, and she will have NO SPEECH ON IMMIGRATION, this is clearly a GAME CHANGER." Also a lot about fucking Huma Abedin, followed by talking heads saying why it's totally fair game, but also how Clinton will be hampered by it forever. Also a lot of shit about "PROVOCATIONS BY IRAN: Did Obama and Clinton endanger sailor's lives?"

I mean, I am pretty inoculated against this stuff, but I swear to you, if all I had was a diet of this crap and I didn't know it was bullshit, I would have come away with this convinced that Clinton was about to fail because she's basically Neville Chamberlain.
posted by corb at 6:31 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Tomorrow's speech:

TRUMP: "My fellow Americans, I just got back from a trip and I have some disturbing news! Hillary doesn't want you to know this! Are you ready? Ya wanna hear it? OK, here goes, MEXICO REALLY EXISTS! Can you believe that? Yeah, I thought it was just a thing from cartoons, what's the guys name, I think he's a mouse or something, Speedy Gonzales? Well, it's not just a cartoon. It's a real place and you're not gonna like this, but I gotta tell ya... IT'S FULL OF MEXICANS! I talked to their President and guess what? HE'S A MEXICAN TOO!

CHANT: "Build that wall! Build that wall!"

[fake but I wouldn't be surprised]
posted by mmoncur at 6:32 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's a deliberate strategy from the Clinton campaign directed down. They want to make Trump into the other, uniquely terrible, so that "reasonable Republicans" have a reason to back her. Even now they're unwilling to tie Trump to every Republican policy that he's merely repeating with more stupider words, in hopes that someday, Paul Ryan will give her the bipartisan hug she's always wanted.

I'm expecting her to switch hard after the debates. I think she's playing to pull the Republican Party apart - and the first part of doing that is to give a lot of opportunities for people to jump ship. And then dropping the anchor on them - but not before you've grabbed the reachable ones.
posted by Francis at 6:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


It seems to, largely, be the guys who are immediately above on the ladder, who clawed themselves out of poverty by the sweat of their brow, who are mortally offended more often.

According to a Facebook screed from my personal Uncle Herbert figure, he's always seeing black people selling their EBT for cash, which proves his point that minorities "don't contribute as much" to this country as white people. He's doing okay for himself, but it's the nearness of the bitterness that seems to be inside him, since he lives in a white-minority area. Somehow it's just an affront to him personally. I'm working on practicing radical empathy for his views, which is just the kind of pampered grad-school liberal bullshit I would believe I needed to do, but nonetheless.
posted by Countess Elena at 6:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


I love Joe in Australia's comment here and love that it brought up the Supreme Court thread. Article link for full context.

I may have jumped out of some of the election threads too early (so many thousands of comments!), but this is not something I have seen seriously discussed until now.
“It only makes sense,” Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote just hours after Scalia’s death, “that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice.” With a Hillary Clinton presidency looming, however, Grassley has changed his mind—conceding on Monday that he might allow hearing for Obama nominee Merrick Garland during the post-election lame duck session.
Sens. Jeff Flake and Orrin Hatch have both supported hearings during the lame duck session.* Flake explicitly stated that he would support lame duck hearings only if “we lose the election in November.” In that case, the senator explained, “we ought to approve [Garland] quickly” given his moderate record: “I’m certain that he’ll be more conservative than a Hillary Clinton nomination, come January.”
I am sure this happens on both sides of the aisle, but saying a lame-duck president should not nominate an SC, despite the constitutional obligation to do so? And, that Obama chose a (from my limited understanding) fairly centrist candidate?

I cannot possibly see a "victory" for the Republicans, and can only see multiple ways the Dems can essentially (pardon my phrasing) stick it to them.

1. Repubs lose Senate and Obama agrees with their logic. "You are all lame-ducks now, too and you should not confirm our next SC justice. I withdraw my nomination."

2. Obama says, "I have given you twice the time to review this SC appointee. You have roadblocked. I withdraw the nomination and here is my next choice."

(Next choice being much more liberal. I don't have the exact dates, but come election day/inauguration it will be a pretty spell longer.)

3. "A 'lame-duck' president is still in charge for four years. Just as 'lame-duck' senators should legislate out their term instead of stalling on important work. In fact, earning a second term should be a sign that the POTUS is doing the job of the American People and they want the POTUS to do it for four more years. Confirm or deny, Senators. Do not hold up the process for partisan reasons.

(I am not a D.C. insider. I don't want to see it "stuck" to anyone. It just seems like politics are currently playing out this way, and I think Obama with his "rhymes with bucket" urge right now, has several ways to get discourse back on track.)
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 6:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Wait corb your doctor's office plays Fox News?
posted by spitbull at 6:38 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wasn't somebody on these threads involved with campaigning in West Virginia?

I remember reading comments from someone in southwest Virginia?
posted by LionIndex at 6:38 PM on August 30, 2016


Wait corb your doctor's office plays Fox News?

Yes, but my doctor's office is my local military hospital, so it's both more and less terrifying.
posted by corb at 6:40 PM on August 30, 2016 [21 favorites]


Washington Post: Trump Considers Meeting in Mexico

hey does anyone know if Mexico has laws against hate speech
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wait corb your doctor's office plays Fox News?

Every doctor's office I ever go to has Fox News on. Dentists, too. Hell, damned near any business with a tv in the waiting room has Fox News on.
posted by Thorzdad at 6:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [20 favorites]


My dentist plays the Food Network.
posted by box at 6:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


Here in Mississippi, I have never been in a doctor's office of any kind that did NOT have Fox News on constantly. It's terrible.
posted by thebrokedown at 6:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Merrick Garland has been an absolute trooper in the face of appalling public treatment, he's a terrific jurist, and he has earned that damn seat. Pulling out the rug from under him now would be a lousy thing to do.
posted by EarBucket at 6:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


Wait corb your doctor's office plays Fox News?

This is super common in many parts of the US.
posted by escape from the potato planet at 6:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


So there's two things I think are really important to understand about this. First - at least when I was doing social service/homeless services work, the majority of people I saw who had SSI (who had regular social workers) were often able to get SSI for the kids as well. So more common than one person alone with 700$ SSI, was a family of three or four, collecting between 2K and 3K a month.

These numbers do not match the easily obtainable data on SSI income to multirecipient households shown in Table 1 (page 4) of this PDF. For three and four-recipient households, the annual SSI payments for the entire household in 2012 were ~$18k and $26k per year, nowhere near the $25-$35k range you're citing, and barely above federal poverty guidelines for households of that size.

Considering that non-couple multi-recipient households constitute just one in six households (numbers here), you appear to be grossly misrepresenting both the incidence of this kind of benefit arrangement and the actual benefits received by those who do have children/other family members drawing additional SSI benefits.
posted by tonycpsu at 6:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [44 favorites]


There's a shocking number of businesses that have a TV in the lobby or waiting room or whatever that are tuned 24/7 to Fox News. I think some of it is because a lot of business owners are (naturally) right-wing cranks and because if you're the sort of person to throw a public temper tantrum about what's on the TV in the waiting room, it's probably Fox News that you're upset about seeing something other than.
posted by Pope Guilty at 6:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


My dentist just gives out the controller both in the waiting room and for the tvs on their ceilings.
posted by Jalliah at 6:44 PM on August 30, 2016


I'm increasingly glad Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders. His organization has essentially collapsed and DWS just won her primary against their #1 guy, Tim Canova. I think Sanders is great where he is in the Senate but it's clear running a Presidential campaign, much less the actual Presidency, would have been out of his wheelhouse.

Still 100x better than Trump.

But Clinton is 500x better.
posted by Justinian at 6:46 PM on August 30, 2016 [34 favorites]


spinifex23: I hope you enjoyed it!

It was delicious.

We're in line now but I'm guessing we won't get in. We did see GoodSpaceGuy in line (I think it was him, he had a nametag). I half expected there to be a significant minority of liberal spies like us, given the proximity of Seattle, but based on hats and tshirts I'd say it's at least 90% actual supporters.
posted by fermion at 6:49 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


His organization has essentially collapsed and DWS just won her primary against their #1 guy, Tim Canova.
I suspect there was some horse trading going on there. Bernie pulled out all his support for Canova at almost the exact same time Hillary went down to campaign for DWS. Maybe in a few years, when someone writes a book about this election and this period in the history of the DNC, we'll find out more about what actually went down.
posted by xyzzy at 6:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Watching livestream and there are empty seats.... They did the national anthem half an hour ago, not sure why they are not filling in more quickly.
posted by mochapickle at 6:51 PM on August 30, 2016


(Also, as a side note, I've been re-watching The West Wing. The episode I just finished was "Let Bartlet be Bartlet." Did Lewandowski get his political strategy from a tv show?)
posted by xyzzy at 6:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Canova never stood a chance and Bernie coming down to Florida would have changed nothing.

DWS is popular in her district. A lot of her supporters saw voting for her as pushback against the witch hunt treatment she received last month.
posted by spitbull at 6:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Oh God. I hadn't actually seen most of the LePage stuff, and then I just saw the segment on Maddow, and HOLY FUCKING SHIT.

I think this goes beyond "racially charged," Maddow.
posted by schadenfrau at 6:54 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm increasingly glad Clinton got the nomination instead of Sanders.

I don't know. Sanders would have flummoxed the usual suspects, been palatable to the base, and attractive to disaffected white voters.

It's a moot point, but he oddly has fewer narratives to dismiss (OK, not so odd since he represents a state that had fallen off R radar.)
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 6:54 PM on August 30, 2016


It's probably still empty due to screening. The line is still blocks long outside.
posted by spinifex23 at 6:55 PM on August 30, 2016


Watching livestream and there are empty seats.... They did the national anthem half an hour ago, not sure why they are not filling in more quickly.

The line is still very long, and moving pretty slow. Not sure why, maybe because of security?
posted by fermion at 6:55 PM on August 30, 2016


Notice now that no one is talking much about LePage's racism, though. It's all about his erratic behavior.
posted by spitbull at 6:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Heh, hi, spinifex! Are you at the turnaround point?
posted by fermion at 6:57 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, I am pretty inoculated against this stuff, but I swear to you, if all I had was a diet of this crap and I didn't know it was bullshit, I would have come away with this convinced that Clinton was about to fail because she's basically Neville Chamberlain.

What a crock of shit. If you were on a diet of that crap and didn't know it was bullshit you'd have no fucking clue on who Neville Chamberlain actually was.

Hell, I only know who he is because my WW2 lesson was Churchill fighting Hitler rather than Pearl Habour.
posted by Talez at 6:57 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am sure this happens on both sides of the aisle, but saying a lame-duck president should not nominate an SC, despite the constitutional obligation to do so? And, that Obama chose a (from my limited understanding) fairly centrist candidate?

"Lame duck" always meant the final few months of a term between the presidential election and the new president's inauguration. Until Obama, when Republicans decided it meant at least the entirety of his second term, and possibly most of his first.
posted by one_bean at 6:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


If our new dealership has a lobby area with a TV tuned to Fox all goddamned day we're gonna have a FUCKING PROBLEM
posted by wallabear at 6:59 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Jeebus, it's hard to find a stream that's not just fucking annoying.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:01 PM on August 30, 2016


Tomorrow is Trump's big immigration speech, yes? What's the over-under on how long after the speech his says something which completely contradicts the speech. I'm going with 8 hours.
posted by Justinian at 7:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Ha, I was just about to ask, CHT. This Right Side Broadcasting one is the one with the guitars.
posted by mochapickle at 7:03 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Thanks, one_bean. I am just now remembering that from decades ago in civics class in High School. I guess that is one of the reasons I was bothered by the SC nomination being ignored. Obama had a full year left in office or so? And they were claiming lame duck?

Something always sat wrong with me using that argument this year.
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 7:03 PM on August 30, 2016


you appear to be grossly misrepresenting both the incidence of this kind of benefit arrangement and the actual benefits received by those who do have children/other family members drawing additional SSI benefits.

From what I saw - from my point of view, which I don't claim is universal - specifically working in homeless prevention services for families - the most common arrangement was unmarried families that could not afford to get married because they would lose their benefits. I know those numbers inside and out, because I was trying to find people housing on that income. I'm not saying people were living large on that money! I'm saying that those incomes were often equal or superior to those of the working poor, most often existing barely above minimum wage.

And God, we caught a lot of flak from what I am just realizing now are probably now Trump voters. White guys who would scream at us over the phone and call us racial slurs for not helping them - guys who were legitimately struggling, but also not legitimately as much as our clients. Like many social service agencies, we had prioritization based on additional factors that meant you were less likely to bounce back from homelessness - including structural and familial issues. White guys who had a house to go back to that they just didn't want to go back to were not as much of a priority as minority individuals with no familial support structure. Dudes who were like "I'm broke from all my child support" were not as much of a priority as women not receiving it.

There's a lot of people who aren't in poverty as the US defines it - which is ridiculously low when you account for rent prices and such - but who are still having a really hard time with things. Even if it's just by their own standards. That's a lot of resentment out there in this country.

I have, at least, the deluded hope that Clinton, when she wins, will try to reach an olive branch out to at least the people who can be reasoned with, and we'll all collectively try to put this toxic shit aside. I know people are kind of gleefully hoping she makes hay while the sun shines, but I just don't know how long we as a society can survive these things bleeding under the surface.
posted by corb at 7:04 PM on August 30, 2016 [58 favorites]


Re the upcoming debate...when was the last time Clinton and Trump were in the same room together? Will he call her "Crooked Hillary" to her face, or chicken out like a typical bully?

It's fascinating and bizarre that he said maybe Ivanka should play Clinton in debate prep. Trump seems to feel a visceral disgust for women he hates (e.g., the much maligned Rosie O'Donnell), in a way that I suspect would prevent him from ever even imagining Ivanka standing in for someone like that...weird.
posted by sallybrown at 7:05 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


This Right Side Broadcasting one is the one with the guitar

This dunce narrating for RSB is living "up" to all my worst stereotyped thoughts of Trump supporters.
posted by sallybrown at 7:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Tentatively offering this stream
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


And here's the one with the classical... I just could not with the Right Side Broadcasting one anymore.
posted by mochapickle at 7:09 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


RSB guy explained the music thing has to do with Youtube's strict music copyright enforcement
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hannity argharghargh my ears just burst and blood flew out like in an anime
posted by Yowser at 7:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


RSB guy explained the music thing has to do with Youtube's strict music copyright enforcement

Yes but there's no requirement to have hideous guitars. I'd even prefer him just humming the Battle Hymn of the Republic instead...
posted by mochapickle at 7:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


And here's yt the one with the classical...

I think that's the one that dubs Ride of the Valkyries when Trump enters. Still, one of the better choices if you're waiting.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:12 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


from my point of view, which I don't claim is universal

You didn't claim it it was universal, but you did use it to try to explain why people feel the way they do about people who draw government benefits:
Why does that matter, you ask? Well, because it brings into the second point - 2-3K a month begins to approach not just entry but post-entry wages for the skilled blue collar professions. -25K to 35K a year. That welder who is making 100K a year didn't start out like that.
For this scenario to make sense, they would have had to have seen the same numbers you did in your personal experience. Which is more likely, that, or that they're simply buying into the line-jumping "welfare queen" mythology that's been cooked up for decades by conservatives?
posted by tonycpsu at 7:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Warmup speaker at the rally is talking about Washington state going red this year. Like it has every year since 1988, except the opposite.
posted by 0xFCAF at 7:14 PM on August 30, 2016


Here is a Fox stream. Not authorised, if it helps.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:16 PM on August 30, 2016


OH GOD THE WASHINGTON GOING RED THING. This is what the leaders of the Washington State Republican Party have sold out for - the promise that Eastern Washington is going to go red and save them from Seattle. It is not going to happen. Everyone sane knows it's not going to happen. But bless Susan Hutchinson's tiny deluded heart, she thinks it's going to happen and she's going to be the One Who Delivers It.

I will take a perverse joy when it goes blue as it was always going to go. YOU SOLD YOUR SOUL FOR NOTHING, FOOLS!
posted by corb at 7:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


Washington State is always red, outside of King County.

(Where all the people are)
posted by Artw at 7:19 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Reince seems to have finally adapted to this most shameless version of himself.
posted by sallybrown at 7:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh god, they brought Guiliani.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 7:20 PM on August 30, 2016


Does Washington need to be protected from Oregon? I'm not sure what this guy is on about protecting our southern border.
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


I want to do an inverted remake of Rudy
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Reince Preibus - "Mike Pence and Donald Trump will tell you the truth."
Lol, fuck you Reince. His rhetoric about how the Republicans will save the country by electing Donald Trump is disgusting. I remember when he spoke in Wisconsin, Reince compared this election to the Revolutionary War. How delusional or shameless can you be?
posted by airish at 7:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


Is it me, or does Giuliani get grinchier every time he makes an appearance?
posted by mochapickle at 7:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh, joy. Sessions is next.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:22 PM on August 30, 2016


Does Washington need to be protected from Oregon? I'm not sure what this guy is on about protecting our southern border.

We're going to build a wall, and California is going to pay for it
posted by the man of twists and turns at 7:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Ahhhhh...according to Rudy, Trump is winning on enthusiasm, so the polls don't matter....
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


They're high on conspiracy

BENGHAZI. [real]

VINCENT FOSTER [real - 20 years ago]
posted by Yowser at 7:24 PM on August 30, 2016


Giuliani can keep 13 memos on his phone. Which doesn't leave his office.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:25 PM on August 30, 2016


"They'll protect our southern border" (coughfrombrownpeople)

Not a word about Lilly white Canucks
posted by Yowser at 7:26 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


We're going to build a wall, and California is going to pay for it

#PNWCampaignPromises
posted by corb at 7:26 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


I want to do an inverted remake of Rudy

*lays "Make America Great Again" hat on Coach Priebus's desk*
posted by sallybrown at 7:26 PM on August 30, 2016


Rudy is an ugly hate machine
posted by Yowser at 7:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Oh god, they brought Guiliani

he's gradually turning into a nosferatu, right? it's not just me?

is there a PredictIt.org pool on whether he'll instinctively eat a bug live on tv?
posted by murphy slaw at 7:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [32 favorites]


Not a word about Lilly white Canucks

Nobody has told Trump just how many Chinese are in Vancouver?
posted by Talez at 7:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


HILLARY IS A WARMONGER!
TRUMP WILL TAKE OUT THE AYATOLLAH IF THEY FUCK WITH US!
posted by Talez at 7:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Rudy is outright fucking delusional.
posted by Talez at 7:29 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm probably late to this, but doesn't Giuliani look like a kid who has been let loose in the candy shop? He's increasingly less tentative.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:30 PM on August 30, 2016


My stream just panned and showed Mario and Luigi in the back of the crowd. Princess Peach doesn't have time for this bullshit.
posted by airish at 7:31 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]




....And he storms off to Ride of the Valkyries. Not even a wave to the crowd.
posted by mochapickle at 7:32 PM on August 30, 2016


There are less people at this rally than at an Everett Silvertips game, that's for sure
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Washington State is always red, outside of King County.

(Where all the people are)


Nah, it's more than just King County. Pretty much all counties west of the Cascades go for Democrats these days. Here are the county-by-county results from 2012, for example.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 7:34 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trimp to Mexico confirmed. Please keep him Mexico.
posted by cashman at 7:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump is going to Mexico.

ETA: like a horrible orange Ernest reboot.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Does he know the president of Mexico is Mexican? Someone should break it to him.
posted by mochapickle at 7:37 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


I can't liveblog this, so step up.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 7:38 PM on August 30, 2016


Thanks to these threads, I realised there isn't anything I'd rather do during my One Day In America than make some calls for Hillary, meet some nice folks, and contribute (however microscopically) to defeating the racist pile of wet Cheetos.

I stand inspired by my fellow Commonwealth member! I will be in New York City for a week next month and will spend a day making calls on behalf of Clinton. I will contribute my Canadian efforts to defeating the Yam That Walks Like A Man.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 7:39 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Trump is going to Mexico.

My eyes are rolling so much right now.

Remember when Mitt went to the UK and tried to be, like, a diplomat or some shit? (Or the last time Trump went abroad and pissed off the locals so much Samantha Bee had to get David Tennant to read the angry tweets?)

Me desculpa, Mexico.
posted by soren_lorensen at 7:39 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


I just don't know how long we as a society can survive these things bleeding under the surface.

I agree with this and yet I don't know if it's politically fixable. I think it taps into what you might call American Civic Calvinism, which manifests itself in a few different ways, mostly around the common belief that poverty (and illness) is a marker of moral failure and affluence (and access to good healthcare) is aligned with righteousness. I mean, Trump basically has a black prosperity gospel preacher as his God-man right now.

Trumpism from Trump is a kind of extreme version, a bit like the splinter-Calvinists who decided that if they sincerely believed in predestination, they could live however the fuck they wanted and it'd be up to God how they spent eternity, but having that sincere belief was probably a marker that they were among the elect.
posted by holgate at 7:40 PM on August 30, 2016 [11 favorites]


He's claiming the crowd is Yuge, just not inside yet, but he'd rather get on with it than wait for them to hear him
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:40 PM on August 30, 2016


Please keep him Mexico.

Please turn him back at border control as an undesirable, Mexico.
posted by holgate at 7:41 PM on August 30, 2016




Apparently, if he does try to negotiate any deals with Peña Nieto, he could be committing a felony under the Logan Act.
posted by Existential Dread at 7:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Is Trump sure it was President Nieto who invited him? Maybe it's a trap.
posted by mmoncur at 7:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh please let him have an heretofore unbeknownst second citizenship, and that the U.S. border decides to send him there because of his 3500+ and counting lawsuits.

One can dream.
posted by Yowser at 7:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


He seems tired.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


DJT:
- We're going to win Washington state
- We're leading in FL and NC, that LA Times Poll
- Our victory is for the people, for every citizen not heard, not for the journalists (boooooo), lobbyists, special interests who are funding and controlling hillary
- We're going to create the "new american future" - jobs (quickly, believe me), infrastructure, "our country is going to hell!", welfare families will have jobs, gov't will be lean and mean "with a big fat beautiful heart"
posted by mochapickle at 7:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


does anyone in the trump campaign speak spanish
posted by murphy slaw at 7:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


El Chapo, ensconced in the secret spaceship-like lab located beneath his sparse prison cell, runs his hands together and smiles. Mañana, Donald.
posted by spitbull at 7:45 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Everyone at this rally seems exhausted with the whole dog and pony show.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 7:46 PM on August 30, 2016


Infrastructure is crumbling, lean and mean government (with a warm heart) will put welfare families to work rebuilding our inner cities for the african american community that has been neglected....or soemething
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:46 PM on August 30, 2016


DJT:
- Border protected, children safe!
- Democrats have taken advantage of AA, taking their votes and giving nothing in return; will rebuild inner cities, safety and peace
- American values and culture will be celebrated!
- Insiders are liars! I KNOW them!
PROTESTER BREAK! I AM IMAGINING SOME SORT OF DANCE PARTY
posted by mochapickle at 7:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Looks like Trump found the remaining batch of quaaludes.
posted by Yowser at 7:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]




First protesters thrown out, into Oakes and Hewitt, to adoring crowd.
posted by spinifex23 at 7:48 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Looks like Trump found the remaining batch of quaaludes.

Or his Dr. Feelgood is suddenly experiencing some extra scrutiny and he's temporarily out of his usual uppers.
posted by soren_lorensen at 7:48 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Why is he talking about inner city blight in Everett washington? and the plight of AA's? He's clueless
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:50 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Hence the trip to Mexico. (Cheap speed and ludes.)
posted by spitbull at 7:50 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


Why does he keep turning around?
posted by schadenfrau at 7:50 PM on August 30, 2016


DJT:
- Law enforcement and police (woooooo!)
- Millions of AAs have succeeded, done SO much! We should celebrate that success, but we must also talk about the millions suffering in disastrous conditions in inner cities - poverty, drugs, violence... No group in USA has been more harmed by people in power.
- HRC's immigration policy brings in illegal immigrants and refugees who take jobs away from AAs and hispanic citizens who want those jobs!
- We don't know where they come from!
- Asking for every AA and hispanic vote
posted by mochapickle at 7:50 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Why does he keep turning around?

Twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!
posted by mmoncur at 7:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [25 favorites]


Why would the president of Mexico entertain this hatemonger? This is terrible. I can only hope this backfires against Trump spectacularly. But I think we're all cringing at the thought that somehow he'll play along with Trump.

It's like when you read about an IRS scam and you warn your loved ones. Then you have a family member who picks up the phone and says "Oh it's the IRS" and starts reciting their social security number. You race over and hang up the phone before the scam artist can get the whole number. Somebody needs to beat Trump over there and tip off Nieto.
posted by cashman at 7:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


DJT:
- [Dang, CHT, this liveblogging is not easy!]
- Democratic policies have produced ONLY poverty joblessness broken schools rising crime. They don't care about you! They have used you for decades and will continue to use you!
- Litany of AA stats (poverty, employment, half of Detroit residents do not work, etc)
- War torn countries safer than our inner cities!
posted by mochapickle at 7:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Millions of AAs have succeeded, done SO much! We should celebrate that success, but we must also talk about the millions suffering in disastrous conditions in inner cities - poverty, drugs, violence... No group in USA has been more harmed by people in power.

Conway has been doing her job, I see. "Mr. Trump, this portrayal of communities of color as hell holes is not polling well. Can you, like, say something nice about black people?"
posted by soren_lorensen at 7:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


For real, what does Nieto possibly get out of this?
posted by schadenfrau at 7:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


seems like only yesterday that peña nieto compared trump to hitler and mussolini
posted by murphy slaw at 7:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


He's going to go after the gangs, with police, to end poverty
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:54 PM on August 30, 2016


Why would the president of Mexico entertain this hatemonger? This is terrible.

You're not actually supposed to accept these sorts of invitations. Trump is being a gauche idiot. He is clearly Ask Culture.
posted by Justinian at 7:55 PM on August 30, 2016 [19 favorites]


DJT:
- Will appoint best judges, prosecutors
- If you keep voting for same people, will keep getting same horrible results. HRC has been doing this for 35 years and NOTHING has happened (boooo)
- What do you have to lose? I will fix it. I will fix it. They won't fight for you. You will gain jobs, opportunity, security, safety, education and "many many other things"
posted by mochapickle at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Nieto's approval ratings at 23%. What do you think he could get out of this meeting? /sarcasm
posted by Sophie1 at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


seems like only yesterday that peña nieto compared trump to hitler and mussolini

What the hell. And then you meet with the guy?
posted by cashman at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016


surely what the african american community has been crying out for is more aggressive policing
posted by murphy slaw at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


For real, what does Nieto possibly get out of this?

A suitcase full of cash from Russia?
posted by Thorzdad at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


Meanwhile on the HRC side:
Clinton names Warren ally to transition team

Hillary Clinton has named a progressive with close ties to Elizabeth Warren to her transition team in a move that seems aimed at mollifying liberals unhappy with earlier choices.

POLITICO has learned that Rohit Chopra, who battled for-profit colleges and loan servicers as the student loan ombudsman at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, has joined the team.
posted by Chrysostom at 7:56 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


Why does he keep turning around?

It's finally the pivot. Literally.
posted by chris24 at 7:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


- War torn countries safer than our inner cities!
Soon to announce that Syria will begin accepting refugees from Detroit...
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Nieto's approval ratings at 23%. What do you think he could get out of this meeting?

WHAT THE HELL DO YOU HAVE TO LOSE
posted by rp at 7:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


DJT:
- Feed blip
- New article coming out: "Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump"
- School choice will make a difference - schools that parents believe will give kids the best shot at success. All children will be part of the american dream.
- "GOP is the party of Abraham Lincoln! Not bad! Not bad!"
- Democratic party is the party of slavery, jim crow, and opposition!
- WHAT A GREAT CROWD
posted by mochapickle at 7:59 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


"Is there anyplace better to be...than a Trump rally?" huh.
posted by OHenryPacey at 7:59 PM on August 30, 2016


he could be committing a felony under the Logan Act.

Didn't seem to hurt Tom Cotton.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:00 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


If Nieto plays this right and (figuratively) sucker punches Trump, he could be the most popular president in Mexico's history.
posted by Sophie1 at 8:01 PM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]


DJT:
- We will bring hope to every forgotten stretch of this country, one american nation, one united people, and we will have ONE REALLY GREAT FUTURE AGAIN.
- The great future will be built on JOBS JOBS JOBS. Manufacturing was hurt by hillary clinton's policies! We're not going to let jobs go to other countries anymore - there will be retribution, there will be a PRICE to pay!
- Renegotiating NAFTA and staying out of TPP (total disaster), stand up to China. "We're not going to be ripped off any longer." USA USA USA
posted by mochapickle at 8:02 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


- New article coming out: "Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump"

"We don't believe you, you need more people."
posted by cashman at 8:04 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm really glad no one but us nerds and the already Trump diehards watch these rallies because he's clearly pivoting to the part of the con where he just says any damn thing he thinks that someone somewhere wants to hear (spoiler: he's actually wrong and it's a trap). But I think there's probably a lot of people who are looking for any excuse to feel okay about pulling the R lever and just hearing the guy being like "I can do compassionate conservatism! Look! I'm doing it right now!!! (Is this how you do it? Am I doing the words right?)" might be enough to tip them.
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:05 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


"Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump"


Further evidence in the "Donald Trump is a narcissist who only regards the world as a reflection of himself" case file.
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:06 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


DJT:
- PROTESTERS!
- Bernie's protesters were much better!
- Taxes: Massive tax relief to all working people, lower tax rate for small bix from 35% to 15%; low and mid income parents can deduct cost of childcare
- Identify and remove all job-killing regulations
- Trade deficit is now nearly 800bn. Who negotiates these deals? Political hacks and politicians!
- American energy revolution lifting regulations on coal and gas, will create millions of jobs and lower your electric bill ("and every other bill for the american household!")
- We will secure border and talk about that in AZ tomorrow
posted by mochapickle at 8:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Wait, did he just do a promo for his big, big speech, tomorrow night in Arizona, tomorrow night, big speech on immigration?

What the fuck is this. This is only the second one of his things I've watched in its entirety. I just can't fucking believe it. And here comes "The Snake."
posted by rp at 8:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


DJT:
- Drugs pouring across border that most people haven't heard of!
- We are going to stop syrian refugees from entering; will build safe zone overseas
- Amazingly, HRC wants a 550% increase in syrian refugees coming in (booooooo)
- The SNAKE! Should I do it or not? OK, this has to do with people coming into our country, gov't says they have paperwork, they don't have paperwork. We have to help the people in syria, but look what's happening in Germany, what "she's" done to germany. Paris is no longer paris.
posted by mochapickle at 8:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


DJT:
- "Bad, bad things are going to happen. It's just a matter of when."
- Did you see they announced today 10s of 1000s coming in and we have no idea where they are being relocated.
- SNAKE POEM
posted by mochapickle at 8:11 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


DJT:
- "OH SHUT UP, SILLY WOMAN" He pauses. (Cheeeeers)
posted by mochapickle at 8:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


2016: Bad, bad things are going to happen. It's just a matter of when.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:13 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Taxes: Massive tax relief to all working people
Isn't that in direct contradiction to his public Economic Policy white paper that was 100% trickle-down?

"Bad, bad things are going to happen. It's just a matter of when."
That's his ultimate out if he's elected - "I didn't cause all these bad bad things happening, I just couldn't stop them in time"
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:14 PM on August 30, 2016


This snake thing. It's gotta just be for the "oh shut up, silly woman" line.

"Bad deal, folks. Bad, bad deal."
posted by rp at 8:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Dang, CHT, this liveblogging is not easy!

No. No it's not. You're doing a yeoman's job.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:16 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Why hasn't every political cartoonist with a conscience done one of Trump IS The Snake? (That hair couldn't look any worse on a python)
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:17 PM on August 30, 2016


DJT:
- Vote for me Nov 8, we're not taking 'em in (USA USA USA)
- Foreign policy: HRC has made one bad decision after another. I opposed Iraq. Most disastrous tenure in US history, she was horrible. World so much better before HRC was Sec of State (Iraq, Syria, ISIS, Iran, 400million cash ransom!) Legacy of HRC is death, destruction, terrorism, and weakness!
- We have crowds, people who love our country!

- That's yeowoman to you, CHT ;)
posted by mochapickle at 8:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


maybe now is not the time, but with how fast this thread moves I'm worried you will miss / going to second that one should re-read corb's thoughts on wages and resentment

I'm from Louisiana, I've worked in living wage movements and I can say that that analysis is right on, but something I've never heard put that simply. But when pushing for higher wages, I was often lectured by ceos and administrators about the dangers of "wage compression" lowering morale within corporations and universities.

basically the wage compression argument is that you can't increase wages for poor people, or the people just above the poorest will be very resentful and form unions to push for more pay or work out seniority, etc.

To which I always thought, "well great! rising tide and boats and all that"

But the resentment part is very real--I had never thought of it in terms of how it would inform reactionary politics.
posted by eustatic at 8:18 PM on August 30, 2016 [24 favorites]


That's yeowoman to you, CHT ;)

Just so long as you can bend a longbow.
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


DJT:
- HRC is all status quo
- HRC/Bill SPEECH MONEY!
- Foreign money going to Clinton Foundation, pay for play! (boooo) UBS, Russian Uranium, money missing from Haiti!
- HRC's public corruption is marked by HRC's 30,000 deleted emails. They're gone. (LOCK HER UP! terrifying from whole arena)
- HRC bleached? so no one can ever see them
- FBI found 1000s of emails, another 15000 emails discovered a few weeks ago, another 30 discovered this week -- emails about BENGHAZI. It just never ends -- there's one way to get justice in this TOTALLY RIGGED SYSTEM (repeat 4x)
posted by mochapickle at 8:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


WAIT
Hillary bleached her emails now? WTF?
posted by rp at 8:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Is this snake thing [real]? I can't watch Trump anymore and appreciate those of you who can.
posted by corb at 8:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


We got in, surprisingly. Saw a protester get arrested for allegedly punching someone in the arm. Lots of empty seats still behind Trump.
posted by fermion at 8:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


But the resentment part is very real--I had never thought of it in terms of how it would inform reactionary politics.

Oh, yes, the resentment is definitely a factor, but when it comes to people resenting those who avail themselves of government handouts, it's far too often uninformed / misinformed resentment based on falsehoods about these programs promulgated by American supply-side conservatives. Simply noting that the resentment exists without understanding why it exists is at best an incomplete picture, and when paired with anecdotes about beneficiaries who receive benefits far above average, a misleading one.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


DJT:
- HRC is powerful protecting the powerful, insiders protecting the insiders; I'm fighting for you

I have no idea about the bleach thing. That was weird
The snake poem is totally real and he's done it several times now
posted by mochapickle at 8:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


corb, the snake thing is real. Like he reads it from a piece of paper. It's bizarre.

And horrifying.
posted by rp at 8:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


The welfare-based argument is crap, though. The majority of benefit dollars go to people who are already employed.
posted by Miko at 8:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Is this snake thing [real]? I can't watch Trump anymore and appreciate those of you who can.

Broadly yes, going back at least to January:
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump has a new bit he's incorporating into his stump speeches. At two recent events, Trump put on a pair of glasses and did a dramatic reading of "The Snake," an anthem by the soul singer Al Wilson, in the middle of his speech.

The lyrics of the song are about a "vicious snake" that takes advantage of a "tender woman," who treats the creature with kindness only to get bitten. Trump suggested the song was a metaphor for what would happen if the US embraced refugees fleeing the violence in Syria, whom Trump considers potential terrorists.
That was 'two recent events' in January, but he's repeated it at a lot of rallies since then.
posted by cjelli at 8:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


...I don't think even one thing in any of these live updates is true.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:24 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


DJT:
- Better economy, future, jobs
- I want to be your champion in the white house
- Together we will make america WEALTHY/STRONG again; we will fix depleted military and take care of our vets; we will appoint the proper judges to the US Supreme Court; we will protect and save "our beautiful" second amendment; we will repeal and replace "the horror known as obamacare"
- We will make america PROUD/SAFE/GREAT again

You can't always get what you want.
posted by mochapickle at 8:25 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


For those of you who are interested, Angela Corey lost her reelection bid tonight.
posted by wittgenstein at 8:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [24 favorites]


You can't always get what you want

*exhales*
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Well at least he seems to have stopped the foamboards for now.
posted by mochapickle at 8:29 PM on August 30, 2016


Corb's comment(s) are exactly dead-on accurate to an experience my own family members' have had, my own neighbors have had, and that I have had.

I used to be a hard-core rural republican until I met people who were not the (only white, only conservative) struggling people I grew up with, and who were not the barely above the water, still desperate people who were my 'goals' in life. I honest to fuck did not realize that there were people worse off than me, I grew up on food stamps, food banks and thrift stores and we called it 'hardiness' whenever we acknowledged we were on the dole. We DID NOT DO THAT, however. I bought my first new clothes at 16, with a paycheck that was finally able to both feed me and clothe me more than rice-a-roni and salvo could. I'd been working at least 17 hrs/wk (maximum allowed by law.) since I was 13, working steady in some way since I was 11.
I honest to god had never been to or seen a place in the US (besides Pine Ridge, but that's a whole other 50-gallon drum of worms) worse than where I grew up until I went to DC in college, staying in a not-great part of it. I honest to fuck had never met a person who was not worse off than me whose parents were not felons or too addicted to drugs to work. This excused their suffering when I was young, but not now, and it stopped then. I'd only know children till then, and that's when I realized that that shit carries over far more than I thought.
I was 19 when this realization occurred. Everyone in my family who had anything, anything at all had gotten there by working their asses off. They benefited from gov't programs, but that was not talked about, as they had also mostly subsisted on plain pasta and lived in shitholes to get there. That was the focus. I did not realize that they had actually had a hand up that was biased because they were white men because even with that, most slipped back into generational poverty, and it didn't seem like we had an edge, but we did. We had a thumbhold. A pitiful thumbhold.

It's largely just that I mostly know shit-poor SD country kids working for nothing with no safety net, nothing in the future for them, no real goals beyond 'have a steady place to live' and 'don't starve', but god-almighty do I understand where they are coming from.
I'm blessed, motherfucking blessed, with a mind that cannot sleep without trying to fully understand what's going on in the world. I read, I try to educate myself about whatever I hear about. I got myself out of where I was in part because of that. I had the chance to be educated, and to travel for my education. I got to meet people who were not like me. I was the first person in my family to leave the US for reasons other than war since we got here. I was the first of us to even leave the midwest in the 100 years since my first blood relative got to our now 'home'. I was able to travel, I met and learned from people, and I'm only the better from it. I am a very lucky man.
I have friends, dear friends of my entire life, hardworking, skilled and dedicated people, soldiers, firefighters, teachers, EMTs, social workers, police and nurses, many of whom are for Trump, most of whom were offered little other choice for upwards mobility than working for the gov't in some capacity while being told to hate it by almost every media choice available, none of whom ever had the the chances I had. I am only differentiated by the chances I had, the places I went, and the people I met. I am, not matter what I believe, the product of SD farmers and laborers, just a product that had a chance to get out.

I hate what they say, I hate what they think, I hate who they vote for, but I have a hard time bringing myself to hate them. I was them. I was exactly as bad as them, and if I had not had amazing parents who worked their asses off (and also got lucky) to get me the opportunities I had, I would still be like them.

Not all hatred is brought on by innate hatred. Not all bigotry is based in entirely in things other than pain misdirected (by those who do not feel that pain.). As much as I was trained, even once I was a liberal, to distrust and hate Clinton and Dems, these folks got more of it, and most of them never got the chance to get outside the bubble that I did. They don't really know what else is going on in the country, but they know that they are suffering, and that the (fox) news tells them that liberals and POC are to blame.

I get that Trump's main support comes from the wealthier, but for the poor people I know who like Trump, he's one of the few people who does not make them feel like dirt for working a manual labor job, or for not people educated. They are entirely incorrect, but that is how they feel. That is how Trump makes them feel. Uplifted. They have never felt uplifted, and have never been more than an assumed base for the GOP. Trump is a drug, a dangerous drug, one that makes them feel worthy and energetic. Trump is the political meth of the rural poor. I regard his followers about the same way. They are tragically under-served people being sold a thing that might lead them out of that pain, no matter how much it hurts the community, no matter how much it hurts them.

Pain, pain is a powerful drug, and hating on the rural poor for latching onto it only helps to ignore the puppet-masters who set up this tableau in the first place. The (money-wise) poor people latching onto his words (I started writing this before his speech tonight.) are scared, lied to, and weak. They are victims, just victims who take out their victim-hood on the people they are told are the ones taking it away from them. They are double-fucked.

Fuck this election. I never thought I'd feel pity and sympathy for these assholes, but fucked if Trump doesn't bring me to it.
posted by neonrev at 8:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [146 favorites]


When this election is over, Trump's reading of "The Snake" is going to go into the pantheon of terrible dramatic readings right up there with William Shatner's version of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds".
posted by Reverend John at 8:30 PM on August 30, 2016 [7 favorites]


Angela Corey lost her reelection bid tonight.
"but sometimes... you get what you need..."
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:31 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


Be a hell of a note if Trump had Montezuma's revenge during his big speech tomorrow. You know, diarrhea coming out of his wherever?
posted by spitbull at 8:31 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]






The snake poem as read by Trump, if anyone missed it before...

It goes on for a while. Its basically the frog and the scorpion but longer and about a snake and a woman.
posted by thefoxgod at 8:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Be a hell of a note if Trump had Montezuma's revenge

Be a hell of a note if Pena Nieto had Trump impounded in a Mexican jail for questioning when something reportedly happens at a hotel or something. Or even make a big stink about wanting to so the State Department has to rescue him. Trump would be an idiot to cross the border into territory he's been dissing right and left right now.
posted by ctmf at 8:35 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


It goes on for a while. Its basically the frog and the scorpion but longer and about a snake and a woman.

My guess is Trump likes it over the frog/scorpion because he gets to blame a woman for being stupid. Also there's something sexual about the whole thing, and I have no doubt it plays into the alt-rights fetishistic racist fantasies about cuckolding.
posted by dis_integration at 8:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [23 favorites]


Apparently we were just in time for the last five minutes. Shame. It's been interesting people watching, anyway. There's a small protest behind the arena marching along with an escort of a dozen bicycle cops.
posted by fermion at 8:38 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Wait an R&B song about a woman deceived by a snake, what could the metaphor possibly be?
posted by spitbull at 8:38 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]




My guess is Trump likes it over the frog/scorpion because he gets to blame a woman for being stupid

Yup. It's pretty clear in his reading that Hilary is the "stupid woman"
posted by ChurchHatesTucker at 8:39 PM on August 30, 2016


Nah ctmf no way that happens. Mexico isn't going to create an international incident or risk rendering Trump a sympathetic figure.
posted by spitbull at 8:40 PM on August 30, 2016


Hillary bleached her emails now? WTF?

I think the bleach thing is a reference to this (Slate), where Trey Gowdy said that she used a file-deletion tool called BleachBit to delete some of her emails.
posted by ectabo at 8:40 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


> I was often lectured by ceos and administrators about the dangers of "wage compression" lowering morale within corporations and universities.

Dang though that analysis is Marx af. Like whenever I make arguments in those terms I feel like I'm playing the Marx stuff up too hard. But nope, the managerial class is Marxist: they understand that maintaining their positions of privilege requires manufacturing poverty.

> I hate what they say, I hate what they think, I hate who they vote for, but I have a hard time bringing myself to hate them. I was them. I was exactly as bad as them, and if I had not had amazing parents who worked their asses off (and also got lucky) to get me the opportunities I had, I would still be like them.

God damn but this was a good post. Sounds so much like the southern branch of my family it makes my teeth ache.

Fortunately, though, most of my southern relatives don't vote, and fortunately we can still have useful/entertaining conversations about politics if I play the Bay Area "let's be very precise about the differences between liberalism and leftism" game. they bitch about liberals, I bitch about liberals, everyone's happy.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 8:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [18 favorites]


More cops biking in to the intersection where the protesters are, Trump supporters yelling "Go get them! Lock them up!"
posted by fermion at 8:41 PM on August 30, 2016


Mexico isn't going to create an international incident

However, Mexico often has rather poor control over things that happen in Mexico.
posted by Miko at 8:42 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


For real, what does Nieto possibly get out of this?

Just a note for fellow anglos from someone who is like just ultimate white-bread so, like, it's with love: If you're using just one name for him, it should probably be Peña.

Hispanic names that are Firstname Surname Surname are usually Firstname Father's-surname Mother's-surname and if you were only going to use two names you'd usually go with Firstname Father's-surname. As with all things there are exceptions.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [17 favorites]


Well yes I suppose mobs could descend on the airport or something. But I mean no officials are going to arrest or detain Trump I'd wager.
posted by spitbull at 8:45 PM on August 30, 2016


Mexico isn't going to create an international incident

I would. Everything is a negotiation - what do I get in advance for not doing that? Hey, I just can't ignore allegations that Trump smuggled drugs in on his plane. I have to investigate that shit. That takes a few days. Ok, I'm being facetious.

But it does raise the question again, what does Pena Nieto think he's going to get from this, especially considering Trump is most likely going to lose?
posted by ctmf at 8:46 PM on August 30, 2016


I don't get the Snake thing. That was weird.
posted by bongo_x at 8:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I suppose mobs could descend on the airport or something

..or outside (non-Mexican) actors could wish to interfere outside US borders. I can understand why the Secret Service has reluctance.
posted by Miko at 8:48 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


You'd be running an extremely high risk of making Trump appear sympathetic or even heroic to begin with. You'd likely kill the tourism industry in a matter of days. It would be perceived potentially as even an act of war.

No way.
posted by spitbull at 8:49 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh to be sure. I joked about El Chapo above but I can imagine a young narco soldier would bring great glory and be the subject of corridos for a century for taking down Trump.

It is very strange that it is on such short notice.
posted by spitbull at 8:51 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


Well, I was promised something explosive.
posted by ctmf at 8:52 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


ctmf specifically suggested that (Trunp being detained), and that was the thing I was saying was unlikely.
posted by spitbull at 8:53 PM on August 30, 2016


> I don't get the Snake thing. That was weird.

I believe it is useful to introduce the concept of "fractal wrongness" to this conversation. Something that is fractally wrong is equally wrong at every scale of resolution. You know how when you zoom in on the Mandelbrot set, you just keep seeing smaller and smaller copies of the entire Mandelbrot set?

You zoom in on "The Snake," and you see that that one little poem has all of the wrongness of the Trump campaign packed into it. Likely if you focused on the poem and its delivery line by line, you'd discover that each line was as wrong as the poem as a whole, which is as wrong as the rally that it's delivered at, which is as wrong as the Trump campaign. It's wrongness all the way down, with no bottom to it.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 8:53 PM on August 30, 2016 [39 favorites]




"The Snake" is Trump's Mirror at its purest essence. Ask most people who fell for his cons in the Private Sector. Donald "Snake" Trump.
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:57 PM on August 30, 2016 [10 favorites]


Yeah, it's deeply odd and unsettling that he recites a poem announcing his own sinister intent at his rallies. but that's fractal wrongness for you...
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:00 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Either way, just to be clear, Mexico has everything to lose here if something bad happens. And it's hard to see what either Peña Nieto or the country have to gain. This election is off the rails enough and we should all hope Trump comes back safely.
posted by spitbull at 9:00 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


where Trey Gowdy said that she used a file-deletion tool called BleachBit to delete some of her emails.

Had she used DBAN, Dimwit Gowdy III would think she'd nuked the server.
posted by holgate at 9:06 PM on August 30, 2016


man. squick isn't the half of it. there's this "Archduke Ferdinand" feel to thinking about the fallout of Trump getting assassinated in Mexico. Like I'm picturing his supporters absolutely positively 100% militia-ing up. it's no good.

I sort of want to tweet "stay safe, idiot" at him.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:07 PM on August 30, 2016 [15 favorites]


Oh, come on, narco gangs have survived dozens of US, Mexican and trans-latin-american efforts to dissolve them (legally? Sometimes?), and that's not because we're bad at this, they are actually quite smart and know fuck-damned-well that assassinating Trump would mean what is basically (even more) open warfare against them, who cares what local gov't thinks. They are not, you know, fucking complete and total idiots.
posted by neonrev at 9:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Yeah, just to be clear, I think it would be a Really Bad Thing if anything happened to him on this trip. I'm just saying that the secret service is probably right in that this trip might actually be a danger, and he probably shouldn't have arranged it.
posted by Mitrovarr at 9:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


neonrev: Trump is the political meth of the rural poor.

Quoting for the truth.

I grew up in rural Ohio. Farmland. But the farmers were, in our parents' and grandparents' generations, able to send their super-grounded (no pun), smart, educated and ambitious kids off to colleges that were the ones demonized in the 80s and 90s as "liberal bastions." And they were the 'upper class' there-- there were the farmers, and the 'trailer park people.' And a few outliers, the "industry" people. Which is a big part of my upbringing, a remnant of the WWII economy-- steel, machining, shops, fittings, components. Who were definitely like the nuveau-riche, even though the industry was dying in the 60s and 70s and would be a blackened husk by the turn of the century.

The thing that pisses me off the most about the "not making people feel like dirt for working a manual labor job" is that we all worked manual labor jobs, and HE NEVER HAS. I ran huge CNC lathes with bar stock in high school. I did landscaping (more like land-shaping) in middle school, high school, and college. I've said this before, but Hillary's Made in America thing is great. And it should be a clarion for all of those people who, for whatever reason, want to believe that we still have a chance to build real things here, meaning infrastructure, not just product. And don't get me started on infrastructure vis a vis ecosystems, because the only ecosystems most of those people are concerned about are the ones inside the walls they have, and you gotta start somewhere. And maybe if we focused more on figuring out how the big picture affects the personal, how good ideas that benefit people because they benefit the environment, too, maybe we could get some real traction. I think one of the big benefits of the Dems' outreach portion of this campaign has been to show people who, 20 years ago, were flapping their arms about the spotted owl being protected instead of opening up logging are starting to see that progress doesn't mean fucking up the world for the grandkids they have now. Maybe it took those 25 years to get them to a point where they're able to see that the fears that they had, that their kids had, is universal and knows no racial or cultural boundaries.

Or maybe I'm just typing at this point. tl;dr: shit's bad. It's been bad a long time. Maybe if we actually get to the point and talk about what's bad, we can start making it less bad. Or even good.
posted by rp at 9:09 PM on August 30, 2016 [43 favorites]


The optics are meant to be "Only Trump Can Go To Mexico", so let's see how that works out. As Josh Marshall just posted, ceding control over a situation is campaign anathema.
posted by holgate at 9:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I tweeted a lot about the event; my handle is @spinifex23. Listed as Hail Zorp!
posted by spinifex23 at 9:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [6 favorites]


Wow, nice work, spinifex!
posted by mochapickle at 9:14 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


So is "Trump goes to Mexico" the new "Nixon in China?"
posted by rp at 9:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


basically the wage compression argument is that you can't increase wages for poor people, or the people just above the poorest will be very resentful and form unions to push for more pay or work out seniority, etc.

To which I always thought, "well great! rising tide and boats and all that"

But the resentment part is very real--I had never thought of it in terms of how it would inform reactionary politics.


One of my work colleagues will turn any mention of the $15/hr minimum wage into a rant about how unfair it is that "burger flippers" will eventually be making as much money as friends of hers with "real jobs." She has no intuition that increasing the minimum wage will ultimately push other wages upwards as well.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


I've tried to get my #undergroundhillary Facebook friends over but to no avail.

This is my sad butch face.
posted by blessedlyndie at 9:19 PM on August 30, 2016


So is "Trump goes to Mexico" the new "Nixon in China?"

Nope. Just Trump's Razor in action, per usual.
posted by mazola at 9:20 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


The thing that pisses me off the most about the "not making people feel like dirt for working a manual labor job" is that we all worked manual labor jobs, and HE NEVER HAS.

The other part of that is the deep cultural understanding that the more thankless varieties of manual work are a generational sacrifice, not a fucking glorious vocation to be valued in and of itself. That work is -- and has been since the beginning of the industrial revolution -- a means towards an end, and the end is making sure your kids don't do the exact same fucking job. There is dignity in that work, but the dignity belongs to the people doing the work.

FFS, the grand narrative of the post-war US is that the Greatest Generation got conscripted into war, travelling thousands of miles to shoot and not be shot, shared the spoils, their Boomer kids got college and cheap housing and optional drugs and sex (but also not-really-optional Vietnam) and then voted themselves tax cuts under Reagan and Medicare expansion under W Bush and are now Trump-curious because America's Changed. Well, fuck me, so it has.
posted by holgate at 9:21 PM on August 30, 2016 [62 favorites]


There is dignity in that work, but the dignity belongs to the people doing the work.

Thank you for saying it more focusedly than I did.
posted by rp at 9:22 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


One of my work colleagues will turn any mention of the $15/hr minimum wage into a rant about how unfair it is that "burger flippers" will eventually be making as much money as friends of hers with "real jobs."

See also: teachers' unions and "why do they get holiday time and a pension when I can get fired from my shitty job at a moment's notice and have to work unpaid overtime because my boss is a shithead?"

Well, the clue is in the question.
posted by holgate at 9:23 PM on August 30, 2016 [22 favorites]


Oh man, that TPM article:
Remember that the central force of Trump's political brand is dominance politics. Trump commands, people obey. Trump strikes, victims suffer. It will be extremely difficult for him to manage anything like this in the Mexican capital. He comes with a weak hand, no leverage and the look of a loser. All Peña Nieto needs to say is no.
posted by Existential Dread at 9:26 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


that josh marshall piece makes me think (hope?) that peña nieto's plan is to put trump on prime time televison and poke curiously at his hair and laugh uproariously
posted by murphy slaw at 9:27 PM on August 30, 2016 [14 favorites]


See also: teachers' unions and "why do they get holiday time and a pension when I can get fired from my shitty job at a moment's notice and have to work unpaid overtime because my boss is a shithead?"

On the local-market call-in radio that I listen to sometimes, they were talking about this yesterday. And everyone, I mean everyone, supported raising teachers' salaries. Across the board. Recognizing all the hours that teachers put in, their own money they spend for kids. Granted, this is in an econimically-safe market, more or less, but it was heartening because it wasn't about taking sides on this, just about supporting the people who are supporting the people.
(sorry for the field report)
posted by rp at 9:28 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


I don't care who psychologically destroys Trump as long as someone does it. Make my dreams come true, Peña Nieto.

Seriously though, I'm boggling at Trump thinking this is a good idea. It screams TRAP, and like Josh Marshall says, Trump has zero leverage. Trump probably wants to go there and tell Peña Nieto he's going to make Mexico pay for the wall to his face, imagining that Peña Nieto will stammer and cower or something. I doubt that will happen.
posted by yasaman at 9:32 PM on August 30, 2016 [9 favorites]


> It will be extremely difficult for him to manage anything like this in the Mexican capital. He comes with a weak hand, no leverage and the look of a loser. All Peña Nieto needs to say is no.

He's going to go in and poke Peña Nieto in the chest and call him a motherfucker. Trump's Razor is in full effect with every aspect of this trip.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


I wonder why Pena is taking the meeting? Is he?
posted by Miko at 9:35 PM on August 30, 2016


I feel this deep sense of relief thinking about how apparently, in some parts of the country, if you play it right, you can sort of get enough from SSI to live off of.

It's no guaranteed basic income... but it's a start.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 9:36 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wow, wait. Pena invited him. According to the NYT, he extended invitations to both Trump and Clintom.
posted by Miko at 9:37 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


He's going to go there, shake hands, smile, get some pictures looking presidential, then go home. Then he'll say after having met the President of Mexico, who's a tremendous guy by the way - great ideas, going to make a great partner, the best partner, stopping illegal immigration, maybe we'll hold off on the wall thing for now.
posted by ctmf at 9:40 PM on August 30, 2016 [26 favorites]


TRAP TRAP IT'S A TRAP.

Win-win for Peña Nieto, no matter how it goes with either candidate, probably a net neutral for Clinton if not positive, but it's gotta be a loss for Trump no matter what. Like, barely knowing anything about Peña Nieto, I'm willing to bet he's smarter than Trump.
posted by yasaman at 9:41 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


it right, you can sort of get enough from SSI to live off of.

...you realize SSI is for disabled people (and old age with basically zero assets...but mainly disabled in practice), right? And it's $733/mo, or $8796/yr. Poverty line is $11880 for an individual. They don't just hand this stuff out, contrary to Republican talking points. You have to prove medical disability, with actual medical records. And then it's literally a pittance, below poverty line.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


So is "Trump goes to Mexico" the new "Nixon in China?"

Or "Bonzo goes to Bitburg."
posted by dersins at 9:44 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


I wonder why Pena is taking the meeting? Is he?

It would be kinda great if he was too busy to see him.
posted by bongo_x at 9:46 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


And I think part of the cultural / ethnic issue is that some white Americans see second-generation immigrant kids who are the beneficiaries of their parents' generational sacrifice, and

But that shit's really hard. It's the diversity lottery winner who drives a cab in the small hours though he arrived in America with a professional degree because there's no easy way to convert his credentials; it's the overqualified woman working server shifts at a restaurant while she gets her language skills up to spec; it's even the aspiring model dumped in NYC on a precarious visa, living in a shitty dorm that's billed against most of what she earns.

It's perhaps easier, paradoxically, when you have fewer cultural ties and no expectations that America's going to give you anything. You've already given up everything you can fall back on. If you're rooted, then you're more likely to get stuck.

That's the noxious bind of Trumpism: it's promising economic change alongside cultural stasis: you (mainly white people, but maybe minorities if you get on board) can keep being just what you are and greatness will be rained down upon you. One thing that's gone largely unnoticed is that Trump doesn't really talk about a path out of shitty prospects in the way that it's usually understood: as befits a dolt who considers education a status symbol, there is no education policy. That, I think, is what chimes most with fascism.
posted by holgate at 9:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


So is "Trump goes to Mexico" the new "Nixon in China?"

With Giuliani and Bannon, it's more like the Three Amigos.
posted by My Dad at 9:48 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Win-win for Peña Nieto

The guy is apparently at 23% in the polls. Who knows how good his political instincts are, and if he actually knows what he's signing up for. Extraordinary times in 2016.
posted by My Dad at 9:49 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump probably wants to go there and tell Peña Nieto he's going to make Mexico pay for the wall to his face, imagining that Peña Nieto will stammer and cower or something. I doubt that will happen.

I wonder whether he's convinced that everyone who'll show up in D.F. will speak only Mexican.
posted by holgate at 9:49 PM on August 30, 2016


More like Neville goes to Munich. Except I'm not sure which guy is Neville Chamberlin.
posted by humanfont at 9:54 PM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ah, found the article Trump was just crowing about: WSJ: Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump

You may remember the writer, Heather Mac Donald, defending Abu Ghraib as "torture lite" some years ago.
posted by mochapickle at 9:57 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


ugh, sack my typist: first graf should have been

"And I think part of the cultural / ethnic issue is that some white Americans see second-generation immigrant kids who are the beneficiaries of their parents' generational sacrifice, and wonder how they got ahead when they're stuck where they are."

But you got the gist.
posted by holgate at 9:57 PM on August 30, 2016


First - at least when I was doing social service/homeless services work, the majority of people I saw who had SSI (who had regular social workers) were often able to get SSI for the kids as well. So more common than one person alone with 700$ SSI, was a family of three or four, collecting between 2K and 3K a month.

What the heck are you even talking about? To collect SSI you must be disabled. Children do not get SSI unless they are disabled. If a family of three or four are all collecting SSI, they they must all be disabled. From tonyscpu's PDF from the Social Security Administration Inspector you will see that in the entire U.S. there are estimated to be less than 14,000 households in which four members are collecting SSI.

So I would have to say that your claim that families of three or four on SSI collecting 2K to 3K a month is common, is, how do we say this ... bullshit. This is Ronald Reagan Cadillac welfare queen level bullshit. No wonder Trump Republicans are angry. They are being showered with bullshit.
posted by JackFlash at 9:58 PM on August 30, 2016 [42 favorites]


Politico has this quote:

"“Trump realized this would be a brilliant time to do it and is trying to pull it together last minute,” according another person close to the campaign who has been briefed by a campaign staffer. “Would be a major power play. It’s like he’s already negotiating on behalf of America.” The person suggested that the meeting could, for example, allow Trump to agree to deport only criminals if the Mexican president offered some sort of concession in return."

Their notions of power plays clearly have disaster written all over them. Tomorrow should be interesting.
posted by feloniousmonk at 10:06 PM on August 30, 2016 [8 favorites]


If you're disabled, it's pretty likely you have expensive or hard to meet needs in terms of transit, shopping, help around the house, medical needs (even if treatment is fully covered, you still have to get to the office), etc. If you're disabled and have kids then I hazard to guess your "income" doesn't go near as far as the same income would for a non-disabled parent (what if you can't pick your kids up? what if you always have to use the bus because you can't drive?). Plus, my understanding of disability rules is you often aren't allowed to accumulate "wealth" where "wealth" means even a few months savings. The people I know on disability or similar aren't allowed more than a few hundred dollars in assets. One unexpected bill (e.g. a broken down car or having to move suddenly because your apartment becomes uninhabitable which actually happens if you're having to rent at the low end of the market) and you're screwed.

While I grant that there are probably a few people here and there who are scamming the system, the vast, overwhelming majority of people getting disability benefits are not living a truly stable and secure life. That some people believe that folks on disability are somehow unfairly getting benefits is entirely because those in power have routinely redirected anger at the system towards marginalized groups that aren't doing any better than those who are angry. It's just another version of blaming the misallocation of government resources on "welfare queens".
posted by R343L at 10:08 PM on August 30, 2016 [16 favorites]


Oh, and the SSA Inspector's report shows that the most common reason for households with four or more disabled members is mental retardation or other mental impairment. These are the families that Trump Republicans are so envious of for jumping ahead of them?
posted by JackFlash at 10:09 PM on August 30, 2016 [13 favorites]


Plus, my understanding of disability rules is you often aren't allowed to accumulate "wealth" where "wealth" means even a few months savings. The people I know on disability or similar aren't allowed more than a few hundred dollars in assets.

That's SSI, to be clear. SSDI is calculated as a fraction of your previous income and you can have savings. Neither is enough to live on.
posted by mochapickle at 10:10 PM on August 30, 2016 [3 favorites]


They are victims, just victims who take out their victim-hood on the people they are told are the ones taking it away from them. They are double-fucked.

Many of the rural poor are indeed victims of snake oil salesmen, but the logic by which you're describing them as victims is itself forbidden by their own ideology, which focuses on personal responsibility and a caveat emptor / victim-blaming approach to one's situation in life. This is a hard nut to crack, as the MoJo article linked above illustrates -- we can give them assistance, but they're certainly not going to extoll the virtues of that assistance to others, so everyone's secretly and shamefully soaking up the benefits while describing themselves as a rugged individualist, leading to the paradox of vanishing public support at the ballot box for the checks that the public desperately wants in their mailbox.

So what are we to do? We can't force-feed these communities benefits they don't want, so we try to bury them in the tax code, which further undermines the public case for their existence, even among other populations that aren't as hostile towards them. Or we try to use blunt instruments like the ACA's Medicaid Expansion, but the public mood in many states is so anti-government that even this free life-saving money is rejected. And as we watch so many of them struggling, sick, and dying, we're told to not be too mean to the ones who continue to crusade against the government assistance that they and their neighbors desperately need.

I don't know about you, but I don't have the stomach to give them what they want and pull away entirely to leave them to die. So I'll keep pushing for them to get the programs they need, but with that, I will retain my right to tell the ones that hate those programs to go fuck themselves, especially the ones who are simultaneously benefiting from them while undermining them.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:17 PM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]




you'd discover that each line was as wrong as the poem as a whole, which is as wrong as the rally that it's delivered at, which is as wrong as the Trump campaign. It's wrongness all the way down, with no bottom to it.

Every word is wrong, every syllable, every phoneme, literally every molecule and atom of air that goes in and out of Trump's mouth while he's saying it.

It's like the absolute epitome of wrongness . . .
posted by flug at 10:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


I read these election threads mainly to keep myself sane during this election season. But the dialogue over the past few hours between people like corb, Frowner, JackFlash, tonycpsu, R343L, holgate, rp (and others who I'm sure I'm missing) is really Best of Metafilter. I wish it wasn't buried at the bottom of such a long thread.

I feel like I'm getting a grad course in sociology here. A lot of what people are saying resonates strongly with my own experience having grown up fairly low-income in a rural red state and now returning home to visit occasionally as an evil lesbian ivory tower liberal. But y'all are saying it better than I ever have, and drawing links between phenomena that I hadn't perceived myself.
posted by forza at 10:33 PM on August 30, 2016 [30 favorites]


Ah, found the article Trump was just crowing about: WSJ: Black Lives Matter to Donald Trump

It's just an op/ed at that, not even journalism or reportage ffs.
posted by OHenryPacey at 10:45 PM on August 30, 2016


All I can think of right now is Admiral Akbar piloting Trump's plane to Mexico but Trump ignoring Akbar's warning because his name sounds Muslim.
posted by Special Agent Dale Cooper at 11:25 PM on August 30, 2016 [12 favorites]


Can Trump legally negotiate policy with a foreign leader? That sounds completely illegal.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:34 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


They could chat about UFOs or whatever but none of it is legally binding. It's just a PR stunt. He's on record calling Mexicans rapists and so forth, so his visit is damage control with Latino voters.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 11:40 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


I suppose it could be a violation of the Logan Act, but I believe that Act specifies negotiating without autority with foreign nations who have a dispute with the United States. Either way, only one person has ever been indicted for such a violation, in the early 1800s. Many have grumbled about it. Reagan mumbled Rev. Jesse Jackson's activities in Cuba, for instance.
posted by xyzzy at 11:43 PM on August 30, 2016 [1 favorite]


DONALD IN MEXICO
President Peña Nieto: 	Mr Trump, it is a great pleasure to welcome you to our beautiful republic.

Donald Trump: 		[thinks: say something presidential say something presidential]
 
			So, what kind of tacos you get around here?
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:47 PM on August 30, 2016 [4 favorites]


that josh marshall piece makes me think (hope?) that peña nieto's plan is to put trump on prime time televison and poke curiously at his hair and laugh uproariously

No, he is going to rip the glowing orange slime mold from Aldebaran IX B from Trump's cortical cavity and beat it to death with a folding chair, thereby saving humanity and earning the Nobel Peace Prize.
posted by y2karl at 11:49 PM on August 30, 2016 [5 favorites]


But the dialogue over the past few hours between people like corb, Frowner, JackFlash, tonycpsu, R343L, holgate, rp (and others who I'm sure I'm missing) is really Best of .

To give credit where it's due? I'm reluctant to quote metafiler comments to my partner because *rolleyes*, but I had to read all of Corb's comment, the one that kicked of the discussion, and we had a long talk about it afterwards.

I may be on the opposite side of the political spectrum from Corb, but damn. The resulting conversation is the best of the internet. If metafilter gave Hugos, I would nominate her.
posted by happyroach at 12:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [21 favorites]


Note: everyone needs a hugo
posted by aubilenon at 12:21 AM on August 31, 2016 [16 favorites]


My dream Clinton opener at the first debate:

"Good evening, ladies and gentleman, etc. I'm disappointed tonight. Every four years, our country comes together to discuss the hopes we have for our country and the challenges we face. And the Republicans have always nominated men with strong visions for our future. We hold elections so that we can compare those competing visions. I was looking forward to debating a serious Republican candidate because I know that the Democratic vision for our future is the right one, and I will debate with anybody, any time, to prove it. Unfortunately, there won't be a real debate tonight. We can't compare visions for this country. We can't debate because Donald Trump doesn't have a vision FOR America, he only has a vision OF America. A bankrupt vision. A vision that says our cities are more dangerous than war torn areas. A vision that say immigrants are rapist and murderers. A vision of women incapable of real work. He doesn't have any ideas about how to fix our country, he only has problems. He says only he can fix them, but he won't say how. So I'm disappointed. There won't be a debate tonight because there is no serious Republican candidate for president. I will share with you how I will move the country forward. I know that's it the right vision. But I'm disappointed because you won't have much to compare it to - only mean spirited attacks and a side of exaggeration. Etc."
posted by one_bean at 12:26 AM on August 31, 2016 [35 favorites]


Note: everyone needs a hugo
but I think only MeFi's Own cstross and jscalzi have won one

posted by oneswellfoop at 12:30 AM on August 31, 2016 [18 favorites]


I think the guy who wrote this amazing dystopia about Trump being the 2016 nominee needs a Hugo. Talk about great speculative fiction! I just need to figure out how to turn off this VR interface...
posted by corb at 12:37 AM on August 31, 2016 [32 favorites]


Well, it has a great opening and I'm sure the climax will totally be worth it, but the storyline really needs editing to tighten it up in the middle. It's taking entirely too long to develop its characters.
posted by Autumn Leaf at 12:45 AM on August 31, 2016 [6 favorites]


the meeting could, for example, allow Trump to agree to deport only criminals if the Mexican president offered some sort of concession in return.
It's win-win, right? The US gets paid to get rid of just the people it doesn't want, and Mexico pays to get back just the people it's better off without. And the money from the deal all goes to BUILD THE WALL! Except for a small* annual stipend to Trump to pay him for the right to hang his name on the wall.

(* 10-15% of gross should do it.)
posted by Autumn Leaf at 12:54 AM on August 31, 2016


my hairdresser, who has had on a couple occasions to stop what she was doing because I was having painful spasms, told me that she is sick of people who can work receiving disability, but I was okay because I was in a wheelchair.

It's like, yaaaaaay, I won your approval, I need a new hairdresser.
posted by angrycat at 1:39 AM on August 31, 2016 [47 favorites]


[A couple of earlier comments deleted. Please don't post specific how-to type assassination scenarios.]
posted by taz at 2:43 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]


I genuinely want Trump to be safe in Mexico as I really don't want to do the moral calculus of deciding whether Los Zetas are better or worse than the alt-right.
posted by um at 3:27 AM on August 31, 2016


Has anyone else spotted the new PPP national poll? There's a spectacular cross-tab in there. "Trump Cares about African-Americans and Latinos Yes/No" Hispanic: 27%/67% African American: 2%/80% White: 51%/40%
posted by Francis at 3:34 AM on August 31, 2016 [29 favorites]


If Joe Arpaio gets his wish and manage to make it on the already hilarrible team of Jefferson Beauregard "A Racist Slave-Owning Traitor Is Literally My Middle Name" Sessions III and Rudy "9/11! I WAS THERE!" Guliani, we may actually deplete the emergency backup popcorn supplies.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:13 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


I have a question for those who are out volunteering for the Clinton campaign -- do you ever talk about downticket races? Or should I sign up specifically with those candidates to volunteer for them?

I ask because while I want to help Clinton to win Florida; I also want to help Patrick Murphy beat Marco Rubio. And I'm near a swing congressional district that could use a push towards the blue (Florida's 26).
posted by JustKeepSwimming at 4:32 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


The script we use does have a bit about downticket Democrats. And if I recall correctly, if the recipient is not enthusiastic about Clinton, you're supposed to ask them about supporting other Democrats on the ticket. I know that some of the HRC events in NH have been joint events to support Maggie Hassan as well.
posted by peacheater at 4:34 AM on August 31, 2016 [7 favorites]


Actually, now that I think about it a bit more, I know there was a bit specifically about Hassan in our script, because I had to ask the elderly lady sitting next to me exactly how to pronounce Hassan, given that I get all my news from the internet and newspapers.
posted by peacheater at 4:35 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think my dream result of Trump's trip to Mexico would be Peña Nieto sending an underling to the airport to tell Trump to go back home when he lands, and then holding a press conference to explain to everyone what an idiot Trump is, and a weak-willed one at that who will come running on a moment's notice. Just a straight up attack on his need for dominance.

A man can dream, right?
posted by tocts at 4:54 AM on August 31, 2016 [12 favorites]


Also in that PPP poll, 31% of Trump supporters favor building a wall across the Atlantic Ocean to keep Muslims from the Middle East from entering the United States. 12% off all poll respondents support the Atlantic wall.
posted by rdr at 4:54 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


Maggie Haberman: Trump at moment is not planning to bring US media with him on trip. Anyone remember another nominee doing foreign trip w no press corps?

So the spin will belong to him entirely. No matter what actually happens the Three Amigos can announce that Trump was the dominant male and he made some fantastic deal.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:55 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]




I can't help but think of the time Rob Ford flew down to appear on Jimmy Fallon's show and everyone worried it was going to be some sort of PR masterstroke and then Fallon just rubbed Ford's face in it for 20 minutes while he sat there sweating and grinning uncomfortably.
posted by The Card Cheat at 5:11 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


A hint at what Trump's concession speech might sound like?

George Richards: .@tim_canova gives his concession speech: "I will concede Debbie Wasserman Shultz is a corporate stooge. There you go."

In other twitter news....

Roger Stone has tweeted a photoshopped picture of Hillary and Bill in full KKK regalia entitled "Who are the racists?"

Pastor Mark Burns retweeted the racist Hillary cartoon but this time without the black face. (She is still holding up signs that say "I ain't no ways tired of pandering to African-Americans" and "#@!* the police."
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:14 AM on August 31, 2016


Trump at moment is not planning to bring US media with him on trip. Anyone remember another nominee doing foreign trip w no press corps?

Dangit foiled again! If only the Mexicans had media outlets of their own
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:18 AM on August 31, 2016 [6 favorites]


So is "Trump goes to Mexico" the new "Nixon in China?"

Seems more like the new "John McCain suspends his campaign to negotiate a brilliant solution to the financial crisis."
posted by PlusDistance at 5:24 AM on August 31, 2016 [27 favorites]


Yes, and if only US news media outlets had access to these things called "airplanes" and "passports".
posted by tocts at 5:25 AM on August 31, 2016 [4 favorites]


also,

NYT: Oh, oh, Mr. Trump sir *tugs on sleeve* is it true you are going to Mexico do you mind if we come too?

DJT: No you have to stay home

*sad trombone*

NYT: Oh well Mr. Trump sir will you please let us know how it went when you return sir?

DJT: maybe if you behave yourselves

NYT: will you bring us treats

DJT: we'll see
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:25 AM on August 31, 2016 [27 favorites]


the new "Nixon in China?"


More like Earnest Goes To Camp, except dumber.
posted by Potomac Avenue at 5:29 AM on August 31, 2016 [12 favorites]


I also hear rumours that US media have correspondents in a place called 'abroad', where the fabled land of Old Mexico is widely thought to be.
posted by Devonian at 5:30 AM on August 31, 2016 [18 favorites]


The Clinton camp believes that Mr. Trump is most insecure about his intelligence, his net worth and his image as a successful businessman, and those are the areas they are working with Mrs. Clinton to target.

In related news, Clinton camp believes water is wet, rocks hard.

It's not like Trump hasn't worn these things on his sleeve since this all began. If I was handling Trump, I'd run the limo back by Dr. Jacoby's office and get him a prescription for a heroic dose of Xanax prior to the debates. Sure, for anyone else trying to participate in a debate on a massive dose of sedatives would be insane, but for the Donald? The expectation is that he will morph into some twisted combination of The Red Skull and The Incredible Hulk. If he just stands there, throws out short, no substance answers and literally drools on himself a bit everyone will be talking about how presidential he looked last night.
posted by Kid Charlemagne at 5:34 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


I heard pretty much anybody can go to Mexico without Trump's permission. There are rumors that even teenagers do it during a fabled spring recreational holiday.
posted by maxsparber at 5:42 AM on August 31, 2016 [4 favorites]


Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio has trounced 3 Republican rivals to win the GOP nomination in his bid for a 7th term

The knowledge that Arpaio's personal fiefdom of brutality will continue for four more years is enough to make someone clinically depressed. We talk about theoretical oppression as a result of people getting elected but Sheriff Joe's everyday brutality has resulted in 24 years of minority oppression and terror with at least another four years to go.

Fuck the people of this country sometimes. We're well past the "we didn't know what he was doing" defense. The electorate of Maricopa County is half inhabited by bloodthirsty brutalists.
posted by Talez at 5:44 AM on August 31, 2016 [28 favorites]


There's mention of downticket races in the Clinton phonebanking scripts, but the best way to support individual candidates is to volunteer for their campaigns.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 5:47 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


One of my work colleagues will turn any mention of the $15/hr minimum wage into a rant about how unfair it is that "burger flippers" will eventually be making as much money as friends of hers with "real jobs."


I have an acquaintance who lives on SSDI and Medicaid and food stamps who says the same things. The burger flipper line is stock now .The image is always a young person of color.

I sometimes ask such people what they'd want to be paid at 50 for standing (or more likely stooping) under blazing sun every day picking strawberries for 10 hours.
posted by spitbull at 6:01 AM on August 31, 2016 [15 favorites]


When this person was not disabled, they made $50k a year for answering phones and booking appointments, by the way. A lot easier than flipping burgers.
posted by spitbull at 6:04 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway: ‘Rape would not exist’ if women were strong enough
In a recently resurfaced video clip from the PBS program To the Contrary, Conway said that she objected to women in combat.

“Women are already making incredible contributions to the United Sates military and will continue to do so,” she opined. “But the military’s first and primary mission is to win wars and to be as completely as capable and efficient and uber-ready as it can be. But we also don’t want to put our women in harm’s way.”

After panel members pointed out that women who pass the physical exam should have the same rights as men, Conway brought up the topic of rape unprompted.

“If you are suggesting that physical fitness experts say it’s different, I’ll accept that,” she said. “Except to say that we should not have the girl’s version and the boy’s version of that physical fitness test.”

“But I’ll tell you,” Conway added. “If we were physiologically — not mentally, emotionally, professionally — equal to men, if we were physiologically as strong as men, rape would not exist. You would be able to defend yourself and fight him off.”
posted by zombieflanders at 6:09 AM on August 31, 2016 [14 favorites]


Trump just tweeted Former President Vicente Fox, who is railing against my visit to Mexico today, also invited me when he apologized for using the "f bomb." [real]

There's a @dril quality to that one.
posted by Countess Elena at 6:11 AM on August 31, 2016 [4 favorites]


George Richards: .@tim_canova gives his concession speech: "I will concede Debbie Wasserman Shultz is a corporate stooge. There you go."

Proves to me he wasn't the right man for a job that's best performed by those skilled in collegiality, diplomacy, compromise, and a desire to serve others. What an immature dick.

This race plus Arpaio plus a lot of the House races where there is no credible opponent to incumbents...it seems like there's a lot of potential room for decent, mature, intelligent adults, but not a lot of decent, mature, intelligent adults who want these jobs or the experience of trying to get them. Is it the money thing? The way candidates get picked apart nowadays? The fact that Congress seems worse than useless?

Imagine the different kind of people we might get in our government if all campaigns were publicly financed...
posted by sallybrown at 6:12 AM on August 31, 2016 [17 favorites]


“But I’ll tell you,” Conway added. “If we were physiologically — not mentally, emotionally, professionally — equal to men, if we were physiologically as strong as men, rape would not exist. You would be able to defend yourself and fight him off.”

It's why every fight between dudes ends in a stalemate and a handshake.
posted by PenDevil at 6:13 AM on August 31, 2016 [71 favorites]


“But I’ll tell you,” Conway added. “If we were physiologically — not mentally, emotionally, professionally — equal to men, if we were physiologically as strong as men, rape would not exist. You would be able to defend yourself and fight him off.”

I'd feel sorry for her at how much she clearly hates herself (see also: Todd Akin campaign), except that she's hurting the rest of us, too. Seek therapy, Conway.
posted by sallybrown at 6:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [37 favorites]


Trump just tweeted Former President Vicente Fox, who is railing against my visit to Mexico today, also invited me when he apologized for using the "f bomb."

He's completely setting up the dominance narrative here. I hope Peña is savvy enough to pick up on this and react accordingly.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]



A caution about the danger of this election:

One of my favourite things from this election is the 'Vagenda of Manocide' thing. It's tickles my funny bone in all the right places and it's really fun to say out loud. Since it came to light I've been saying it out loud (mostly to myself) and having a good giggle.

Yesterday I was working on the books at our music festival office.

Me to our event manager: "So I have something I need to put on next weeks vagenda.'

Event manager: 'Eh wot? '

Me: o.0 'doh'
posted by Jalliah at 6:15 AM on August 31, 2016 [34 favorites]


Fuck the people of this country sometimes. We're well past the "we didn't know what he was doing" defense. The electorate of Maricopa County is half inhabited by bloodthirsty brutalists.

To be fair to the good people of Maricopa county, Arpaio only got 67% of the vote of the people who showed up for the GOP primary, where turnout is generally lower. He might still lose in the general election, maybe.
posted by dis_integration at 6:19 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]


Canova was a leftist stooge. I'd frankly prefer corporate stooges to governance by the campus left.
posted by spitbull at 6:21 AM on August 31, 2016 [4 favorites]


I've said this before, but Hillary's Made in America thing is great. And it should be a clarion for all of those people who, for whatever reason, want to believe that we still have a chance to build real things here, meaning infrastructure, not just product.

These campaigns are explicitly prohibited by almost every trade agreement. It's been a part of NAFTA for ages. She can do it in a campaign because she isn't government yet. The moment she is president she has to drop it because it is illegal.
posted by srboisvert at 6:22 AM on August 31, 2016


George Richards: .@tim_canova gives his concession speech: "I will concede Debbie Wasserman Shultz is a corporate stooge. There you go."

Proves to me he wasn't the right man for a job that's best performed by those skilled in collegiality, diplomacy, compromise, and a desire to serve others. What an immature dick.


I'd assumed that that tweet was satire. No wonder DWS won.
posted by Francis at 6:24 AM on August 31, 2016 [15 favorites]


To be fair to the good people of Maricopa county, Arpaio only got 67% of the vote of the people who showed up for the GOP primary, where turnout is generally lower. He might still lose in the general election, maybe.

Then there's the whole "criminal charges being considered by the Dept of Justice thing"...
posted by strange chain at 6:27 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yeah I would not want to be on a departmental committee with someone like Tim Canova.

As I said above and in the prior thread, DWS won in a walk (13 points last I saw) because her many supporters in her district were itching for payback for the two-minute hate style misogynistic witch-burning and scapegoating of their well liked and hard working long time rep, known for superb constituent service. Some even took those attacks as vaguely anti-Semitic (which I think is right). The BOB crowd's viciousness toward DWS was so disproportionate. And they wonder why they're eating crow this morning?
posted by spitbull at 6:29 AM on August 31, 2016 [16 favorites]


Obama Pays Mexico Five Billion Dollars to Keep Donald Trump (fake, obvs)

“I have been assured by the government of Mexico that Mr. Trump will be well taken care of and, if he proves to be a productive member of their society, will be provided a pathway to Mexican citizenship,” Obama said.

The President bristled at the suggestion that paying Mexico to keep Trump was “reverse ransom” and an extravagant use of taxpayer money. “There is only one accurate word for this payment: a bargain,” he said.


Gold, Jerry.
posted by adamp88 at 6:31 AM on August 31, 2016 [18 favorites]


rp: The thing that pisses me off the most about the "not making people feel like dirt for working a manual labor job" is that we all worked manual labor jobs...

My own vision of National Service is that everyone should spend a year working in a service job like waiting tables or in retail. Then everyone will get the experience of some kind of long hours, tiring work, and no thanks....but you also get an enormous lesson in empathy for others.

People who have never been in a service job give away that fact sooner or later, in the way they treat the ordinary people they deal with. Trump strikes me as someone who probably tips big, but does so unhappily because he wants to have a reputation as a big spender -- but he hates giving away his Precious Wealth to "just" someone with a service job.
posted by wenestvedt at 6:33 AM on August 31, 2016 [16 favorites]


Can someone explain the whole DWS controversy from beginning to end to me? I honestly don't understand where it all came from. I guess I'm specifically interested in:
1. What she is supposed to have done
2. Whether she actually did what she is supposed to have done
3. What her appointment in Florida afterward was, and why it's so controversial
4. What her reputation was before all this brouhaha - it seems that many people have a long-standing dislike of her, I'd like to understand more about why
5. Who this Tim Canova chap is
posted by peacheater at 6:42 AM on August 31, 2016


1. What she is supposed to have done
2. Whether she actually did what she is supposed to have done
3. What her appointment in Florida afterward was, and why it's so controversial
4. What her reputation was before all this brouhaha - it seems that many people have a long-standing dislike of her, I'd like to understand more about why
5. Who this Tim Canova chap is


1. She's supposed to have used the DNC (the committee) as part of HRC's campaign, not as a neutral entity.
2. Sort of. There's no precise smoking gun but the emails certainly reveal a lack of concern for remaining neutral
3. Clinton took her on as a member of her campaign, which was controversial because the whole point was that she was supposed to be biased in favor of Clinton, instead of being neutral.
4. Much of her negative rep comes from her work to help out those poor, struggling, payday lenders.
5. After that bullshit concession, he's just some chucklefuck.
posted by dis_integration at 6:48 AM on August 31, 2016 [15 favorites]


Oh man please put him on live Mexican TV and proceed to humiliate him in both languages at once

Please please please
posted by schadenfrau at 6:49 AM on August 31, 2016 [10 favorites]


Can someone explain the whole DWS controversy from beginning to end to me? I honestly don't understand where it all came from. I guess I'm specifically interested in:
1. What she is supposed to have done


She was in charge of the DNC - responsible for organising the Democratic Primary. Some Sanders supporters claim she rigged the election. She's also the representative for Florida's 23rd district.

2. Whether she actually did what she is supposed to have done

No. She didn't. There were some leaked emails from the DNC - which showed a couple of DNC staffers kicked round floating an anti-Sanders controversy that never materialised.

3. What her appointment in Florida afterward was, and why it's so controversial

Clinton made her her Honorary Campaign Chair and then sent her back to Florida. Emphasis on the word honorary - it was a kiss-off. The loopier Sanders supporters claim this was giving her a job.

4. What her reputation was before all this brouhaha - it seems that many people have a long-standing dislike of her, I'd like to understand more about why

A good fundraiser. Otherwise someone who was right in Clinton's camp in 2008 - and threw her over for Obama as soon as it was clear he was winning. Generally not very organised or good at much other than fundraising and she managed to annoy both Clinton and Obama.

5. Who this Tim Canova chap is

She's a member of the House from Florida. He was making her fight a primary because he wanted to become the Democratic candidate for the House in Florida's 23rd district. It's gerrymandered enough that the Primary is basically the election.
posted by Francis at 6:51 AM on August 31, 2016 [10 favorites]


2. Sort of. There's no precise smoking gun but the emails certainly reveal a lack of concern for remaining neutral
Did she personally send any of these emails?

Also, was under the impression that the DNC did not actually organize any of the state primary elections. How is the rigging of the elections supposed to have taken place?
posted by peacheater at 6:53 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]


Did she personally send any of these emails?

No.

Also, was under the impression that the DNC did not actually organize any of the state primary elections. How is the rigging of the elections supposed to have taken place?

Your guess is as good as mine.
posted by Francis at 6:58 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]


Did she personally send any of these emails?

Well
“Do you all think it’s worth highlighting for CNN that her term ends the day after the inauguration, when a new D.N.C. Chair is elected anyway?” Mr. Miranda asked. Ms. Wasserman Schultz responded by dismissing the senator’s chances. “This is a silly story,” she wrote. “He isn’t going to be president.”
It's up to others to interpret things the way they want here. I'm just trying to answer the "what was she supposed to have done" and "did she do it" questions. The answer to the second is closer to "sort of" than it is to "not at all".
posted by dis_integration at 7:01 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


She wrote that towards the end of May though, right? It was pretty clear Sanders was not going to be President at that point.
posted by peacheater at 7:04 AM on August 31, 2016 [11 favorites]


On mobile and can't read the link--what's the date on that email? IIRC it was after Sanders had no remaining mathematical path to the nomination.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:04 AM on August 31, 2016


The people who most often grouse about "rigged" elections lodge the complaint that the DNC was not an impartial party in the primary, as they claimed they would be*.

I don't think they had any good reason to be impartial, but I believe that DWS made statements from the beginning that the DNC wouldn't play favorites between any of the candidates. I think a lot of the "scandal" with the DNC's obvious preference for Clinton would have looked better if they had never pretended to do otherwise.

*citation needed, but I'm pretty sure I have read DWS quotes from that time saying as much
posted by Tevin at 7:04 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yeah, context matters if you care about, you know, the truth.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:05 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


Awww none of these MSNBC correspondents have slept at all
posted by schadenfrau at 7:07 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


The date on the email is March 21. Sanders had just won 7 primaries in a row. He still had a path: by winning NY and CA by huge margins. An insane, improbable path, perhaps. But the primary was not over till it was over.
posted by dis_integration at 7:09 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


Misread that. May 21. But still. I don't think it matters much to the question.
posted by dis_integration at 7:10 AM on August 31, 2016 [1 favorite]


It matters a great deal to me. On March 21st, DWS would have been dismissing Sanders' chances when he had several plausible ways to still win. On May 21st the primary was over in all but name, and DWS is just saying what we all recognized as mathematically true at that point.
posted by peacheater at 7:12 AM on August 31, 2016 [43 favorites]


Kind of by definition, a miracle is not a path. It's the hand of God parting the waters to make a path where none existed before.

It seems incredibly disingenuous to claim this is evidence of even "sort of" bias, and is the kind of thing that, since it has no basis in reality, contributes to the sense that the attacks on DWS (like the attacks on Clinton) have to do with something else.

I wonder what it could be.
posted by schadenfrau at 7:12 AM on August 31, 2016 [19 favorites]


Vicente Fox: 'I really apologize' for Trump's Mexico visit
"It's a very opportunistic move and I hope U.S. public opinion, U.S. citizens can see this and finally, and finally see what is behind Trump, this false prophet that is just cheating everybody," Fox said. "It's a desperate move and I don't see how it can work at all."
posted by mochapickle at 7:13 AM on August 31, 2016 [28 favorites]


Also, was under the impression that the DNC did not actually organize any of the state primary elections. How is the rigging of the elections supposed to have taken place?

Through the intangible bias of endorsements and other forms of intangible support.

The date on the email is March 21. Sanders had just won 7 primaries in a row. He still had a path: by winning NY and CA by huge margins. An insane, improbable path, perhaps. But the primary was not over till it was over.

If someone honest to god thought Sanders had even a sliver of a chance of a blowout in New York I'd like some of what they're smoking to get through the rest of the campaign season. It was over on March 15th. Hell, it was over on March 1st.
posted by Talez at 7:13 AM on August 31, 2016 [4 favorites]




I don't see the point in arguing about this again. I think the unbiased view of things is: the primaries weren't over. Winning was, in fact, still possible, if "mathematically" unlikely. Huge margins would've done it. Were they going to happen? Probably not. But does it look really bad if the ref stops making good calls even when the losing side needs 3 touchdowns in the last 5 minutes? Yes.
posted by dis_integration at 7:13 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think the unbiased view of things is...

I think people here are disputing whether your view of what is "unbiased" is really unbiased.
posted by OmieWise at 7:16 AM on August 31, 2016 [15 favorites]


Still reading the thread, but I found the ideal justice for the Supreme Court.
posted by pxe2000 at 7:16 AM on August 31, 2016


Can someone explain the whole DWS controversy from beginning to end to me? I honestly don't understand where it all came from

From back in May 2016 (when this was still a heated topic): Newsweek: Why Don’t People Like Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

This isn't necessarily representative of where the dislike of Debbie Wasserman Schultz came from, originally, but she's been accused of:
- Being personally responsible for the Democratic congressional losses in 2014
- Limiting the number of primary debates to favor Clinton, the better-known candidate
- 'repeatedly pursu[ing]her own agenda at the expense of the progressive base [of the Democratic party]', which I'm not going to try to distill down to a bullet point

Those are all claims from online petitions that non-zero numbers of people signed, so they're at least mildly representative of what some people (but not necessarily all people who dislike her) think she's done.

She was the figurehead of the DNC, and therefore of the establishment, at a time when Sanders was drawing in a lot of anti-establishment support. Personally, I think a lot of the 'controversy' has less to do with any of her specific actions or non-actions and has much more to do with her doing her job well by representing the DNC; a lot of the criticisms leveled at her, whether or not they're legitimate criticisms in and of themselves -- and I am entirely uninterested in rehashing those debates; they've been well-covered in prior election threads -- they're (mostly) of her-as-the-most-public-representative-of-the-DNC.

'Where is all this dislike of the DNC coming from, that's getting pointed to her?' -- again, I'd punt that back to the prior election threads. But I do think it's worth separating the 'controversy' about Debbie Wasserman-Schultz from critiques of the DNC.
posted by cjelli at 7:18 AM on August 31, 2016 [7 favorites]


Much of her negative rep comes from her work to help out those poor, struggling, payday lenders.

My main beef with her is that she's sufficiently pally with her Miami-area House Republican colleagues (in competitive or even Obama-voting districts) that she's discouraged and refused to assist Dem challengers. That's not compatible with a role (DNC chair) that by definition should treat every GOP incumbent as a target, or at very least worthy of a challenge that reflects the chance of winning.
posted by holgate at 7:20 AM on August 31, 2016 [25 favorites]


>But I do think it's worth separating the 'controversy' about Debbie Wasserman-Schultz from critiques of the DNC.

I want to quote that and Nth it because I think it's a really terrific point.
posted by Tevin at 7:21 AM on August 31, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't see the point in arguing about this again. I think the unbiased view of things is: the primaries weren't over. Winning was, in fact, still possible, if "mathematically" unlikely. Huge margins would've done it. Were they going to happen? Probably not. But does it look really bad if the ref stops making good calls even when the losing side needs 3 touchdowns in the last 5 minutes? Yes.

As of May 21 Sanders' chances of victory were down to "wins California by 60 points," which, come the fuck on.

Sports metaphors are kinda dumb, but, if it were a boxing match, the ref would have, yes, stopped the fight.
posted by dersins at 7:23 AM on August 31, 2016 [16 favorites]


An insane, improbable path, perhaps. But the primary was not over till it was over.

This is what makes her unsuitable for any sort of leadership role. She didn't need to put her thumb on the scales at that point, and went ahead and did it anyway.

This is not a non-issue, as the resignations indicate, and her deep ties to Clinton is one of the two reasons I went from "Eh, I'll vote Sanders but I'll be happy with Clinton" to "Hold my nose and vote for the lesser evil."

Clinton and her allies' continual missteps prevarications would have doomed her campaign early Any. Other. Year. Fortunately she's up against an actual fascist lunatic and so has what looks like an ironclad lead.

Doesn't mean I have to be overjoyed I'm stuck with her as the D candidate - or any of the D candidates. The field was ludicrously weak this election, containing two(!) candidates who switched parties to run as Democrats.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:24 AM on August 31, 2016 [2 favorites]


My main beef with her is that she's sufficiently pally with her Miami-area House Republican colleagues (in competitive or even Obama-voting districts) that she's discouraged and refused to assist Dem challengers.

1000 times this. Her and Steve Israel repeatedly withheld DNC support for progressive cha