|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 3:42:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 3:45:39 GMT
Also, his indictments boosted his appeal to black voters apnews.com/article/trump-black-conservative-south-carolina-primary-aa1155c31bfc3b397a32b33eff04ada8“I got indicted for nothing, for something that is nothing,” Trump told a black-tie event for Black conservatives in South Carolina ahead of Saturday’s Republican primary. “And a lot of people said that’s why the Black people like me, because they have been hurt so badly and discriminated against, and they actually viewed me as I’m being discriminated against. It’s been pretty amazing but possibly, maybe, there’s something there.”
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Mar 10, 2024 3:57:28 GMT
But. First. He. Suggested. Injections. Stop insisting he didn’t. You aren't going to win this one. Stop insisting I said that, because you are not going to win that one. You have insisted multiple times that the claim he suggested injections of disinfectant has been completely debunked. No, it hasn't, and besides that, even a 9yo would know better than to do such a thing, without having to be told by his aides. We haven't even addressed that point yet. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 3:57:40 GMT
A measure of character is the ability to take responsibility and apologize if you make a mistake. Has Trump ever taken responsibility or apologized? For his idiotic, moronic, reckless, irresponsible suggestion about disinfectant or anything else?
|
|
|
|
Post by onelasttime on Mar 10, 2024 4:09:47 GMT
Put on your thinking cap look at the red underlined comment What’s wrong with that comment? Especially when one is talking about a virus. Put on your own damn thinking cap. He said "IT WOULDN'T BE THROUGH INJECTIONS". You did it again. You pick one small part of the story while ignoring the main part. Bottom line is this. trump made comments that led people to believe if they took some sort of disinfectant they could get rid of COVID. Regardless of what he said later he is responsible for this. The real story and not the bit about injection. “ At least 5 states report an increase in calls to poison control after Trump’s ‘disinfectant’ COVID-19 remarks”From the article… ”Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer expressed similar views, whether comments are “serious or not” she said people listen to those in power. “We have seen an increase in numbers of people calling poison control and so I think it’s really important that every one of us with a platform disseminate medically accurate information,” Whitmer told ABC News. “I want to say, unequivocally no one should be using disinfectant — to digest it to fight COVID-19,” she added. “Please don’t do it. Just don’t do it.” But it wasn’t just Maryland and Michigan residents who took Trump’s advice seriously. New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene said it saw an increase in calls within the 18-hour period after Trump’s briefing on Thursday. The poison control center recorded 30 cases by Friday, including nine “specifically about exposure to Lysol, 10 cases specifically about bleach and 11 cases about exposures to other household cleaners,” department spokesperson Pedro F. Frisneda told NPR. Kansas Poison Control reported an increase of 40% in cleaning chemical cases, according to Lee Norman, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. One of the reported cases included a man “who drank a product because of the advice he received,” Norman said Monday. Illinois also experienced an increase in calls to poison control. According to the state’s public health director, Ngozi Ezike, the center was receiving calls in which residents reported dangerous acts such as using a detergent solution for a sinus rinse or gargling with bleach as a substitute for mouthwash to kill germs.” The above is all on trump because of the remarks he made. That IS the story. Not that shit you were getting hysterical about. And here is some more shit from trump. This is from a speech he gave tonight. What is he even talking about? And he said it. ”Trump: Suburban housewives don’t want illegal immigrants knocking on their door and saying I’m going to use your kitchen” & this… ”Trump: And I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate” & this… ”Trump: I will seal the border… I will stop the plunder of our cities, the sacking of our towns and the conquest of our country, the conquering our country. These people are conquering our country. They're horrible people.” You agree with this shit that he is saying? |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 4:46:08 GMT
Can you imagine Trump in charge during a major international crisis with the threat of nuclear weapons? He would probably start World War III, we would all be lucky to be alive. www.nytimes.com/2024/03/09/us/politics/biden-nuclear-russia-ukraine.htmlBiden’s Armageddon Moment: When Nuclear Detonation Seemed Possible in Ukraine
For a few weeks in October 2022, the White House was consumed in a crisis whose depths were not publicly acknowledged at the time. It was a glimpse of what seemed like a terrifying new era.
President Biden was standing in an Upper East Side townhouse owned by the businessman James Murdoch, the rebellious scion of the media empire, surrounded by liberal New York Democrats who had paid handsomely to come hear optimistic talk about the Biden agenda for the next few years.
It was Oct. 6, 2022, but what they heard instead that evening was a disturbing message that — though Mr. Biden didn’t say so — came straight from highly classified intercepted communications he had recently been briefed about, suggesting that President Vladimir V. Putin’s threats to use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine might be turning into an operational plan.
For the “first time since the Cuban Missile Crisis,” he told the group, as they gathered amid Mr. Murdoch’s art collection, “we have a direct threat of the use of a nuclear weapon if in fact things continue down the path they’ve been going.” The gravity of his tone began to sink in: The president was talking about the prospect of the first wartime use of a nuclear weapon since Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And not at some vague moment in the future. He meant in the next few weeks.
The intercepts revealed that for the first time since the war in Ukraine had broken out, there were frequent conversations within the Russian military about reaching into the nuclear arsenal. Some were just “various forms of chatter,” one official said. But others involved the units that would be responsible for moving or deploying the weapons. The most alarming of the intercepts revealed that one of the most senior Russian military commanders was explicitly discussing the logistics of detonating a weapon on the battlefield.
Fortunately, Mr. Biden was told in his briefings, there was no evidence of weapons being moved. But soon the C.I.A. was warning that, under a singular scenario in which Ukrainian forces decimated Russian defensive lines and looked as if they might try to retake Crimea — a possibility that seemed imaginable that fall — the likelihood of nuclear use might rise to 50 percent or even higher. That “got everyone’s attention fast,” said an official involved in the discussions.
No one knew how to assess the accuracy of that estimate: the factors that play into decisions to use nuclear weapons, or even to threaten their use, were too abstract, too dependent on human emotion and accident, to measure with precision. But it wasn’t the kind of warning any American president could dismiss.
“It’s the nuclear paradox,” Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff until he retired in September, told me over dinner last summer at his official quarters above the Potomac River, recalling the warnings he had issued in the Situation Room.
He added: “The more successful the Ukrainians are at ousting the Russian invasion, the more likely Putin is to threaten to use a bomb — or reach for it.”
This account of what happened in those October days — as it happened, just before the 60th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the closest the United States and the Soviet Union ever came to a nuclear exchange in the Cold War — was reconstructed in interviews I conducted over the past 18 months with administration officials, diplomats, leaders of NATO nations and military officials who recounted the depth of their fear in those weeks.
Though the crisis passed, and Russia now appears to have gained an upper hand on the battlefield as Ukraine runs low on ammunition, almost all of the officials described those weeks as a glimpse of a terrifying new era in which nuclear weapons were back at the center of superpower competition.
While news that Russia was considering using a nuclear weapon became public at the time, the interviews underscored that the worries at the White House and the Pentagon ran far deeper than were acknowledged then, and that extensive efforts were made to prepare for the possibility. When Mr. Biden mused aloud that evening that “I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily” make use of “a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon,” he was reflecting urgent preparations being made for a U.S. reaction. Other details of extensive White House planning were published Saturday by Jim Sciutto of CNN.
Mr. Biden said he thought Mr. Putin was capable of pulling the trigger. “We’ve got a guy I know fairly well,” he said of the Russian leader. “He is not joking when he talks about potential use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons because his military is, you might say, significantly underperforming.”
Since then, the battlefield advantage has changed dramatically, and October 2022 now looks like the high-water mark of Ukraine’s military performance over the past two years. Yet Mr. Putin has now made a new set of nuclear threats, during his equivalent of the State of the Union address in Moscow in late February. He said that any NATO countries that were helping Ukraine strike Russian territory with cruise missiles, or that might consider sending their own troops into battle, “must, in the end, understand” that “all this truly threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, and therefore the destruction of civilization.”
“We also have weapons that can strike targets on their territory,” Mr. Putin said. “Do they not understand this?”
Mr. Putin was speaking about Russian medium-range weapons that could strike anywhere in Europe, or his intercontinental ballistic missiles that can reach the United States. But the scare in 2022 involved so-called battlefield nukes: tactical weapons small enough to be loaded into an artillery shell and designed to eviscerate a military unit or a few city blocks.
At least initially, their use would look nothing like an all-out nuclear exchange, the great fear of the Cold War. The effects would be horrific but limited to a relatively small geographic area — perhaps detonated over the Black Sea, or blasted into a Ukrainian military base.
Yet the White House concern ran so deep that task forces met to map out a response. Administration officials said that the United States’ countermove would have to be nonnuclear. But they quickly added that there would have to be some kind of dramatic reaction — perhaps even a conventional attack on the units that had launched the nuclear weapons — or they would risk emboldening not only Mr. Putin but every other authoritarian with a nuclear arsenal, large or small.
Yet as was made clear in Mr. Biden’s “Armageddon speech” — as White House officials came to call it — no one knew what kind of nuclear demonstration Mr. Putin had in mind. Some believed that the public warnings Russia was making that Ukraine was preparing to use a giant “dirty bomb,” a weapon that spews radiological waste, was a pretext for a pre-emptive nuclear strike.
The wargaming at the Pentagon and at think tanks around Washington imagined that Mr. Putin’s use of a tactical weapon — perhaps followed by a threat to detonate more — could come in a variety of circumstances. One simulation envisioned a successful Ukrainian counteroffensive that imperiled Mr. Putin’s hold on Crimea. Another involved a demand from Moscow that the West halt all military support for the Ukrainians: no more tanks, no more missiles, no more ammunition. The aim would be to split NATO; in the tabletop simulation I was permitted to observe, the detonation served that purpose.
To forestall nuclear use, in the days around Mr. Biden’s fund-raiser appearance Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken called his Russian counterpart, as did Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and the national security adviser, Jake Sullivan. Germany’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, was going on a planned visit to Beijing; he was prepped to brief Xi Jinping, China’s president, about the intelligence and urge him to make both public and private statements to Russia warning that there was no place in the Ukraine conflict for the use of nuclear weapons. Mr. Xi made the public statement; it is unclear what, if anything, he signaled in private.
Mr. Biden, meanwhile, sent a message to Mr. Putin that they had to set up an urgent meeting of emissaries. Mr. Putin sent Sergei Naryshkin, head of the S.V.R., the Russian foreign intelligence service that had pulled off the Solar Winds attack, an ingenious cyberattack that had struck a wide swath of U.S. government departments and corporate America. Mr. Biden chose William J. Burns, the C.I.A. director and former U.S. ambassador to Russia, who is now his go-to troubleshooter for a variety of the toughest national security problems, most recently getting a temporary cease-fire and the release of hostages held by Hamas.
Mr. Burns told me that the two men saw each other on a mid-November day in 2022. But while Mr. Burns arrived to warn what would befall Russia if it used a nuclear weapon, Mr. Naryshkin apparently thought the C.I.A. director had been sent to negotiate an armistice agreement that would end the war. He told Mr. Burns that any such negotiation had to begin with an understanding that Russia would get to keep any land that was currently under its control.
It took some time for Mr. Burns to disabuse Mr. Naryshkin of the idea that the United States was ready to trade away Ukrainian territory for peace. Finally, they turned to the topic Mr. Burns had traveled around the world to discuss: what the United States and its allies were prepared to do to Russia if Mr. Putin made good on his nuclear threats.
“I made it clear,” Mr. Burns later recalled from his seventh-floor office at the C.I.A., that “there would be clear consequences for Russia.” Just how specific Mr. Burns was about the nature of the American response was left murky by American officials. He wanted to be detailed enough to deter a Russian attack, but avoid telegraphing Mr. Biden’s exact reaction.
“Naryshkin swore that he understood and that Putin did not intend to use a nuclear weapon,” Mr. Burns said. |
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 10, 2024 5:46:05 GMT
Stop insisting I said that, because you are not going to win that one. You have insisted multiple times that the claim he suggested injections of disinfectant has been completely debunked. No, it hasn't, and besides that, even a 9yo would know better than to do such a thing, without having to be told by his aides. We haven't even addressed that point yet. Let me be perfectly clear. He absolutely said that. I never said that he didn't. He then clarified, by saying "IT WOULDN'T BE THROUGH INJECTIONS, we're talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. If someone clarifies, do you hang on to what they wrongly said, or move along with them on the clarification? |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Mar 10, 2024 7:19:40 GMT
Put on your own damn thinking cap. He said "IT WOULDN'T BE THROUGH INJECTIONS". You did it again. You pick one small part of the story while ignoring the main part. Bottom line is this. trump made comments that led people to believe if they took some sort of disinfectant they could get rid of COVID. Regardless of what he said later he is responsible for this. The real story and not the bit about injection. “ At least 5 states report an increase in calls to poison control after Trump’s ‘disinfectant’ COVID-19 remarks”From the article… ”Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer expressed similar views, whether comments are “serious or not” she said people listen to those in power. “We have seen an increase in numbers of people calling poison control and so I think it’s really important that every one of us with a platform disseminate medically accurate information,” Whitmer told ABC News. “I want to say, unequivocally no one should be using disinfectant — to digest it to fight COVID-19,” she added. “Please don’t do it. Just don’t do it.” But it wasn’t just Maryland and Michigan residents who took Trump’s advice seriously. New York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene said it saw an increase in calls within the 18-hour period after Trump’s briefing on Thursday. The poison control center recorded 30 cases by Friday, including nine “specifically about exposure to Lysol, 10 cases specifically about bleach and 11 cases about exposures to other household cleaners,” department spokesperson Pedro F. Frisneda told NPR. Kansas Poison Control reported an increase of 40% in cleaning chemical cases, according to Lee Norman, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment. One of the reported cases included a man “who drank a product because of the advice he received,” Norman said Monday. Illinois also experienced an increase in calls to poison control. According to the state’s public health director, Ngozi Ezike, the center was receiving calls in which residents reported dangerous acts such as using a detergent solution for a sinus rinse or gargling with bleach as a substitute for mouthwash to kill germs.” The above is all on trump because of the remarks he made. That IS the story. Not that shit you were getting hysterical about. And here is some more shit from trump. This is from a speech he gave tonight. What is he even talking about? And he said it. ”Trump: Suburban housewives don’t want illegal immigrants knocking on their door and saying I’m going to use your kitchen” & this… ”Trump: And I will not give one penny to any school that has a vaccine mandate” & this… ”Trump: I will seal the border… I will stop the plunder of our cities, the sacking of our towns and the conquest of our country, the conquering our country. These people are conquering our country. They're horrible people.” You agree with this shit that he is saying? Hilarious fact: the Trumpers are now mad at him for saying that Covid vaccine technology is now being used to treat cancer - one thing it was developed for - and that Trump is showing approval of vaccines. www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-upsets-his-supporters-three-times-48-hours-1877588 |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 13:55:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 13:57:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 14:00:40 GMT
Trump praising a dictator
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 14:19:17 GMT
So loyal he cheated on his third wife when she was pregnant and probably cheated on his first two wives as well. So loyal his wife has been MIA since he left the White House. On the rare occasions they are seen together, she won’t even hold his hand or ride in the same car with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 16:08:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Mar 10, 2024 16:37:40 GMT
You have insisted multiple times that the claim he suggested injections of disinfectant has been completely debunked. No, it hasn't, and besides that, even a 9yo would know better than to do such a thing, without having to be told by his aides. We haven't even addressed that point yet. Let me be perfectly clear. He absolutely said that. I never said that he didn't. He then clarified, by saying "IT WOULDN'T BE THROUGH INJECTIONS, we're talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. If someone clarifies, do you hang on to what they wrongly said, or move along with them on the clarification? Congratulations on seeing the light. If someone says something inordinately stupid and then backpedals, do you insist they never said it in the first place? No response actually required. I’m ready to put this to rest if you are. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 16:46:13 GMT
Trump does and says so many things that are a clear indication a second Trump term will be a dictatorship. Republicans politicians are not listening, don't care or are selfishly prioritizing their own careers.
He meets with and praises dictators
He even said he would be a dictator on day one
He uses the language of language of fascists/ dictators - poisoning the blood of our country, "migrant crime", describing migrants with words like invasion, sacking, plundering etc
He's threatened mass deportations and internment camps
He demands loyalty from staff, advisors and supporters - says Haley and DeSantis supporters are not welcome
He wants to control the media, uses "fake news" to discredit the media and bullies reporters
He attacks institutions - the Department of Justice, courts, judges and the FBI as "corrupt" and "weaponized"
He tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election
He's already claiming the 2024 will be stolen and rigged, unless he wins
He threatened to terminate provisions in the constitution
He's promised to pardon J6 insurrectionists
He's promised to persecute the Biden family without cause
He ruthlessly goes after anyone in his party who disagrees with him
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 10, 2024 16:53:30 GMT
Let me be perfectly clear. He absolutely said that. I never said that he didn't. He then clarified, by saying "IT WOULDN'T BE THROUGH INJECTIONS, we're talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. If someone clarifies, do you hang on to what they wrongly said, or move along with them on the clarification? Congratulations on seeing the light. If someone says something inordinately stupid and then backpedals, do you insist they never said it in the first place? No response actually required. I’m ready to put this to rest if you are. I guess I wasn't clear enough. I NEVER said, insisted, or insinuated that he never said it in the first place. Let me ask you again... If someone clarifies, do you hang on to what they wrongly said, or move along with them on the clarification? That is not a rhetorical question. |
|
Gem Girl
Pearl Clutcher
......
Posts: 2,686
Jun 29, 2014 19:29:52 GMT
|
Post by Gem Girl on Mar 10, 2024 19:50:44 GMT
claims E Jean Carroll made false accusations Sounds like he needs to pay another hefty fine, as he's already forgotten the reason for the one he just paid. Trump's speech tonight makes the choice between candidates crystal clear. Crystal--a raving, lying, self-absorbed lunatic, vs a caring, polished political player who's done huge good for this country and has plans for more. Regulate guns, not women button I'd like a button that says this, myself! |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 20:48:37 GMT
Strong economic growth under Biden's leadership
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 20:54:42 GMT
He's well on the way to becoming unhinged, unstable and unravelled. Here is a summary of Donald Trump’s 3/9 speech in Rome, Georgia:
1. Starts by mocking President Biden for having a stutter.
2. Does an impression mocking people with the disability of stuttering.
3. Says he is friends with “Poten” referring to Putin.
4. Says Biden is going after him because he is a “political appointment” of Biden.
5. Defames woman he was found to have raped and defamed.
6. Complains about $83 million judgment defaming rape victim.
7. Says he mixes up names of people on purpose.
8. Says he “protects women” so “suburban women like me.”
9. Says he stops immigrants from going into kitchens of women.
10. Attacks Ron DeSantis.
11. Repeats several times that he’s not cognitively declined.
12. Says media should be banned from writing bad stories on him.
13.Talks about how bad America is.
Speech ends. We do our recap here with supporting videos: youtu.be/UCCd4_Pgwy0?si=XZ032U72MGNqodUv |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 21:02:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 21:13:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 21:43:18 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 21:45:03 GMT
Starting Topics:
1. As the general election campaign kicks off, President Biden is laying out what is at stake this November. We as a country will determine which vision of America we will embrace - one filled with old ideas like hate, retribution, and revenge, or one brimming with hope, prosperity, and dignity.
2. Trump is pursuing an agenda of grievances and scapegoating. He isn’t interested in governing, making the nation secure, or finding ways to help average Americans. He only wants power so he can get himself out of trouble and punish his critics.
3. No Labels announced they will run a third party candidate. But the math shows a vote for No Labels is a vote for Donald Trump. The only way to stop the disintegration of democracy is to vote to re-elect President Biden.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 10, 2024 21:57:43 GMT
Maybe this is one of the reasons for Biden's poll numbers. Mainstream media is really failing at reporting on Trump's authoritarian tendencies. If the J6 trial in DC starts in September, hopefully that will remind people what they're getting if they vote for Trump. newrepublic.com/article/179548/poll-voters-trump-dictator-threatsGreg Sargent March 5, 2024 LOW INFORMATION Maddening New Poll: Voters Are Unaware of Trump “Dictator” Threats A small percentage of voters surveyed are familiar with Trump’s most overt authoritarian outbursts. That’s frightening. But it’s also an opportunity. President Biden’s brain trust appears confident that he will ultimately prevail over Donald Trump due to the threat Trump poses to our constitutional system. By November, the election’s “focus will become overwhelmingly on democracy,” one top Biden adviser told The New Yorker, adding that “the biggest images in people’s minds are going to be of January 6th.”
If so, the Biden campaign had better get cracking.
Some new polling from a top Democratic pollster finds mixed news for Team Biden on this front: Large swaths of voters appear to have little awareness of some of Trump’s clearest statements of hostility to democracy and intent to impose authoritarian rule in a second term, from his vow to be “dictator for one day” to his vague threat to enact “termination” of provisions in the Constitution.
That’s maddening for obvious reasons. But it also presents the Biden campaign with an opportunity. If voters are unaware of all these statements, there’s plenty of time to make voters aware of them—and the polling also finds that these statements, when aired to respondents, shift them against Trump.
The survey—which was conducted by veteran Democratic pollster Geoff Garin for the group Save My Country and shared with The New Republic—did something novel. It polled 400 voters in each of three swing states—Arizona, Michigan, and Pennsylvania—and weighted them in proportion with each state’s Electoral College votes. It omitted respondents who voted for Trump in 2020 and also said Biden didn’t legitimately win.
In short, the poll was designed to survey voters who are genuinely gettable for Biden. The poll asked them about 10 of Trump’s most authoritarian statements, including: the two mentioned above, Trump’s claim that immigrants are “poisoning the blood of our country,” his vow to pardon rioters who attacked the Capitol, his promise to prosecute the Biden family without cause, his threat to inflict mass persecution on the “vermin” opposition, and a few more.
Result? “Only 31 percent of respondents said they previously had heard a lot about these statements by Trump,” the memo accompanying the poll concluded.
The good news for Biden is that when respondents were presented with these quotes, it prompted a rise in Trump’s negatives. For instance, after hearing them, the percentage who see him as “out for revenge” jumped by five points, the percentage who see him as “dangerous” rose by nine points, and the percentage who see him as a “dictator” climbed by seven points.
“This is an opportunity to move voters and change the race,” Garin told me, noting that this shows that current public polling, which has Biden down to Trump, is “not set in concrete.”
If this Democratic polling is right, it might help explain a dynamic that has perplexed observers. The latest New York Times poll finds Biden trailing Trump by five points among registered voters even as 53 percent think he committed serious crimes.
Yet voters may still see Trump’s (alleged) criminality as a theoretical proposition, without connecting it to the type of unbound, lawless presidency he has told us he’d preside over—in his own words.
Indeed, the poll from Save My Country finds that after voters are presented with these statements, the percentage of those who view Trump unfavorably jumps five points, from 53 percent to 58 percent, and 69 percent say Trump will bring “chaos to the presidency and our country.”
In other words, when voters are presented with evidence straight from Trump’s own mouth, they see an authoritarian second term as very plausible.
In one sense, the lack of voter awareness of Trump’s “dictator” threats shows that the Biden campaign and Democrats don’t appear to have succeeded in making voters aware of the menace Trump poses. Perhaps their messaging has yet to work, or maybe the party has not seriously used the levers of power at its disposal to highlight Trump’s staggering corruption and malice.
But if this polling is right, one explanation that doesn’t seem as plausible is that voters don’t care about these matters. In fact, all this might in some ways validate one of the Biden camp’s frequent claims—that voters are so checked out that they aren’t seriously aware of the threat a second Trump term poses.
The new polling also counters a well-worn refrain from skittish, nonconfrontational Democrats. They sometimes say Trump’s negatives are so well known—or “baked in,” as campaign jargon puts it—that there’s no sense in spending much time on his authoritarian outbursts, affection for political violence, and wide array of (alleged) crimes. Yet all this may in an important sense constitute new information for untold numbers of voters.
“Trump’s negatives are not baked into the cake at all,” Garin told me. Fortunately for the Biden camp, between now and Election Day there are some eight months to fire up the campaign crucible and ensure that they do get baked in—good and hard. |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 11, 2024 21:35:00 GMT
This election is about Hope v. Fear … Progress v. Chaos.
@joebiden has proven that he will do everything in his power to invest and secure a bright future for young people.
From combating the climate crisis to tackling the cost of college and eliminating student debt to creating millions of good paying jobs to addressing gun violence, Joe Biden & Kamala Harris have had our backs and we will have theirs! #BidenHarris2024
|
|
|
|
Post by morecowbell on Mar 12, 2024 0:24:00 GMT
A measure of character is the ability to take responsibility and apologize if you make a mistake. Has Trump ever taken responsibility or apologized? For his idiotic, moronic, reckless, irresponsible suggestion about disinfectant or anything else? Why in hell would you show ANY respect to an evil murdering scumbag? |
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 12, 2024 1:26:03 GMT
It's respect for a group of people that should not be called simply by their legal status. And what happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Trump's words like invasion and animal are dehumanizing to an entire demographic of people.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 12, 2024 1:31:36 GMT
Seems a little suspicious that Hur resigns the day before his testimony in Congress.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 12, 2024 1:33:46 GMT
Also, the promises of a dictator to pardon people engaged in political violence on his behalf
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Mar 12, 2024 1:36:59 GMT
|
|
