POL Politiek
Discussies en diepgaande gesprekken over de politiek in de breedste zin van het woord kun je hier voeren.
The Kingdom and the Kushners: Jared Went to Riyadh. So Did His Brother.twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 22:10:10 Although Jared Kushner severed his ties with his bro's biz and divested his interest in his bro's funds, he was still discussing U.S. policy with rulers of Saudi Arabia at virtually the same time his bro was talking biz with their top aides, NYT reports.https://t.co/a1hdZ4aLFr reageer retweet
Although Jared Kushner severed his ties with his bro's biz and divested his interest in his bro's funds, he was still discussing U.S. policy with rulers of Saudi Arabia at virtually the same time his bro was talking biz with their top aides, NYT reports.quote:In late October 2017, Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and Middle East adviser, dropped into Saudi Arabia for an unannounced visit to the desert retreat of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who was in the process of consolidating his power. The two men talked privately late into the night.
Just a day earlier, Mr. Kushner’s younger brother, Josh, then 32, was flying out of the kingdom.
Jared came to talk policy, but Josh was there on business.
The founder of an eight-year-old venture capital firm, Josh Kushner had spent the three days before his brother’s arrival at an investor conference, where Prince Mohammed had promised to spend billions of dollars on a high-tech future for Saudi Arabia.
As others sat through speeches in a gilded conference hall, several participants said, the younger Mr. Kushner frequently ducked out for more exclusive conversations with Saudi officials.
Some government ethics lawyers say those conversations — never hidden, but not previously reported — create the appearance of a potential conflict of interest. Although Jared Kushner severed his ties with his brother’s company and divested his interest in his brother’s funds around the time he entered the White House, he was nonetheless discussing American policy with the rulers of the kingdom at virtually the same time that his brother was talking business with their top aides.
A spokesman for Josh Kushner’s firm, Thrive Capital, said that it was not in a formal fund-raising period at the time of the conference. A year later, however, the company raised $1 billion. And two people who spoke with Josh Kushner at the conference said he had been actively promoting a health insurance start-up he founded in 2012, Oscar Health, which five months later announced a fresh $165 million round of financing.SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Trump says the Islamic State’s defeat is imminent — as he has for months
quote:On Jan. 30, he tweeted that the caliphate would be destroyed “soon.”
On Jan. 31, he told reporters that “you’ll be seeing something next week” about “what’s happened in Syria with respect to ISIS and the caliphate.” (“We’ve done tremendous in the last couple of weeks,” he said.)
On Feb. 1, it was back to “soon” in a tweet.
On Feb. 3, Trump said on CBS’s “Face the Nation” that “we will be announcing in the not-too-distant future 100 percent of the caliphate which is the area — the land — the area — 100.”
“We’re at 99 percent right now,” he added. “We’ll be at 100.”
On Feb. 6, Trump pledged in a speech that it “should be formally announced sometime probably next week that we will have 100 percent of the caliphate.”
On Feb. 10, it was back to “soon.”
On Feb. 11, Trump told a rally in El Paso that “in the Middle East, our brave warriors have liberated virtually 100 percent of ISIS in Iraq and Syria.”
“Now, you don’t hear that from these people,” he added, pointing to the news media. “Now, we’ve taken back — soon it’ll be announced soon, maybe over the next week, maybe less, but it’ll be announced very soon — we’ll have 100 percent.”
On Feb. 15, during his news conference announcing his border-wall emergency declaration, he promised good news imminently.
“We have a lot of great announcements having to do with Syria and our success with the eradication of the caliphate,” he said. “And that will be announced over the next 24 hours. And many other things.”
On Feb. 16, he claimed that the caliphate had been “100%” defeated already, so he was removing troops from Syria.
On Feb. 22, it was again not 100 percent defeated.
“In another short period of time, like hours — you’ll be hearing hours and days — you’ll be hearing about the caliphate. It will — it’s 100 percent defeated,” Trump said. “Nobody has been able to say that.”
On Feb. 28, the caliphate was back to being entirely defeated.
“We just took over — you know, you kept hearing it was 90 percent, 92 percent — the caliphate in Syria,” he said at an Air Force base in Alaska. “Now it’s 100 percent. We just took over. A hundred percent caliphate. That means the area of the land. We just have 100 percent, so that’s good.”
On March 2, speaking to the Conservative Political Action Conference, Trump said that “as of probably today or tomorrow, we will actually have 100 percent of the caliphate in Syria. One hundred percent. One hundred percent.”
And then, March 20: Complete eradication within 24 hours.
It does seem likely that the caliphate will soon be completely destroyed, though, as Trump has also noted at times, that doesn’t mean the risk of attacks by members of the Islamic State or its sympathizers has vanished. (“You’re always going to have that,” he told the New York Times. “Somebody is going to walk into a store, unfortunately.”)
All we’re saying is that you might take the “gone by tonight” prediction with a grain of salt.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
twitter:markberman twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 21:48:48 JUST IN: Cesar Sayoc just pleaded guilty to mailing explosive devices to Trump critics. The Florida man had been accused of sending devices to more than a dozen politicians and others who criticized Trump https://t.co/6zrdnEEeI9 reageer retweet
JUST IN: Cesar Sayoc just pleaded guilty to mailing explosive devices to Trump critics. The Florida man had been accused of sending devices to more than a dozen politicians and others who criticized Trump
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Gaan de alt-right stans hier net zo hard over vallen als over die ene zin van Sadiq Khan?quote:that doesn’t mean the risk of attacks by members of the Islamic State or its sympathizers has vanished. (“You’re always going to have that,” he told the New York Times. “Somebody is going to walk into a store, unfortunately.”)
They told me all of my cages were mental, so I got wasted like all my potential.
twitter:yashar twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 21:36:49 1. @MariaBartiromo's interview with Trump airs on Fox Business tomorrow morning. Here he is on McCain (cont) https://t.co/nfyB04320z reageer retweet
1. @SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.Over Trump's bewering dat hij nooit bedankt is:twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 22-03-2019 om 01:25:50 For the record: McCain family spokesman Rick Davis. August 27, 2018."The combined efforts of the Trump administration, the White House ... We really thank them for coming together very quickly and pulling together all the federal resources that we have." https://t.co/fN9FyifjYI reageer retweet
twitter:yashar twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 21:36:49 2. President Trump to @MariaBartiromo on his Golan Heights tweet and whether it had to do with the April 9th elections in Israel. https://t.co/1JgnzQuzsn reageer retweet
SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.
[ Bericht 16% gewijzigd door Kijkertje op 22-03-2019 02:13:24 ]
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Marine Corps commandant says deploying troops to the border poses ‘unacceptable risk’twitter:latimes twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 19:21:28 Breaking: The commandant of the Marine Corps is warning that deployments to the U.S.-Mexico border and funding transfers under the president's emergency declaration are contributing to an “unacceptable risk” to the Corps’ combat readiness. https://t.co/guKDSr1MqD reageer retweet
Breaking: The commandant of the Marine Corps is warning that deployments to the U.S.-Mexico border and funding transfers under the president's emergency declaration are contributing to an “unacceptable risk” to the Corps’ combat readiness. quote:The commandant of the Marines has warned the Pentagon that deployments to the southwest border and funding transfers under the president's emergency declaration, among other unexpected demands, have posed “unacceptable risk to Marine Corps combat readiness and solvency.”
In two internal memos, Marine Corps Gen. Robert Neller said the “unplanned/unbudgeted” deployment along the border that President Trump ordered last fall, and shifts of other funds to support border security, had forced him to cancel or reduce planned military training in at least five countries, and delay urgent repairs at bases.
The border deployment and funding transfers, as well as recovery costs from hurricanes Florence and Michael, new housing allowances and civilian pay raises, are taking a toll on combat readiness, Neller wrote to Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and Navy Secretary Richard Spencer.
The Times obtained copies of the memos, dated Feb. 19 and March 18.SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Several 2020 Democrats to skip AIPAC conference after call to boycott
Liberal group MoveOn.org asked all 2020 presidential candidates to steer clear of the event.
Liberal group MoveOn.org asked all 2020 presidential candidates to steer clear of the event.
quote:Several Democratic presidential candidates will skip the American Israel Public Affairs Committee's policy conference this year after a prominent progressive group called on them to boycott the event.
Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., will all ditch the conference, the Associated Press reported, and a spokesman for former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, told NBC News that he also will not attend.
Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, will not be going, The Jewish Week reported, and former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julian Castro also won't show, according to HuffPost.
Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, who is considering running for president as an independent, will also skip the conference, the Associated Press reported.
Josh Orton, a policy director for Sanders, told NBC News that the senator is "concerned about the platform AIPAC is providing for leaders who have expressed bigotry and oppose a two-state solution.”
Sanders didn't attend the 2016 conference while he was running in the Democratic presidential primary, but addressed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at length during a speech around the time of the event.
The candidates' decisions to skip the prominent pro-Israel lobbying group’s conference come one day after liberal group MoveOn.org called on all 2020 presidential candidates to steer clear of the event.SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Trump Has a Plan to Preserve Benefits for Oil Drillers in Future
quote:A top Interior Department official told oil industry leaders the Trump administration is seeking to sign contracts leasing new coastal waters for oil drilling under favorable terms that will be difficult for future presidents to revoke or rewrite.
Joe Balash, the assistant secretary for land and minerals management, outlined that approach to oil industry leaders attending an International Association of Geophysical Contractors conference in Houston last month, according to audio obtained by Bloomberg News.
“When it comes to our specific royalty terms -- anything that’s under contract -- we still enjoy the sanctity of contracts in this country and I expect that’s going to last for some time,” Balash told the IAGC conference. “So getting our leases out -- and out on terms that are competitive and have the ability to sustain the long life of a property once it goes into production -- is also key.”
The Interior Department is already developing a new five-year plan of offshore oil and gas leases that could give energy companies opportunities to vie for virgin territory in the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic oceans. But at the conference, Balash was pressed to describe how the Interior Department also is pursuing policy changes that would make the U.S. more attractive to oil companies eyeing cheaper prospects in South America -- and ensure they will endure whenever a new president enters the White House.
That could include lowering royalty rates that energy companies pay the U.S. government on any oil and gas extracted from federal waters. An Interior Department advisory committee has recommended slashing royalty rates for offshore oil and gas production, but so far, the Trump administration has not followed the advice.
Leases set terms for royalty payments that can govern oil production at some offshore sites for decades to come.
Balash also stressed the importance of taking “advantage of the opportunities to open up some of our own areas that have not yet been fully explored” and signaled those areas included the Atlantic Ocean, where the government has given geophysical companies initial authorizations to conduct seismic surveys designed to help seek out potential oil and gas reserves. At least some of those firms were present at the IAGC conference, according to meeting documents.
Representatives of the Interior Department did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
In Golan Heights, Trump Bolsters Netanyahu but Risks Roiling Middle Easttwitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 17:50:46 After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability! reageer retweet
After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability! quote:President Trump declared on Thursday that the United States should recognize Israel’s authority over the long disputed Golan Heights, delivering a valuable election-eve gift to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but jettisoning decades of American policy in the Middle East.
Mr. Trump’s announcement, in a midday Twitter post, came after persistent pressure from Mr. Netanyahu, a close political ally who is fighting for his survival in the election scheduled for April 9, and has invoked his friendship with the American president as a prime argument for staying in office.
But Mr. Trump’s move, while popular in Israel and among some lawmakers in Congress, is likely to be condemned almost everywhere else. The United Nations has rejected Israel’s occupation of the Golan Heights since 1967, when Israeli troops seized the 400 square miles of rocky highlands from Syria during the Arab-Israeli war.
It will also reverberate throughout the Middle East and could undermine Mr. Trump’s long anticipated peace proposal for Israel and the Palestinians. The White House has been enlisting support for the plan among Arab leaders who now face the prospect of acquiescing in the loss of land they had long claimed as Arab.
As a practical matter, Mr. Trump’s announcement changes little. There is no negotiation underway on the status of the Golan Heights, nor any expectation that Israel is going to withdraw from it. The United States could veto any United Nations Security Council resolution condemning the move.
But as a symbolic step, the decision is momentous — underlining Mr. Trump’s willingness to flout diplomatic orthodoxy and shake up a debate over the Middle East that has changed little since the 1970s.
“I’ve been thinking about doing that for a long time,” Mr. Trump said to Fox Business Network in an interview scheduled to air on Friday. “Every president has said ‘do that,’” he said, “I’m the one that gets it done.”
Mr. Trump brushed aside suggestions that he was trying to help Mr. Netanyahu in the election, professing to be only vaguely aware of the Israeli leader’s political challenges. He plans to welcome Mr. Netanyahu to the White House next Monday.
Yet unlike the president’s earlier decision to move the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which was mandated by Congress and fulfilled a promise he made during the 2016 presidential campaign — one made by previous presidential candidates — this latest move was both a first for an American president and almost purely a gesture to Mr. Netanyahu.
The Israeli leader welcomed it as such during a meeting in Jerusalem with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
“President Trump has just made history,” said a beaming Mr. Netanyahu, who said he called the president to thank him on behalf of the Israeli people after his tweet. “He did it again.”SPOILEROm spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.“The fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.”— Bertrand Russell
Op zijn leeftijd kun je tijdbesef in de prullenmand gooien. Dat zie je wel vaker bij bejaarden. Vandaar dat ze vaak Golf spelen. Iemand die jonger is heeft dan het gevoel dat de tijd stilstaat. Die oudjes kunnen het gras op de green zien groeien en willen het continu gemaaid hebben..quote:
Op
Mag ik je vandaag weer eens irriteren?
twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 22-03-2019 om 01:00:10 Eric Swalwell this AM on Hope Hicks: "She also told me when I interviewed her that she had told lies for the president, and when I asked her what she had lied about, she refused to testify. And then the Republicans did not force her to actually give us an answer." @MSNBC reageer retweet
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
In Washington lijkt het me een beetje een stilte voor de storm.
Er gaat iets gebeuren. Er is veel onderhuidse spanning.
Er gaat iets gebeuren. Er is veel onderhuidse spanning.
Mag ik je vandaag weer eens irriteren?
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 21:12:40 We are here today to take historic action to defend American Students and American Values. In a few moments, I will be signing an Executive Order to protect FREE SPEECH on College Campuses.https://t.co/gFFnSl1bEF reageer retweet
Totaal onnodige onzin want dat valt al onder het 1e amendement.quote:Op vrijdag 22 maart 2019 12:55 schreef EipNiC het volgende:
twitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op donderdag 21-03-2019 om 21:12:40 We are here today to take historic action to defend American Students and American Values. In a few moments, I will be signing an Executive Order to protect FREE SPEECH on College Campuses.https://t.co/gFFnSl1bEF reageer retweet
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
https://www.politico.com/(...)nvestigation-1232147
Trumpie is weer in paniekmodus naar Clinton aan het wijzen.
Trumpie is weer in paniekmodus naar Clinton aan het wijzen.
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
Blijkbaar niet afdoende.quote:Op vrijdag 22 maart 2019 13:02 schreef xpompompomx het volgende:
[..]
Totaal onnodige onzin want dat valt al onder het 1e amendement.
Die vrouw heeft dus ook banden net de chinese overheid. Lekker swampy weer.twitter:kylegriffin1 twitterde op vrijdag 22-03-2019 om 13:00:01 Cindy Yang helped Chinese tech stars get $50K photos with Trump. Who paid? Yang isn't saying—but she and 3 associates donated $135,500 to Trump Victory before an event. Selling tix to campaign fundraisers without disclosing the buyer to the FEC is illegal. https://t.co/74zngfaZui reageer retweet
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Nou ja, het is nogal ongeloofwaardig van een president die bv zei:quote:
Die dit tweette:quote:“We’re losing a lot of people because of the Internet, and we have to do something. We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what’s happening. And we have to talk to them. Maybe in certain areas closing that Internet up in some way [audience member cheers]… Somebody will say, ‘oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people. We have a LOT of foolish people.”
Die aangaf de advocaatkosten te betalen voor mensen die een protester in elkaar zouden rossen: https://newrepublic.com/m(...)ell-cover-legal-feestwitter:realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 29-11-2016 om 12:55:13 Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail! reageer retweet
En dit is dan nog maar het topje van de ijsberg.
Ik zie ook niet in waarom het dan "blijkbaar" nodig zou zijn.
Wat een randdebiel die manquote:Op vrijdag 22 maart 2019 13:12 schreef ExtraWaskracht het volgende:
Ik zie ook niet in waarom het dan "blijkbaar" nodig zou zijn.
. Ik zie niet waarom Trump z'n achterlijkheid de nood verminderd.[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 22-03-2019 13:15:01 ]
De vraag was waarom het nodig was, aangezien het namelijk in de grondwet verankerd staat. Waarop jij aangaf dat het blijkbaar niet afdoende geborgd was ofzo. Ik weet niet waar die blijkbaar over ging, maar interpreteerde dit als zijnde dat, omdat Trump dit decreet uitvaardigt het blijkbaar nodig zou zijn... dat zie ik niet als een geldig argument.quote:
[..]
Wat een randdebiel die man
Je weet het zelf ook niet uit te leggen dusquote:
Ah, je doet alsof je neus bloed. Dan ga ik maar naar de kapper.
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
bronquote:Nobody Knows Anything About ‘Electability’
When pundits anoint Biden—or Sanders or O’Rourke—as the likeliest to beat Trump, they’re making lots of dubious assumptions.
Have we learned nothing? In 2016, very few political writers, myself emphatically included, thought Donald Trump would win the Republican nomination, let alone the presidency. Very few thought Bernie Sanders would win 23 states and 13 million votes in his Democratic-primary battle with Hillary Clinton.
The voters were lousy prognosticators too. Although polls generally suggested that Sanders would fare better against Trump, voters overwhelmingly believed Hillary Clinton had a better chance of winning the general election. And in the closing weeks of the 2016 campaign, they overwhelmingly predicted that Clinton, not Trump, would triumph.
The point is that we, and they, simply don’t know. Electability is extremely hard to predict. And when pundits discuss it, they often rely on unstated and dubious assumptions—which usually lead them to predict that the most centrist candidate with the most establishment support is the person general-election voters will like best.
All this glib talk about electability has a cost. It leads commentators, often implicitly, to give “electable” candidates a pass when their policy views are fuzzy or flat-out wrong. So what should journalists do? It’s simple: Spend less time discussing which candidates can win the presidency and more time discussing what they’d do if they actually did.
To grasp how questionable much of the discourse surrounding “electability” is, consider the two candidates who, according to conventional wisdom, are considered best able to defeat Trump in 2020. The first is Joe Biden. The reason: As a Washington Post headline put it last fall, “Biden Appeals to Working-Class Whites Who Defected to Trump.”
But does he really? The evidence suggests that most of the voters who supported Barack Obama and then Trump are not Democrats who “defected” to Trump. They’re Republicans or Republican-leaning independents who “defected” to Obama and in the years since have grown ever more ensconced in the GOP. So it’s not clear that any Democratic candidate could lure many of them away from Trump next year.
Nor is it obvious that Biden would be best suited to doing so. Yes, his race and gender might prove an advantage. Yes, he might be harder to tar as a socialist radical. But Biden supported NAFTA and the Iraq War, and he’s been a Washington insider for almost a half century. In 2016, Trump voters expressed their deep pessimism about the state of the country by voting for radical disruption. If some have now lost faith in Trump, and thus grown even more disillusioned with politics than they were before, wouldn’t they look for a different species of disrupter, perhaps an anti-establishment populist such as Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren? Why go for the Democratic candidate who, more than almost any other, represents the pre-Trump status quo?
And even if Biden did prove better able to win back working-class whites than his competitors, could he rouse the Democratic Party’s African American and female base? The fact that his advisers are reportedly considering asking Stacey Abrams to be his running mate suggests that they themselves have doubts. But if choosing Abrams boosts Biden among women and people of color, why wouldn’t it hurt him among white men who backed Trump?
Do these questions mean Biden is less electable than other candidates? Not at all. What they mean is that we really don’t know.
It’s the same with Beto O’Rourke. His boosters say he’s like Obama: appealing to moderate whites because of his unifying, upbeat message, but also rousing to progressives, who find him idealistic and inspirational. As one Democratic bundler told Politico, “He’s Barack Obama, but white.” But the white part matters. You can’t assume O’Rourke is more electable than Kamala Harris or Cory Booker without explaining how O’Rourke could match the epic African American turnout numbers that Obama elicited in 2008 and 2012, but that Clinton did not match in 2016.
Moreover, saying that O’Rourke would appeal to “moderate” or “centrist” whites glosses over a critical distinction: It depends on which “moderates” we’re talking about. O’Rourke’s cultural liberalism, pro-business background, and unifying, optimistic rhetoric might serve him well among the upper-middle-class Democrats and independents who admire Michael Bloomberg. But is a candidate who has backed Trade Promotion Authority and praised NAFTA best suited to winning back working-class voters in the industrial midwestern states that gave Trump the presidency? In a recent interview with Thomas B. Edsall of The New York Times, Paul A. Sracic, a political scientist at Youngstown State University, suggested that “O’Rourke’s vague, ‘We all need to come together’ message will not resonate with people who see life as a battle. Working class voters believe in pugilistic politics.” Why is Sracic’s take less plausible than that breathless Democratic bundler’s?
Anyone can play this game. Maybe Sanders is the most electable because his pugilism can win over anti-establishment, anti-corporate Trump voters while eliciting a vast turnout among Millennials? Maybe Warren is the most electable because she’s as passionate as Bernie but more substantive and less radical, and she’ll inspire women as well? Maybe Harris is the most electable because she can replicate Obama’s massive African American numbers while pivoting to the center in a way white candidates can’t. Maybe Booker is the most electable because his message is as positive and unifying as O’Rourke’s, but he’ll do better among African Americans, and his unabashed religiosity will prove a secret weapon with evangelicals.
All these narratives are superficially plausible, and all of them could be nonsense. No one knows. And by embracing some while dismissing others, journalists—sometimes unwittingly—create a double standard for evaluating candidates. It’s fine that O’Rourke is less substantive than Warren, political handicappers imply, because he’s better able to beat Trump, which is what matters most. Let’s not credit Sanders for opposing the Iraq War, which Biden supported, because it’s better to nominate a more hawkish Democrat who can win than a dove who will lose.
The irony is that many political commentators think it’s easier to have an informed opinion about electability than about policy. It’s actually harder. If you want to know which candidate was correct about deregulation or the Iraq War, or whose health-care plan will cover the most people at the lowest cost, you can talk to experts, assemble facts, and come to a reasonable conclusion. Deciding which candidate can best beat Trump is more like looking at someone’s zodiac sign and predicting his or her future. It may be a fun hobby, but it’s a distraction from useful work.
Volkorenbrood: "Geen quotes meer in jullie sigs gaarne."
Ben trouwens wel geïnspireerd geraakt door Pete Buttigieg. Beetje een nerdy man met een rare naam maar hij zegt wel hele rake dingen.
Wat ik een tijdje geleden al zei maar nu vrijwel zeker is: het Mueller onderzoek is afgelopen en straks zal blijken dat Trump niets verkeerd heeft gedaan.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
Heb de indruk dat je niet de enige bent. Zie die naam steeds vaker voorbij komen.quote:
Ben trouwens wel geïnspireerd geraakt door Pete Buttigieg. Beetje een nerdy man met een rare naam maar hij zegt wel hele rake dingen.
Anders lees je het hele artikel even, daar staat toch echt wat anders.quote:
Wat ik een tijdje geleden al zei maar nu vrijwel zeker is: het Mueller onderzoek is afgelopen en straks zal blijken dat Trump niets verkeerd heeft gedaan.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
[ afbeelding ]
James Comey weet niet wat het Mueller onderzoek oplevert, en neemt ook geen afstand.
EDIT: Wat bedoel je met 'neemt afstand'? Neemt afstand van de conclusies? Staat er niet. Neemt afstand van het onderzoek? Ja, hij was maanden geleden al door Trump ontslagen, dus die afstand was er al wel. En heb je misschien nog een bron voor je bewering dat het Mueller onderzoek al afgelopen is? Want dat staat (verrassing) ook niet het artikel waar je alleen de kop van hebt gepost.
[ Bericht 15% gewijzigd door AllesKaputt op 22-03-2019 15:33:08 ]
Trololoquote:
Wat ik een tijdje geleden al zei maar nu vrijwel zeker is: het Mueller onderzoek is afgelopen en straks zal blijken dat Trump niets verkeerd heeft gedaan.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
[ afbeelding ]
ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
quote:
Wat ik een tijdje geleden al zei maar nu vrijwel zeker is: het Mueller onderzoek is afgelopen en straks zal blijken dat Trump niets verkeerd heeft gedaan.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
[ afbeelding ]
Comey wil zich niet uitlaten over de inhoud (probeert onpartijdig over te komen). Waar hij zich wel over uit: de manier waarop het onderzoek verlopen is - het gaat Comey erom dat het goed en volledig onderozek is.quote:I have no idea whether the special counsel will conclude that Mr. Trump knowingly conspired with the Russians in connection with the 2016 election or that he obstructed justice with the required corrupt intent. I also don’t care. I care only that the work be done, well and completely.
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)-mueller-report.html.
Maar ja, het stille en secure manier van Mueller bevalt velen niet, velen zijn aan het overhaasten. Het komt wanneer het zo ver is.
Goed punt.
Trump kan niet eens een ruzie met een dode winnen. Dan ben je wel echt een faalhaas van epische proporties.twitter:brithume twitterde op vrijdag 22-03-2019 om 15:19:52 President Trump’s attacks on the late John McCain mark the first time in memory where a President has picked a fight with a dead man and lost. McCain was no saint, but he was a brave and patriotic man. Hitting him when he can’t hit back is repellent. reageer retweet
President Trump’s attacks on the late John McCain mark the first time in memory where a President has picked a fight with a dead man and lost. McCain was no saint, but he was a brave and patriotic man. Hitting him when he can’t hit back is repellent.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Je hebt de op-ed in de NYT niet gelezen en neemt conclusies over van je echokamer. Wees eens kritisch op je media consumptie.quote:
Wat ik een tijdje geleden al zei maar nu vrijwel zeker is: het Mueller onderzoek is afgelopen en straks zal blijken dat Trump niets verkeerd heeft gedaan.
Zelfs James Comey realiseert zich dat het een Nothing Burger is en neemt afstand.
[ afbeelding ]
Géén kloon van tvlxd!
Het is wel echt slecht van CNN anders hoor, om met zo'n titel te komen.quote:
[..]
Je hebt de op-ed in de NYT niet gelezen en neemt conclusies over van je echokamer. Wees eens kritisch op je media consumptie.
''Wel grappig''quote:
De enige kandidaat die het over het meest prangende en alles aantastende probleem heeft, en die is wel grappig. Nee, beperk je dan maar tot de Russia-Trump conspiracy theory. En schop dit topic dan ook gewoon definitief naar BNW.[ Bericht 0% gewijzigd door #ANONIEM op 22-03-2019 16:01:48 ]
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)ps://t.co/tgrW9vxkNk
Onder de auteurs van het economische rapport aan Trump bevinden zich grootheden als P. Parker, J. Snow, J. The Hutt en B. Wayne.
Onder de auteurs van het economische rapport aan Trump bevinden zich grootheden als P. Parker, J. Snow, J. The Hutt en B. Wayne.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Dat is wel zo'n beetje het minst interessante in de column.quote:
https://www.nytimes.com/2(...)ps://t.co/tgrW9vxkNk
Onder de auteurs van het economische rapport aan Trump bevinden zich grootheden als P. Parker, J. Snow, J. The Hutt en B. Wayne.
Volkorenbrood: "Geen quotes meer in jullie sigs gaarne."
Malteser afkomst die naam. Schijnt een shitload aan talen te kunnen spreken.quote:
Ben trouwens wel geïnspireerd geraakt door Pete Buttigieg. Beetje een nerdy man met een rare naam maar hij zegt wel hele rake dingen.
Aut viam inveniam, aut faciam
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. A high-powered mutant of some kind never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die.
Geeft ons dan duiding, oh Monolith-die-dingen-weet.quote:
[..]
Dat is wel zo'n beetje het minst interessante in de column.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Peiligen:
Nog steeds Biden en Sanders voorop.
2020 National Democratic Primary:
Sanders 26% Biden 26% Harris 12% O'Rourke 11% Warren 8% Buttigieg 3% Booker 3% Yang 1% Castro 1% Gabbard 1% Klobuchar 1% Inslee 1% Hickenlooper 1% Gillibrand 0%
@EmersonPolling 3/17-18
Biden 28% Sanders 20% Harris 12% O'Rourke 11% Warren 6% Kerry 4% Booker 3% Klobuchar 3% Castro 1% Gillibrand 1% Inslee 1% Buttigieg 1% Hickenlooper 1% Gabbard 0% Delaney 0% McAuliffe 0% Bullock 0%
@CNN 3/14-17
Biden 35% Sanders 27% Harris 8% O'Rourke 8% Warren 7% Booker 4% Klobuchar 2% Buttigieg 1% Castro 1% Gabbard 1% Gillibrand 1% Hickenlooper 1% Inslee 1% Delaney 1% Bullock 0% McAuliffe 0%
@MorningConsult 3/11-17
2020 National Republican Primary:
Trump 90% Weld 10%
@EmersonPolling 3/17-18
Nog steeds Biden en Sanders voorop.
2020 National Democratic Primary:
Sanders 26% Biden 26% Harris 12% O'Rourke 11% Warren 8% Buttigieg 3% Booker 3% Yang 1% Castro 1% Gabbard 1% Klobuchar 1% Inslee 1% Hickenlooper 1% Gillibrand 0%
@EmersonPolling 3/17-18
Biden 28% Sanders 20% Harris 12% O'Rourke 11% Warren 6% Kerry 4% Booker 3% Klobuchar 3% Castro 1% Gillibrand 1% Inslee 1% Buttigieg 1% Hickenlooper 1% Gabbard 0% Delaney 0% McAuliffe 0% Bullock 0%
@CNN 3/14-17
Biden 35% Sanders 27% Harris 8% O'Rourke 8% Warren 7% Booker 4% Klobuchar 2% Buttigieg 1% Castro 1% Gabbard 1% Gillibrand 1% Hickenlooper 1% Inslee 1% Delaney 1% Bullock 0% McAuliffe 0%
@MorningConsult 3/11-17
2020 National Republican Primary:
Trump 90% Weld 10%
@EmersonPolling 3/17-18
https://fivethirtyeight.c(...)st-name-recognition/twitter:eelcobvr twitterde op woensdag 20-03-2019 om 08:57:38 Hier betoogt Nate Silver dat vroege peilingen wel degelijk iets zeggen: https://t.co/G2tXLJ2p2o reageer retweet
Hier betoogt Nate Silver dat vroege peilingen wel degelijk iets zeggen:
Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.
Gelul. Alt Right denkt dat mensen die protesteren tegen hun haatzaaierij het 1e amendement overtreed.quote:
"The enemy isn't men, or women, it's bloody stupid people and no one has the right to be stupid." - Sir Terry Pratchett.
Het hele stuk gaat over het feit dat de tax cuts totaal niet het bedoelde effect hebben gehad en dan is dit rapport zelfs nog een stuk optimistischer over toekomstige groei dan prognoses uit de markt.quote:
[..]
Geeft ons dan duiding, oh Monolith-die-dingen-weet.
Zo moeilijk is lezen toch niet?
Volkorenbrood: "Geen quotes meer in jullie sigs gaarne."
Ik vraag me af tot in hoeverre Raegan al wat aan het dementeren was tijdens zn regeerperiode maar Trump raakt hiermee wel nieuwe dieptepunten. Als hij straks in de bloembakken begint te pissen dan zal ik 't hem maar vergeven dat hij zich als een idioot presenteert.quote:
Goed punt.Trump kan niet eens een ruzie met een dode winnen. Dan ben je wel echt een faalhaas van epische proporties.twitter:brithume twitterde op vrijdag 22-03-2019 om 15:19:52 President Trump’s attacks on the late John McCain mark the first time in memory where a President has picked a fight with a dead man and lost. McCain was no saint, but he was a brave and patriotic man. Hitting him when he can’t hit back is repellent. reageer retweet
Betrekkelijk interessant draadje over de op handen zijnde zaken bij de Supreme Court over gerrymandering in North Carolina en Maryland:
twitter:
On Tuesday, partisan gerrymandering returns to SCOTUS when the high court hears arguments in cases challenging North Carolina's and Maryland's congressional maps. A thread.
Laatst riep een reporter alleen maar: "Mr President,...." en antwoordde Trump met "No Collusion, no collusion.". Een reflex.quote:Op vrijdag 22 maart 2019 17:56 schreef Beathoven het volgende:
[..]
Ik vraag me af tot in hoeverre Raegan al wat aan het dementeren was tijdens zn regeerperiode maar Trump raakt hiermee wel nieuwe dieptepunten. Als hij straks in de bloembakken begint te pissen dan zal ik 't hem maar vergeven dat hij zich als een idioot presenteert.
Tragisch eigenlijk. Helemaal in zijn eigen wereldje. Een zielige oude man. En dan heeft hij het nog rustig gehad. Als de SDNY een RICO case start tegen zijn campagne breekt de pleuris pas echt uit voor hem.
I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me.
Rustig aan, het schuim spat zowat van je lippen.quote:
[..]
''Wel grappig''
Wat is dan precies het meest prangende en alles aantastende probleem waar hij het als enige over heeft?
Hij heeft zichzelf Noors geleerd omdat hij de boeken van een Noorse auteur wilde lezen en die niet in het Engels vertaald waren. Dan heb je meteen mijn respect.quote:
[..]
Malteser afkomst die naam. Schijnt een shitload aan talen te kunnen spreken.
Het over op-eds in de NYT hebben en anderen betichten van het zich bevinden in een echokamer. Waanzinnig.quote:
[..]
Je hebt de op-ed in de NYT niet gelezen en neemt conclusies over van je echokamer. Wees eens kritisch op je media consumptie.
Volgens de voorspelmodellen op basis van de economie zou Trump in 2020 glansrijk moeten gaan winnen:
https://www.politico.eu/a(...)or-a-2020-landslide/
https://www.politico.eu/a(...)or-a-2020-landslide/
Volkorenbrood: "Geen quotes meer in jullie sigs gaarne."
| Forum Opties | |
|---|---|
| Forumhop: | |
| Hop naar: | |