Yup! The polls were so accurate for the last cycle. I'm sure they are right again this time.

I don't even like President Trump, but as long as the Democrats keep putting up the worst candidates, and the economy is thriving, there is no way that he won't win again.

But it will be fun listening to all your bitching day after day.

 

Yep!
Shooter believes this is Trump's to lose.
Just like it was Hillary's to lose in 2016.
We'll have to wait and see how this turns out.......

 

The leftist propaganda is strong today, yet merit-less at best.

SCOTUS will throw this back to the State...and again backfiring on the leftist held State legislature...

 

Is it the economy?

 

Tulsi Gabbard Youth Voice Presidential Forum
(Image by Phil Roeder) Details DMCA
https://www.opednews.com/articles/A...atic_Election_History_Leftist-200118-793.html
A Sanders/Gabbard Ticket: The Best Available Combination
By Bill Willers (Page 1 of 1 pages)


Bernie Sanders, according to recent reports, has taken the lead in the Iowa Caucus. At the same time, Tulsi Gabbard, the first choice for nearly all "progressives" (according to my own leftist definition) within my circle (both face-to-face and online) from the very beginning of her entry into the field, has a long history of support for Sanders and his positions. She went so far in 2016 as to quit her position as vice-chair of the Democratic National Committee to support Sanders as he opposed Hillary Clinton for the Party's nomination, an offense the Clinton people have not forgotten. A choice to put Gabbard onto a ticket with Sanders would not be the result of some political juggling, as for example an attempt to balance a ticket geographically. The two have similar views and would be naturals for working together.



Problems for Gabbard stem from her progressive position itself. Simply take a look at her platform, laid out for such ease of use by viewers that just clicking on the link and perusing for a minute would tell you more, and more quickly, than another thousand words posted here. She is everything a progressive - or a Green for that matter - could wish for, and as a woman "of color" she encompasses much of the overall gender and race issue for which so many insist "it is time". It is that very progressive position that threatens the prevailing power structure to such a degree that it places her in its crosshairs. It is the reason for her having been marginalized from early on in her campaign. Her platform is similar to that of 2008 presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich who, in multiple ways, was "disappeared" by the media and by his own Party, rotten elements of which have become ever more evident in recent years.

 

Expert uncovers Georgia election system hack in 2014



OAN Newsroom
UPDATED 4:20 PM PT — Saturday, January 18, 2020
Security concerns are still plaguing elections after a cybersecurity expert discovered a Georgia voting server had been hacked. As One America’s Eddie McCoven reports, potential vulnerabilities still exist despite several states’ investments in new voting machines.

 

I asked people why they don't vote, and this is what they told me
Andrew Joseph Pegoda, Lecturer in Women's, Gender and Sexuality Studies; Religious Studies; and First Year Writing, University of Houston
January 17, 2020, 7:54 AM CST

With the 2020 presidential election approaching, directives for people to “get out and vote” will be firing up again.

Some people might be indifferent or simply not care, but many who forgo voting have legitimate reasons.

Over the past decade, through my extensive research on civil rights and oppression, through my observations of social media comments and through my conversations with hundreds of college students, I have concluded that such reasons are both important and, generally, unnoticed.

1. Voter suppression
Republican-led efforts to diminish participation in voting and voter registration have greatly contributed to the number of nonvoters.

Since 2010, 25 states have adopted measures specifically aimed at making voting more difficult. Such measures include additional voter identification requirements.

Sometimes lawmakers said these were necessary to curb illegal voting, which research shows is an all-but-nonexistent problem.

Some counties and states have also created confusion and uncertainty about how to initially register or re-register after a voter has moved.

In other cases, people might not know where to vote, due to the distribution of deliberately false information.

Since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 that key aspects of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were unconstitutional, states have closed over 1,000 polling locations, half of these in Texas.

[img class="caas-img caas-lazy caas-loaded" alt="" src="https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/loJ58xAuDR8a2WnB_kSEHg--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTcwNQ--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/the_conversation_us_articles_815/3d0372031b1121a2d034022bf13ca1f2" >
2. Personal choice
Some people decide to forgo voting.

I hear again and again that sometimes people make such choices because they were intimidated by friends, by family members or by people at polling places.

When facing the complexities of races with dozens of candidates and complicated issues, others say they don’t feel they know enough to make informed decisions.

People have also told me they worry about feeling personally responsible if they vote for a candidate or position and there are unforeseen consequences, such as cuts to important aid programs. Members of any group, but especially those of underrepresented groups, may long to vote for desirable candidates but not feel that current candidates offer the possibility that anything will really change.

Individuals have shared with me that they have not voted because they do not trust a nation that they feel has lied and perpetuated systemic abuse against minorities, aggravated further by widespread gerrymandering and for presidential elections, by an Electoral College system that doesn’t weigh each vote the same.

In France and India, for example, people who dislike all of the candidates can formally “vote” without endorsing any candidate by selecting “none of the above.” Not having this option in the U.S. might affect turnout, too.

3. Obstacles to access
For others, voting may simply be too difficult.

I often hear of people who – even with early voting or absentee options – cannot vote because they lack transportation. They are homeless. They lack child care. They are disabled. They work, go to school and live in different cities.

This is even more applicable for the 7 to 8 million in the U.S. who hold multiple jobs. Laws guarantee time off for voting but aren’t enforceable and aren’t always workable.

Such people are effectively disenfranchised.
4. Lack of rights
Only nonincarcerated, mentally competent, registered citizens of age can vote.

Based on 2015 data, the right to vote was not extended to an over 13 million people with green cards, work visas or refugee status. Given the total population of people 18 and older exceeded 248 million in 2015, one out of every 20 adults living, working and spending money in the U.S. was not eligible to vote.

Using vague and inconsistent language, states have also worked to deny disabled or mentally ill people a political voice. This affects potentially over a million people nationwide.

As discussed in the books “The New Jim Crow” and in “Race, Incarceration and American Values,” an additional 6 million Americans cannot vote because of felony convictions, an issue that disproportionately affects black people. In some states, this disenfranchisement remains in effect for life.

The future
Given the legitimacy of reasons why they don’t participate, nonvoters certainly shouldn’t be scolded with, “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain.” Or with even harsher words, as one friend on Facebook put it: “If you don’t vote, everything wrong in the world is your fault.”

People long to be heard and deserve fair representation. Instead of bashing nonvoters, I recommend taking some deep breaths and initiating friendly conversations. Listen and learn. At a time when public trust in government is at historic lows, such conversations might even encourage someone to demand a voice.

 

I see 2 or 3 Bloomberg adds everyday, dude acts like he already has the nomination.

 

Since 2010, 25 states have adopted measures specifically aimed at making voting more difficult. Such measures include additional voter identification requirements.

Sometimes lawmakers said these were necessary to curb illegal voting, which research shows is an all-but-nonexistent problem.

Oh my.

Presenting an I.D. to cast a vote should be a principle concept, and the leftists feel the same way, that's the illegals in sanctuary cities and counties get the opportunity to have a Drivers License offered to them...by the Sanctuary State.

 

An other reason-as a corollary to "Individuals have shared with me that they have not voted because they do not trust a nation that they feel has lied and perpetuated systemic abuse..." and who see their 'skills' as more adaptable to taking advantage to those institutions and people who they see as operators and operations of excluding abuse

 

.... legitimate reasons for not voting....
1. Requirement to show ID.
2. Personal choice
3. Access obstacles
5. Lack of legal rights
6. Lack of trust in the system

These are anything but legitimate reasons. They are excuses.

 

Nobel economist: Trump’s economy is an absolute disaster for people and the planet
January 19, 2020
By

Joseph Stiglitz, Common Dreams
It is becoming conventional wisdom that US President Donald Trump will be tough to beat in November, because, whatever reservations about him voters may have, he has been good for the American economy. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Neither GDP nor the Dow is a good measure of economic performance. Neither tells us what’s happening to ordinary citizens’ living standards or anything about sustainability.

Report Advertisement

As the world’s business elites trek to Davos for their annual gathering, people should be asking a simple question: Have they overcome their infatuation with US President Donald Trump?

Enjoy progressive journalism? Help fight right-wing disinformation by supporting Raw Story. Click to learn more.
Two years ago, a few rare corporate leaders were concerned about climate change, or upset at Trump’s misogyny and bigotry. Most, however, were celebrating the president’s tax cuts for billionaires and corporations and looking forward to his efforts to deregulate the economy. That would allow businesses to pollute the air more, get more Americans hooked on opioids, entice more children to eat their diabetes-inducing foods, and engage in the sort of financial shenanigans that brought on the 2008 crisis.
Today, many corporate bosses are still talking about the continued GDP growth and record stock prices. But neither GDP nor the Dow is a good measure of economic performance. Neither tells us what’s happening to ordinary citizens’ living standards or anything about sustainability. In fact, US economic performance over the past four years is Exhibit A in the indictment against relying on these indicators.

The lion’s share of the increase in GDP is also going to those at the top.

To get a good reading on a country’s economic health, start by looking at the health of its citizens. If they are happy and prosperous, they will be healthy and live longer. Among developed countries, America sits at the bottom in this regard. US life expectancy, already relatively low, fell in each of the first two years of Trump’s presidency, and in 2017, midlife mortality reached its highest rate since World War II. This is not a surprise, because no president has worked harder to make sure that more Americans lack health insurance. Millions have lost their coverage, and the uninsured rate has risen, in just two years, from 10.9% to 13.7%.


One reason for declining life expectancy in America is what Anne Case and Nobel laureate economist Angus Deaton call deaths of despair, caused by alcohol, drug overdoses, and suicide. In 2017 (the most recent year for which good data are available), such deaths stood at almost four times their 1999 level.

The only time I have seen anything like these declines in health—outside of war or epidemics—was when I was chief economist of the World Bank and found out that mortality and morbidity data confirmed what our economic indicators suggested about the dismal state of the post-Soviet Russian economy.

Trump may be a good president for the top 1%—and especially for the top 0.1%—but he has not been good for everyone else. If fully implemented, the 2017 tax cut will result in tax increases for most households in the second, third, and fourth income quintiles.


Given tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the ultrarich and corporations, it should come as no surprise that there was no significant change in the median US household’s disposable incomebetween 2017 and 2018 (again, the most recent year with good data). The lion’s share of the increase in GDP is also going to those at the top. Real median weekly earnings are just 2.6% above their level when Trump took office. And these increases have not offset long periods of wage stagnation. For example, the median wage of a full-time male worker (and those with full-time jobs are the lucky ones) is still more than 3% below what it was 40 years ago. Nor has there been much progress on reducing racial disparities: in the third quarter of 2019, median weekly earnings for black men working full-time were less than three-quarters the level for white men.

Making matters worse, the growth that has occurred is not environmentally sustainable – and even less so thanks to the Trump administration’s gutting of regulations that have passed stringent cost-benefit analyses. The air will be less breathable, the water less drinkable, and the planet more subject to climate change. In fact, losses related to climate change have already reached new highs in the US, which has suffered more property damage than any other country – reaching some 1.5% of GDP in 2017.


The tax cuts were supposed to spur a new wave of investment. Instead, they triggered an all-time record binge of share buybacks – some $800 billion in 2018 – by some of America’s most profitable companies, and led to record peacetime deficits (almost $1 trillion in fiscal 2019) in a country supposedly near full employment. And even with weak investment, the US had to borrow massively abroad: the most recent data show foreign borrowing at nearly $500 billion a year, with an increase of more than 10% in America’s net indebtedness position in one year alone.

Likewise, Trump’s trade wars, for all their sound and fury, have not reduced the US trade deficit, which was one-quarter higher in 2018 than it was in 2016. The 2018 goods deficit was the largest on record. Even the deficit in trade with China was up almost a quarter from 2016. The US did get a new North American trade agreement, without the investment agreement provisions that the Business Roundtable wanted, without the provisions raising drug prices that the pharmaceutical companies wanted, and with better labor and environmental provisions. Trump, a self-proclaimed master deal maker, lost on almost every front in his negotiations with congressional Democrats, resulting in a slightly improved trade arrangement.

And despite Trump’s vaunted promises to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US, the increase in manufacturing employment is still lower than it was under his predecessor, Barack Obama, once the post-2008 recovery set in, and is still markedly below its pre-crisis level. Even the unemployment rate, at a 50-year low, masks economic fragility. The employment rate for working-age males and females, while rising, has increased less than during the Obama recovery, and is still significantly below that of other developed countries. The pace of job creation is also markedly slower than it was under Obama.


Again, the low employment rate is not a surprise, not least because unhealthy people can’t work. Moreover, those on disability benefits, in prison—the US incarceration rate has increased more than sixfold since 1970, with some two million people currently behind bars – or so discouraged that they are not actively seeking jobs are not counted as “unemployed.” But, of course, they are not employed. Nor is it a surprise that a country that doesn’t provide affordable childcare or guarantee family leave would have lower female employment—adjusted for population, more than ten percentage points lower—than other developed countries.

Even judging by GDP, the Trump economy falls short. Last quarter’s growth was just 2.1%, far less than the 4%, 5%, or even 6% Trump promised to deliver, and even less than the 2.4% average of Obama’s second term. That is a remarkably poor performance considering the stimulus provided by the $1 trillion deficit and ultra-low interest rates. This is not an accident, or just a matter of bad luck: Trump’s brand is uncertainty, volatility, and prevarication, whereas trust, stability, and confidence are essential for growth. So is equality, according to the International Monetary Fund.

So, Trump deserves failing grades not just on essential tasks like upholding democracy and preserving our planet. He should not get a pass on the economy, either.

 

It it was economy stupid Trump's approval rating would be way above 50%. And he would not be losing to all the top Democrats in polling especially in the battleground states.

Michael Bloomberg Reportedly Prepared to Spend $2 Billion to Defeat Trump

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/m...-prepared-to-spend-2-billion-to-defeat-trump/

 

Donald Trump has Higher Approval Rating than Barack Obama at this Point of his Presidency


Jan 18, 2020
By

Jose Nino


Marc Lotter has great new for America First supporters.

The Director of Strategic Communications for President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign tweeted on January 17, 2020 that Trump has a higher approval rating than President Obama did at this point of his presidential term.

Lotter tweeted, “President @realDonaldTrump’s approval is 6% HIGHER than Obama’s at this point in his term! #KeepAmericaGreat.”


Marc Lotter - Text TRUMP to 88022

✔@marc_lotter

President @realDonaldTrump’s approval is 6% HIGHER than Obama’s at this point in his term!#KeepAmericaGreat





Lotter is basing these numbers off of a report from the polling firm Rasmussen.


All in all, this looks good for President Trump’s re-election bid.

Nonetheless, Trump should continue sounding off on the immigration issue, which is the top priority for GOP voters heading into 2020. Not doing so, will likely leave his based unmotivated.

Immigration patriots will need a Trump victory in 2020 to see their immigration policies through.

 

I just love laughing at your stupid ignorant (two different things) gullible (that's three) ass. You just proved my point as good as I could have. At this point in President Obama's presidency the economy was still in the tank trying to crawl out of the Great Recession. The unemployment rate was 8.3%, And yet even in Rasmussen polling, the most unfriendly to President Obama, his approval rating was at 47% on January 19, 2012. While in Rasmussen Polling, the most friendly Trump is going to get, right now Trump is only two points ahead of President Obama at 49%. So it is obviously not the economy stupid. If it was Trump would be polling around 62% approval rating like President Obama was when he left office. God I do get such a fucking kick out of you,

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu...a_administration/obama_approval_index_history

https://www.rasmussenreports.com/pu...p_administration/trump_approval_index_history

And now I will show you a real problem for Trump. He gets away with lying to his low information supporters at his MAGA rallies, But not with farmers who know what is going on, know what helps or hurts them. And fucking hate being lied to. And Trump's low information red hat brigade is sure as fuck not enough to get Trump re-elected and he is losing everyone else.

Farmers refuse to cheer for Trump as he lies that he’s fighting for them to keep their land

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/01/fa...hat-hes-fighting-for-them-to-keep-their-land/

 

Why would you quote polls when they were so wrong back in the 2016 election?

 

Why do people like you keep lying about the polls in 2016 when it has been proven around here dozens of times that after Comey came out with his letter about Clinton's emails a little more than a week before the election Clinton's lead fell to within the margin of error. Which proves the polls were actually really close.

 

I wonder if more people knew about this upcoming Make Women Great Again rally/ conference thing they would still vote for the GOP?

$2,000 Tickets And All-Male Speakers: The ‘Make Women Great Again’ Convention Is Causing Outrage On The Internet


“Make Women Great Again”—that’s the tagline of the upcoming “The 22 Convention” that will happen in May in Orlando, Florida. It’s causing some huge waves of disbelief and anger both online and in the media.

Some people are outraged at nearly every part of the convention. That it costs 2,000 dollars for a ticket (though there’s a 2-for-1 early bird deal going on now). That the speaker lineup is composed only of men. That the convention promises to show women how to be “ideal” and “ultimate wives.”

Meanwhile, the convention styles itself as an opponent of feminism and claims to promote “all forms of positive femininity.” It also states on its website that it will be “the mansplaining event of the century.”

 

Throughout the general election campaign, Clinton consistently led Trump in fundraising. Through August 2016, Clinton, the Democratic National Committee and Clinton's main super PAC, Priorities USA Action, had raised more than $700 million.

While Trump’s campaign increased its spending on television ads in its final election push, it still used the traditional outreach tool much less than Clinton’s did. As of late October, Clinton spent’s campaign spent about $141.7 million on ads, compared with $58.8 million for Trump’s campaign, according to NBC News.

That disparity extended to campaign payrolls. For example, Clinton’s campaign had about 800 people on payroll at the end of August, versus about 130 for Trump’s. Democrats often have larger ground operations than Republicans.

True to form...leftists think throwing more money in is always the solution....only extending the assumptions that those that voted for Clinton still dont know how Hillary lost the election in '16.