RockyRoadTravel

Interesting speculation. I do expect that Trump is currently interfering to try to prevent a cease fire being agreed to. It's all about campaign issues for him, not solutions.

Sometimes, if I'm working on something a bit complicated, I bring up a website on another browser that shows DJT stock falling in real time. It seems just.

Bertolt Brecht, German play write, is quoted as saying "even the dead aren't safe."

Last week, Devin Nunes CEO of DJT dumped the 25% of his stock he was allowed to get rid of, for $600,000+ dollars. On September 20th insiders can dump the stock they were given. If you own stock in DJT, get rid of it before Sept 20th. Maybe Devin needed money to continue his legal campaign against @devinnunescow

If you've seen the digital trading cards, I'm waiting for the day the defeated former presidents starts selling SPANX, the girdle for men.

Trump really is freaking out and afraid. The more the defeated former President talks, the more voters he turns off. Thank you again for pointing that out @EmmetK. It's appreciated.

Is that going to be the line of group think in the MAGA echo chamber? Thank you for keeping us up to date. Appreciated.

Devin Nunes DJT CEO just dumped 25% of his DJT stock. @EmmetK what's the MAGA echo chamber have to say about DJT stocks getting dumped by their own? It's always good to know what other people are hearing. Thank you.

I haven't previously read Diane Francis on things Russian so I'm not aware of how her thoughts on this topic have evolved or remained the same. In general, she is an consistently very right-wing pundit, so this might be of note given the support Putin has amongst right-wing pundits in the USA. She's base out of Toronto, Canada.

The Underdog label. She's the sitting Vice-President and ahead in the polls. Democrats are the underdogs because of the unfairness of the system, recognizing that the candidate with the most votes might not win. Democrats need to win by 3-4% just to be even in the Electoral College I believe (correct me if I go that estimate wrong). Under the current election rules Democrats are always the underdogs. But I also I think that the underdog label she is embracing for the Democratic ticket is that of the underdog middle class candidates against the plutocrat born into wealth, who's never worked a day in his life for anyone else. So far I think it's a subtle and effective message.

If Trump won - God help us if that were to pass - I could see the States rights mantle being morphed into more regional coordination by liberals and leftists as a rear guard action against an authoritarian federal government. For example, there could be more coordination at a State level amongst California, Oregon and Washington, to salvage social and economic gains and protections.

There are reasons he's the least popular Senator amongst his constituents currently serving in the Senate.

Even as a poor candidate Hillary only lost by 80,000 votes across three swing states, her VP candidate was also safe/boring. Harris is a much better candidate, with a better strategy (so far) and a better VP running mate. There are also more Democratic governors in those swing states now, and I think that makes a difference.

He kind of slow jams the news and opinions. It's not for everyone. He'd have to go home after we were finished.

I heard this somewhere, sorry I don't remember the source, Hawley is the least popular Senator currently serving in the Senate. It's a big lift but maybe there's some Cruz factor there to exploit, with having both sides of the aisle hate you.

I've heard a couple of non-Trump Republican commentators, Jennifer Rubin being one of them, speculate that Trump might replace JD Vance with Kennedy as a running mate. Beyond the historical mind-fuck that would be, I don't buy it. Even Trump has to know that he's conspiratorial enough for the slate, and best not to double down with two old privileged white men whining about how unfair the world is to them. Does anyone know what the mechanics are to replace an already nominated candidate?

In a second term there would be no adults in the room, no guard rails, or however one wants to describe his disinterest/opposition to institutions and norms, or the rule of law.

I think you have a little crush on Halperin. I was listening to a podcast of Ezra Klein's today. Laying in bed with his soft voice, if it wasn't so interesting I would have masturbated. Perhaps too much information.

Looking back, and the impact of the not working the voter turnout/pandemic campaigning of 2022, that Wisconsin seat that Ron Johnson won by 1% is sure going to come back and bite America in the ass.

Not to be completely pedantic, and for the public record, I believe it was eating dogs, and skinning bears. Even after an assassination attempt Trump's approval didn't reach 50%. He has a high floor and a low ceiling, as many people have already noted.

I think some of the difference from poll numbers and eventual election results is from the Democrats not working the vote and having a pandemic (non) turn out strategy (as I said before). I don't think Trump voters have the same embarrassed about talking to pollsters more than they did in 2016, and polls are likely more accurate now. Also, there are more right-wing pollsters in the mix this election cycle - look at the difference between 538 and Real Clear Politics polling averages. The right leaning Rasmussen refused to clarify their methodology to 538, so 538 dropped them. If you look back at the 538 predictions for 2020, they had North Carolina going to Biden, before Georgia would. I think it's the same this year.

I remembered the third thing that makes me positive about a potential re-defeat of the defeated former President. (The Georgia and North Carolina point was just a filler because I knew I had three points, but couldn't remember the third one.) 3. The "who do you want to see controlling Congress" polling numbers have been trending up for the Democrats, with now a 1.7% lead over the Republicans according to 538. This, to me, indicates a general positive political environment for the Democrats and gives them more of a home game advantage (let's be a little Walz-ey) for Harris and team.

Beyond the polling numbers, I think enthusiasm and the campaign turn out the vote operations are, so far, the sleeper issue in terms of discussions on the election outcomes. Maybe it's just early for that discussion. From what I've read there is more of a Harris ground game than with the Trump campaign.

I I listened to as much of his speech as I could stand without getting completely irritated. His speech could have been written by Trump. It was another old privileged white guy whining about how unfair the world is to him, its was all "me, me, me." He couldn't even get over himself to withdraw from the race completely, he still needs to see his name on a ballot. He's partially withdrawing - we all know how partially withdrawing works - in the swing states only. In the event of an Electoral College tie RFK still wants to be considered for President. God he was irritating with his self-serving rationalizations.

I think movements and political parties fit into different categories. There may be a movement for reproductive rights, and the Democrats may have a policy on reproductive rights, and those are different things. In my opinion. There are three things which give me optimism about the Harris campaign. 1. In 2020 Biden's results didn't live up to the polling. I think this was partly to do with how they were campaigning, and not working the vote for turn out. They were observing pandemic protocols, remember "Biden campaigning from his basement", and the GOP was working the vote. That's not happening this time. 2. Unlike 2016 people are no longer embarrassed to support the former defeated President, and so the polls are probably more accurate. 3. I'm thinking - in spite of all the experts - that North Carolina is more likely than Georgia for the Harris campaign, and a maybe a Democratic governor might help with minimizing election interference by the MAGA element of the GOP.