11 hours ago, Juliajms said:

 

 

Now??!  They should've always been.  All the signs were there that this was classically Russian neuro/chemical attack.  The hallmarks are all there but because the U.S. now has a Russian-compromised government at the highest levels, the signs were ignored.  It was more convenient to blame and cut emerging ties with the Cubans.

There are scientists who've been saying that Russians have been using sonic waves since the late 70s.

 

 

Also, I am aghast that all that water was sitting on a tarmac in P.R. when people were literally dying of thirst! Beyond unacceptable.

Republicans have grown increasingly worried about losing control of the Senate.

"Shipwreck" was how one leading strategist described the situation, adding an expletive to underscore the severity of the party's problems. https://t.co/djdNqkiEec

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) September 12, 2018

You know, I'm-a have to go with Carl: as much as I would LOVE to see the GOP lose control of the Senate (and the House), I just don't see it happening.  What's more, I think the media is gonna keep up with stories like this because (again, as Carl would say) they want the narrative to be that the GOP pulls a surprising upset in the midterms, crushing the Democrats hard, and giving them (meaning, of course, the media) more "oooooooh, look at what the big, bad bullies in the GOP are up to NOW" stories over which to salivate.

Edited September 12, 20187 yr by Khan

8 minutes ago, Khan said:

You know, I'm-a have to go with Carl: much as I would LOVE to see the GOP lose control of the Senate (and the House), I just don't see it happening.  What's more, I think the media is gonna keep up with stories like this because (again, as Carl would say) they want the narrative to be the GOP pulling a surprising upset in the midterms, crushing the Democrats hard, and giving them (meaning, the media) more opportunities to push stories over which they can salivate.

 

Someone was tweeting out the old Time 2006 cover a few weeks ago, comparing it to 1994 (1994 was an elephant on the rampage while 2006 was about "the center"). The media loves the GOP and they are dearly hoping for the narrative they have spent several years pushing about the GOP standing up to Trump to come true. The media is riddled by daddy issues, as shown with McCain (RIP) and Mitt Romney. They want strong dads, and cool dads. They associate Democrats with mothers they hate (Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton) and fathers they saw as weak (Jimmy Carter) or never willing to bend to them (Obama). 

 

It took tons of breaks, and also the GOP overstretching their Congressional gerrymanders in 2002, for Democrats to win the House and the Senate. 

 

I am hoping the Democrats will get at least one chamber, but I am expecting none. Too much money is behind the GOP and too much of the media consolidation. 

 

If Democrats do take over anything, the press is already pushing their scripts about how scary it will be to see all those women and all those non-white faces in power. 

Edited September 12, 20187 yr by DRW50

I don't think this is in any way some sort of double swerve to try to help the GOP - with the exception of Politico and some of the folks at the NYT, I don't think the media is interested in that so much as they get completely blinkered by Beltway thinking (which invariably leads to conservative sympathizing) and the horse race and treat things like a big game. Some journalists know it isn't. Some never will.

 

And I do think most of the media want the GOP out of control of the House if only to stopgap Trump - I think most major media personalities do believe the GOP is corrupt and out of control and need to be handicapped this year. That doesn't mean they'll ever stop criticizing Democrats first once it's done. Like what we now see at Facebook, it is about the press' constant fear of 'liberal bias' and a generational slant towards not only conservative thought, but more importantly overcorrecting and reporting the conservative viewpoint to prove they are not 'too liberal.' What they've never understood is the GOP will never stop calling them liberal.

 

I think the article is an accurate summation of the GOP's fears. Do I think they will lose the Senate? Probably not. But it is in play and I hope we can make it very close. 

Edited September 12, 20187 yr by Vee

In 2006 the Senate was not supposed to flip, but it did and only came into contention at the last minute. That was the same map that is up now, except Democrats have more seats to defend. If Midwest and Rust Belt backlash that shows up against the controlling party in midterms is particularly harsh then Republicans could lose the Senate.

Given the recent polling, I'm cautiously optimistic about November. Trump's polling with independents has gone into the toilet. It started happening after the Manafort conviction and Cohen guilty pleas and the Nat'l Enquirer guy flipping. That's when reality-based people had to face up to the fact that this isn't a witch hunt. Then came Trump's shameful behavior after McCain's death. I expect to see another drop in the next round of polls thanks to his embarrassing behavior yesterday and what will no doubt be a disgusting response to this upcoming hurricane.

 

The hardcore MAGAts don't care but the people who voted for him "shake things up" didn't mean disrespecting a POW and doing a fist pump at 9/11. The real issue with a Trump for these people is that he's exhausting and it's no longer worth the trouble of trying to defend him. Those people may not vote Democrat but we might be able to keep them depressed enough to stay home in November.

4 hours ago, marceline said:

The real issue with a Trump for these people is that he's exhausting and it's no longer worth the trouble of trying to defend him.

 

I think that's how I would feel as well.  There must come a point for some people (who aren't "MAGAts") when you just get sick of the drama -- and from the start, it seems like that's all we've gotten from him and his administration, too.  You know it's bad when people like Bannon, McMaster, Scaramucci, Spicer and Tillerson all seem like relics of a previous administration.

Edited September 12, 20187 yr by Khan

So much here, via @burgessev @elianayjohnson: Trump has slowly come to realize that Mattis’ political views are more moderate than his sobriquet suggests, and the president has taken to referring to him behind closed doors as “Moderate Dog.” https://t.co/27meta6bid

— Carrie Budoff Brown (@cbudoffbrown) September 13, 2018

Good God, what a mess.

You keep thinking Trump's vileness and dishonesty has lost its power to shock, then he takes it to a new level https://t.co/O6VZg0r3rS

— Paul Krugman (@paulkrugman) September 13, 2018

The term "delusional" doesn't even begin to cover Trump's state of mind. At times (more often than not) it feels like he's living in a little world of his own.

"Yeah, there were deaths, but there weren't THAT many!"

 

There is so much wrong with that line of thinking that I don't know where to begin.

 

(ANY deaths, whether three or three thousand, is a blow, okay?  Especially when those deaths could, and probably should, have been avoided.)

 

But, what do you expect from a "leader" who tossed the citizens of Puerto Rico a roll of paper towels as if it were a cleanup on aisle four?

#BREAKING: Sen. Dianne Feinstein says she received information from a confidential informant "concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh" and has referred the matter to the FBI.

— Caroline O. (@RVAwonk) September 13, 2018

Details emerge about a secret letter that Sen Dianne Feinstein received about Kavanaugh that has since been given to the FBI for investigation. It involves a woman who wants to stay off the record, who has likely retained legal counsel. https://t.co/IGkYeUa8YX … #StopKavanaugh

— Amee KavaNOPE Vanderpool (@girlsreallyrule) September 13, 2018

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm..........