I do not and will not put any faith in any poll. period. over 100 million people voted 4 years ago....between 500-1500 people depending on the poll give their responses to questions, and most of them always get the same phone calls from the saqme polling sites/newspapers/radio programs.

If the polls are correct, then it's because the media has allowed the GOP to control the narrative once again.  Trump was right about one thing: in many ways, the media has become the enemy of the people.

18 minutes ago, Khan said:

If the polls are correct, then it's because the media has allowed the GOP to control the narrative once again.  Trump was right about one thing: in many ways, the media has become the enemy of the people.

I didn't trust the polling when it said people favored impeachment and trust it even less now.  There is no rational by a for that significant a flip unless the numbers to start with were not that hard and fast. 

 

I refuse to give up on this country and won't be a doomsday democrat. Democrats just won Va, elected a dem governor in KY and held LA.  That was just a week ago and suddenly we are back to doomsday.  I said before I thought the house should vote on impeachment and not refer it to the senate. Let the indictment sit.

Edited November 22, 20196 yr by JaneAusten

LOL, I'm not going to doomsay over a single poll conducted before the hearings fully began and being eagerly touted by the right wing. You are welcome to take those things at face value and wallow in despair if you like. It's what they want.

Edited November 22, 20196 yr by Vee

6 hours ago, Vee said:

LOL, I'm not going to doomsay over a single poll conducted before the hearings fully began and being eagerly touted by the right wing. You are welcome to take those things at face value and wallow in despair if you like. It's what they want.

 

I don't really care much about the polls in of themselves. The polls had Clinton winning and we saw where that went (she didn't win what she had to win). It's more the futility of the hearings and the weakness of the field, outside of a few that I would like to see do well, like Warren or Kamala - and even then it's mostly just Kamala I could see as a strong general nominee, although I certainly would be fine with supporting Warren. This primary is just awful and it never ends and it drags down the party and the race.

 

Anyway, I saw this article yesterday about Biden. I don't think a stutter is the reason for his struggles, but it's an interesting read.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/01/joe-biden-stutter-profile/602401/

While I was trying to skip the post-debate commentary on MSNBC the other day, I did catch a snippet of a former Obama campaign manager who said that he won't be paying attention to any polls until January, at the earliest.  He used an example, illustrating how far down in the polls Obama initially was in his presidential campaign until the first set of primaries actually began in earnest. 

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

I don't really care much about the polls in of themselves. The polls had Clinton winning and we saw where that went (she didn't win what she had to win). It's more the futility of the hearings and the weakness of the field, outside of a few that I would like to see do well, like Warren or Kamala - and even then it's mostly just Kamala I could see as a strong general nominee, although I certainly would be fine with supporting Warren. This primary is just awful and it never ends and it drags down the party and the race.

 

Anyway, I saw this article yesterday about Biden. I don't think a stutter is the reason for his struggles, but it's an interesting read.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/01/joe-biden-stutter-profile/602401/

I agree and disagree.

 

I think the problem with the primary season is the length, number of candidates. I don't think the debates themselves are an issue but the number of candidates still allowed to participate and in the race make it problematic.

 

The main problem is the media. I think there are good candidates in the field . Harris, Warren, and yes Klobuchar. I think Castro is also a good candidate. I actually think Bullock COULD have been a good candidate had be gotten more backing and into the race sooner. Problem is the media had decided to swing with Biden and now Buttigieg long ago. Warren I believe was pushed originally by design to split the Bernie vote but notice how they treated her once she started pulling votes from the so called 'centrists". 

 

I actually don't hate Buttigieg. But there is a sense of entitlement there and his dismissiveness of black voters is a turnoff and a deal breaker.

39 minutes ago, JaneAusten said:

The main problem is the media. I think there are good candidates in the field . Harris, Warren, and yes Klobuchar. I think Castro is also a good candidate. I actually think Bullock COULD have been a good candidate had be gotten more backing and into the race sooner. Problem is the media had decided to swing with Biden and now Buttigieg long ago. Warren I believe was pushed originally by design to split the Bernie vote but notice how they treated her once she started pulling votes from the so called 'centrists". 

 

I actually don't hate Buttigieg. But there is a sense of entitlement there and his dismissiveness of black voters is a turnoff and a deal breaker.

 

Agreed. Overall, Wednesday's debate was a big fail and we learned nothing new about the candidates; what their differences are; how their policies and "plans" differ from one another. We know Warren and Bernie's stance on healthcare, how about the other 8 candidates on stage be given 90 seconds each to explain their plans? 

 

There's no need to waste time asking what they'd do to Trump after he's out of office. We know they all despise him. I'm tired of these moderators/networks of trying to create buzzworthy moments and easy click-baiting headline makers, pitting candidates against one another for unnecessary reasons. 

 

"Donald Trump. Terrible for America. Great for CBS" --- Les Moonves. 

2 hours ago, JaneAusten said:

I agree and disagree.

 

I think the problem with the primary season is the length, number of candidates. I don't think the debates themselves are an issue but the number of candidates still allowed to participate and in the race make it problematic.

 

The main problem is the media. I think there are good candidates in the field . Harris, Warren, and yes Klobuchar. I think Castro is also a good candidate. I actually think Bullock COULD have been a good candidate had be gotten more backing and into the race sooner. Problem is the media had decided to swing with Biden and now Buttigieg long ago. Warren I believe was pushed originally by design to split the Bernie vote but notice how they treated her once she started pulling votes from the so called 'centrists". 

 

I actually don't hate Buttigieg. But there is a sense of entitlement there and his dismissiveness of black voters is a turnoff and a deal breaker.

 

I don't hate Buttigieg either; I think Buttigieg is tone deaf and arrogant and I wish he'd just tried again at getting a job at the DNC or in someone's campaign, but he has some charisma and potential. Unfortunately his presence has helped drag the primary down to the petty, identity politics level that it has delved into. There is always a lot of "why isn't it me? why isn't it me?" griping from the supporters of other candidates, and at times the other candidates seem to come close to saying it themselves. Castro in particular has ended up being defined by his resentment of other candidates - O'Rourke, Biden, Buttigieg - and the idea that they are somehow taking a place he was supposed to have had. I feel that to a point with Booker and Klobuchar as well. The whole "people only care about Buttigieg being a Rhodes Scholar because he's white and Booker isn't." That's true, but it's also true that Booker has had a decade of media attention, much of it very positive, including gushing coverage over his romantic relationship with a popular actress. If he isn't getting traction is it really because of some guy nobody heard of until this year? 

 

One of the reasons I was impressed with Harris in the debate is she didn't try to play those types of games, even when she was teed up, and instead just made a forthright case for herself and her candidacy. 

 

It's unfortunate that this is in such short supply and we instead have frontrunners (I don't count Buttigieg as a frontrunner and Warren seems to be on the decline so at this point it seems to be Bernie and Biden) who want or need validation, whether it's for the best for their party or country or not. I think that's what leaves me so dispirited. I just don't know how it got this way. I have no trust and no respect for Bernie, and I am mostly just deeply concerned about Biden's health at this point, not to mention his godawful son. 

 

If Harris can't come back then I will keep hoping for Warren. I saw a video today of Ayanna Pressley standing up for her over a heckler, and I couldn't help feeling that this is just the start of criticism Warren is going to face, and if she can't face this now, how will she deal with what's to come? 

 

I just wish it could have gone another way. I guess that's what you get in politics, but weeks like this I have a hard time figuring out how most of these people will make it another year.

 

 

Twitter can sometimes be a great thing. The infamous No Quid Pro Quo note, Ramones style and Morrissey style:

 

 

 

 

 

Devin Nunes, this one's for you!

 

 

You always bring the quality needle-drops for these moments.

Sarah Reese Jones‏Verified account @PoliticusSarah

 

 

 

 

Giuliani warns Trump that he has insurance if the president tries to throw him under the bus.