Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, May 23, 2016

OTP 2016 May 23: Baseball owners hear from Democratic, Republican strategists

Baseball owners heard from Democratic and Republican strategists Wednesday on the opening day of their spring meeting.

Jim Messina, co-chair of Priorities USA Action, spoke to them along with Matt Rhoades, chairman of America Rising. Messina was campaign manager of President Barack Obama’s successful re-election campaign in 2012 and Rhoades was campaign manager four years ago for Republican nominee Mitt Romney.

(Views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 23, 2016 at 07:32 AM | 1628 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: owners, politics

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 10 of 17 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›
   901. Lassus Posted: May 26, 2016 at 05:52 PM (#5229970)
Her tenure in the Senate was mediocre, and her tenure at State was godawful. Her effort to craft a healthcare plan in her early years in the White House was a disaster. Only a certain kind of uptight professorial, or pseudo-professorial, fop could find anything of actual merit in her career and personality. She's a pauper's Adlai Stevenson -- with a bunch of crimes and grifting thrown in for good measure.

Maybe you should change your political definition from Sane Centrism to Objective Centrism. It's just as accurate!
   902. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 26, 2016 at 05:53 PM (#5229971)
Yes, there's nothing more creative than self-described billionaires

Well, he's definitely more creative with the truth than she is. Turns out that he should've been running against Biden; they both lied about their academic careers.


What academic career? I thought he was serving in virtual Vietnam during his years in that military academy.
   903. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 05:53 PM (#5229972)
Concession accepted on Andy's behalf.

In much the same way that the guy laying across the subway train this morning accepted my concession when I didn't sit next to him.
   904. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 05:59 PM (#5229975)
Yeah, victims only matter when they accuse Bill Clinton of rape. Trump's victims can just get in line and take a number.

So someone who gets their house taken by eminent domain in a perfectly lawful process is the same as a woman who's been raped?

That seems ... odd.
   905. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 26, 2016 at 05:59 PM (#5229976)
And for obvious reasons: Trump would be exposed to the sort of fact-based direct hits about his business practices that he's never had to face in a one-on-one debate before.


Lol.

Not to mention that it would expose his rattling points for Hillary to exploit in the general election debates.


Yes, if only the Republicans had thought to put Trump through a few debates. That would have finished him for sure!
   906. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:03 PM (#5229978)
The 17-odd Republicans that went after Trump on his "business practices" in the 10-odd debates they had weren't able to lay a glove on him, but goshdarn it, Hillary will!! She's really swell and just the best!!! And she's so above-board and honest, too!!!
   907. Lassus Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:06 PM (#5229980)
That was indeed a fierce clown car.
   908. The Rare Albino Shrieking Goat of Guatemala. Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:10 PM (#5229981)
That was indeed a fierce clown car.


Well, at the least, there was no shortage of clowns in it ...
   909. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:11 PM (#5229983)
And for obvious reasons: Trump would be exposed to the sort of fact-based direct hits about his business practices that he's never had to face in a one-on-one debate before.


Lol.


Just for the record, I read Andy's howler earlier today and was going to LOL, but at this point it's becoming a little too close to LOLing at a three-legged dog trying to fetch a ball for my comfort.

I mean, my God (or whatever) -- he actually seriously believes Trump hasn't been "vetted" and that when Hillary gets hold of him he finally will be. This after being called "Hitler" and "fascist" and "racist" relentlessly by many components of the nation's major media. That's almost two-legged dog territory.
   910. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:11 PM (#5229984)
My kind of North American - Canadian AmBadAssador to Ireland Tackles Memorial Service Protester:
Canada's ambassador to Ireland, the man hailed as a hero for shooting Ottawa gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau after he stormed Parliament Hill in 2014, tackled a protester at a ceremony in Dublin Thursday morning.

Kevin Vickers, the former House of Commons sergeant-at-arms, was at the event commemorating the 100 British soldiers who died during the Easter Rising, also called the Easter Rebellion, when Irish republicans tried to overthrow British control of the country by force.

Not a man to be trifled with, it appears.
   911. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:12 PM (#5229986)
The 17-odd Republicans that went after Trump on his "business practices" in the 10-odd debates they had weren't able to lay a glove on him,
Apparently SBB hallucinated entire debates that never happened. (Ones with at least 18 candidates in them, even more oddly. Unless SBB is counting Trump as one of the people who went after Trump.)
   912. Lassus Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:12 PM (#5229987)
edit: fixed
   913. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:13 PM (#5229988)
And Andy, I'm renewing my offer to double down on the $500 at 2-1 if it's Trump vs. Hillary.(*) At this point, the race is at worst a toss-up.

(*) I'd of course want any other non-Bush/Kasich/Little Marco R if somehow Trump is denied the R nomination.
   914. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:13 PM (#5229989)
Yeah. The last Republican Senator to hold office left 2 years before Hillary got elected.

He didn't "leave" — he was trounced by a far-left liberal (Chuck Schumer).
   915. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:18 PM (#5229999)
Trump voters. But I digress. If you do a Venn diagram of "people who are currently uninformed as to the basic distinctions between Clinton and Sanders


Let's go through "basic distinctions":

He's a socialist who calls himself one; she's a socialist who doesn't call herself one.

He hates Wall Street; she loves Wall Street.

He hates cronyism; she loves cronyism.

He is without scandal; she is with scandal.

He hasn't had the singular power hungry quest to be president for decades; she has had the singular power hungry quest to be president for decades.

He's a man; she has a vagina.

He's not a Clinton; she is a Clinton.

He didn't lie to the families of the Benghazi victims; she did lie to the families of the Benghazi victims.

He didn't have his own server where he stored state secrets; she did have her own server where she stored state secrets.

He didn't run interference for a serial womanizer and sexual harasser who was accused of rape, and he didn't refuse to "hear, support, and believe" women who said they were victims of sexual harassment or abuse; she did.

He didn't get filthy rich stemming from his work in government; she did get filthy rich stemming form her work in government.

I'd go on but my fingers are getting sore with all the typing. I grant that on policy issues they're close to the same (free stuff and free vacations for all! soak the evil rich who are already paying for everything!), save that he's upset about her Wall Street thing.
   916. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: May 26, 2016 at 06:45 PM (#5230007)
Is Trump man enough to risk being Berned?

I am delighted that @realDonaldTrump has agreed to debate. Let’s do it in the biggest stadium possible.
   917. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:06 PM (#5230013)
What will Hillary or Bernie do for them? With trillions in debt, trillions in unfunded liabilities, and capital more mobile than ever, we're quickly running out of other people's money to shovel at such people.


I would enter this into the "Most uninformed comment on BBTF this week", but given the competition from TGF and SBB I know even this level of dumb is doomed to fail at winning.
   918. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:15 PM (#5230015)
I would enter this into the "Most uninformed comment on BBTF this week", but given the competition from TGF and SBB I know even this level of dumb is doomed to fail at winning.

LOL.

Tell us again how the very presence of low-skilled people "shifts the demand curve" in such a way that prosperity follows. I love when you tell that story.
   919. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:18 PM (#5230016)
LOL.


You realize we can't really run out of money, right? I mean you know that much I hope?
   920. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:23 PM (#5230019)
You realize we can't really run out of money, right? I mean you know that much I hope?

That's what the Chavistas in Venezuela thought.

But the same policy will yield different results in the U.S. because ... reasons.
   921. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:27 PM (#5230020)
But the same policy will yield different results in the U.S. because ... reasons.


Yup, Reasons. The US is not Venezuela. The policies are not the same. Thus the policies the US under Obama will not result in the outcome in Venezuela.

Reasons. You are welcome.
   922. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:29 PM (#5230022)
Yup, Reasons. The US is not Venezuela. The policies are not the same. Thus the policies the US under Obama will not result in the outcome in Venezuela.

Reasons. You are welcome.

Printing money in the U.S. to the point of massive inflation will yield a different result because "The U.S. is not Venezuela"? Because "The policies are not the same"?

This barely qualifies as gibberish.

The U.S. has ~$19,000,000,000,000 in debt and another ~$75,000,000,000,000 to ~$130,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities. Anyone who thinks we can print our way out of that should lay off the crack pipe for a while.
   923. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:52 PM (#5230035)
Maybe we can just print money and give every citizen $10 million -- then everyone would be rich!!!
   924. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 07:56 PM (#5230038)
The U.S. has ~$19,000,000,000,000 in debt and another ~$75,000,000,000,000 to ~$130,000,000,000,000 in unfunded liabilities. Anyone who thinks we can print our way out of that should lay off the crack pipe for a while.


Oh big scary numbers are BIG and SCARY. Sigh.

In terms of real debt and government spending as a percentage of GDP is not at all out of line. Anyone rolling out big numbers and making wild claims about printing money to "get out of" all the "unfunded liabilities" needs to do more than put down their crack pipe, they need to crack an economics book and learn something.

EDIT: Only a moron thinks the US and Venezuela are even vaguely comparable.
   925. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:00 PM (#5230043)
Ray, #891:
Are there examples from the past of presumptive nominees who have been attacked as vociferously as Trump has been?
[reply snipped]
I meant attacked so vociferously by members of the party he won the nomination of.



Of course. Sitting President William Taft came in third place because of it.

The total rises when you consider that several frontrunners were viciously challenged in pre-primary days and periodically de-presumptived at the conventions. The Trump attacks may seem like a new high because everything gets extended attention in today's information firehose society, and because the attacks are happening now, in front of us.

Quick example: 1964. The Goldwater-Rockefeller fight was bloody. The influential and conservative NH Union Leader called Rockefeller a "wife swapper" in print because he'd remarried, but really because he was a New York moderate. Speaking from the convention stage, Rockefeller blasted the winning side while denouncing what he called "infiltration and takeover of established political parties by communist and Nazi methods": "These are people who have nothing in common with Americanism. The Republican Party must repudiate these people." Senator and former RNC Chairman Hugh Scott openly said that a Goldwater nomination would take down thirty Republican Congressmen. He was right. Pennsylvania Governor William Scranton entered the race late specifically as a #NeverBarry candidate, saying he was doing so to stop the GOP from becoming "some ultra-rightist society" that would "falter, grow limp and collapse in the dust." The Republicans' 1960 Vice Presidential candidate Henry Cabot Lodge told Newsweek, "What in God’s name has happened to the Republican Party? I hardly know any of these people." Protesters at the convention carried signs comparing Goldwater to Hitler (e.g. "Goldwater for Fuhrer").
   926. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:02 PM (#5230046)
One difference between US and Venezuela is that Venezuela's economy was dependent on oil. So when the price of oil crashed that was devastating to them. The US has a very diverse economy, so the price of any one good crashing won't have nearly the effect. That said the larger point that one shouldn't simply print more money to pay off their debt is completely valid. Venezuela isn't the first country to do that. Many have, such as the Germany during the interwar period, and the results of hyper inflation have been the same.

Even a perception that the US might try to get out of debt by printing money would be a bad thing. I've talked to some economists about the trade deficit and they've all said the same thing. There is nothing wrong with running a trade deficit- it means that we are receiving more goods and services than we are exporting. However, the reason that we can get away with such a deal is that the US dollar is the desired reserve currency around the world. If there becomes a perception that the US dollar is unstable, then that would be harmful to our trade deals.
   927. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:05 PM (#5230049)
Instead of spending another half-year arguing about the election, let's just ask Sen. Orrin Hatch who's going to win:
Sen. Orrin Hatch reacts to meeting with Merrick Garland before it occurs

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) hasn’t yet met with Supreme Court nominee Merrick B. Garland for what has been a long anticipated encounter between the former Judiciary Committee chairman and the federal appeals court judge he has long praised.

But when the meeting does happen, don’t expect Garland to succeed in convincing Hatch to support his nomination, because Hatch has already declared that it won’t.

“Like many of my Senate colleagues, I recently met with Chief Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court. … Our meeting, however, does not change my conviction that the Senate should consider a Supreme Court nominee after this presidential election cycle,” Hatch wrote in an op-ed published on the website of the Deseret News early Thursday morning and later removed. It remains available in a Google database.
   928. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:06 PM (#5230051)
That's what the Chavistas in Venezuela thought.

But the same policy will yield different results in the U.S. because ... reasons.
Well, first, the U.S. is a rich country, and Venezuela is a poor one. Second, the vast majority of U.S. government debt is owed domestically, something which is not true of Venezuela. Third, U.S. debt is denominated in U.S. dollars, which the U.S. government controls the supply of. It would not be good to inflate our way out of debt, but we could do it. The same does not work for Venezuela, because they owe money in currencies they don't control (like U.S. dollars). If they print more Bolivars, that doesn't give them any more money to pay foreign creditors. Fourth, Venezuela is a petrostate; it produces nothing besides oil. The U.S. is the most productive and diverse economy in the world.
   929. Mefisto Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:14 PM (#5230054)
That said the larger point that one shouldn't simply print more money to pay off their debt is completely valid.


This is wrong. Just to take a simple example, if our debt were $1, nobody would argue that printing an extra dollar to pay it off would be "wrong" or "harmful".

Obviously the current debt is a lot more than that, but the key point from my example is that inflation is a matter of context. Sometimes it's easy to generate inflation. Sometimes it's very hard (e.g., Japan for the last 20 years or so). The economic conditions in the US since 2008 make it very hard to generate inflation -- that's why right-wing economists have predicted hundreds of the last zero inflation episodes since then.

As for episodes of hyperinflation, they're actually pretty rare (Wikipedia lists 10).
   930. . Posted: May 26, 2016 at 08:30 PM (#5230069)
The only reason we would have to pay off debt is if we couldn't roll it over.
   931. my email address is hashtag 57i66135 Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:06 PM (#5230098)
Hatch didn’t even wait to hear Garland’s elevator pitch before deciding his “principled position” against the nomination was right all along! Of course, pre-writing an opinion piece is pretty standard practice in politics, but it seems emblematic of the current state of play on Capitol Hill that Hatch went ahead and decided what happened in the meeting—and wrote about it—before even attending the meeting. “The nominee’s background and reputation, the views of experts and the opinions of pundits and other third parties will be relevant when the confirmation process occurs, but not before,” Hatch wrote. “The question for the Senate is when and how the confirmation process for the Scalia vacancy should occur.”
   932. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:16 PM (#5230109)
And Andy, I'm renewing my offer to double down on the $500 at 2-1 if it's Trump vs. Hillary. At this point, the race is at worst a toss-up.(*)

Hmmmm, I wonder where you were when BM was offering 3 to 1 and JoeB was offering 10 to 1?

Ah, the confidence that a few early polls can bring. It was only a couple of months ago (March 4th, to be exact) that you were pimping to buy out of your original bet for $50.

But sure, for you I'll still give 2 to 1, in spite of this near toss-up election. All you have to do is to post your $1000 with Jason within 7 days, in the form of a cashier's check made out to Jason. Once Jason confirms that he's received it, I'll send him a similar check for $2000. As soon as a winner is declared, Jason will endorse both checks and co-sign them both over to me (if Hillary wins) or to you (if Trump wins).

(*) I'd of course want any other non-Bush/Kasich/Little Marco R if somehow Trump is denied the R nomination.

Sure, but if Hillary loses the nomination or drops out for any reason, for you to win the bet either Trump or the substitute candidate would still have to win the election. If Sanders should win over any Republican, nobody wins our bet, and we'll both have our consolation prizes.
   933. Chicago Joe Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:21 PM (#5230118)
The only reason we would have to pay off debt is if we couldn't roll it over.


Bingo. And we've been rolling it over at advantageous interest rates.
   934. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:34 PM (#5230137)
Bingo. And we've been rolling it over at advantageous interest rates.


Not only that, but the world's financial system needs large amounts of high quality debt. The US serves a big purpose in providing that.
   935. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:36 PM (#5230143)
Hmmmm, I wonder where you were when BM was offering 3 to 1 and JoeB was offering 10 to 1?


Was? I still am. 3 to 1. Practically FREE money. I mean look at the polling averages. Hard to believe I am this loose with my money.
   936. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:59 PM (#5230169)
Hmmmm, I wonder where you were when BM was offering 3 to 1 and JoeB was offering 10 to 1?

Was? I still am. 3 to 1. Practically FREE money. I mean look at the polling averages. Hard to believe I am this loose with my money.

Mouse, you must have bad breath or something, or maybe you live in one of those high crime Mexican neighborhoods with all them RAPISTS.

And JoeB with his 10 to 1? Bear must assume JoeB's thinking about paying off in Venezuelan Bolivars.
   937. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 10:30 PM (#5230196)
maybe you live in one of those high crime Mexican neighborhoods with all them RAPISTS


I think we all know this is not so. :)
   938. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: May 26, 2016 at 10:39 PM (#5230204)
The System Isn't 'Rigged' Against Sanders. Due to the Chinese firewall, I can't see the comments on that article, but I'm sure there is plenty of ire from Sanders fans there.
   939. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 26, 2016 at 10:54 PM (#5230210)
All you have to do is to post your $1000 with Jason within 7 days, in the form of a cashier's check made out to Jason. Once Jason confirms that he's received it, I'll send him a similar check for $2000. As soon as a winner is declared, Jason will endorse both checks and co-sign them both over to me (if Hillary wins) or to you (if Trump wins).

I don't see any mention of how you guys are planning to compensate Jason for his valuable services here. He can present a bill for such services, right; after all... you're not Communists? Or . . .
   940. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 26, 2016 at 10:58 PM (#5230211)
All you have to do is to post your $1000 with Jason within 7 days, in the form of a cashier's check made out to Jason. Once Jason confirms that he's received it, I'll send him a similar check for $2000. As soon as a winner is declared, Jason will endorse both checks and co-sign them both over to me (if Hillary wins) or to you (if Trump wins).

I don't see any mention of how you guys are planning to compensate Jason for his valuable services here. He can present a bill for such services, right; after all... you're not Communists? Or . . .


I'll let Jason downgrade my Clyde's meal from a porterhouse steak to a cheeseburger, and I won't order more than two beers.
   941. Stormy JE Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:06 PM (#5230217)
But sure, for you I'll still give 2 to 1, in spite of this near toss-up election. All you have to do is to post your $1000 with Jason within 7 days, in the form of a cashier's check made out to Jason. Once Jason confirms that he's received it, I'll send him a similar check for $2000. As soon as a winner is declared, Jason will endorse both checks and co-sign them both over to me (if Hillary wins) or to you (if Trump wins).

I don't see any mention of how you guys are planning to compensate Jason for his valuable services here. He can present a bill for such services, right; after all... you're not Communists? Or . . .

Not to worry, Clapper: On Election Day, Jason will spend the $3,000 on hookers and blow then, as the returns come in, sit in the bathtub and open up his wrists.
   942. Joe Kehoskie Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:20 PM (#5230223)
Well, first, the U.S. is a rich country, and Venezuela is a poor one.

It's poor now. It wasn't all that poor before the Chavistas took over. In competent hands, having the world's greatest proven oil reserves seems like it could be sort of valuable.

Second, the vast majority of U.S. government debt is owed domestically, something which is not true of Venezuela.

How is this preferable? If the crap hits the fan, it's way better to owe money to people a thousand miles away, or five thousand miles away, than to people down the street.

Third, U.S. debt is denominated in U.S. dollars, which the U.S. government controls the supply of. It would not be good to inflate our way out of debt, but we could do it.

Of course we could do it in the literal sense of the phrase; my point was that we couldn't do it without yielding horrendous results. It would be far better to simply slash pensions in half than to inflate the currency to the point that it was only worth half as much.
   943. Stormy JE Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:21 PM (#5230225)
Karie Couric, fraud:
Here’s how Lazure handled that concern: “I’m truly sorry to hear you were disappointed with the final product. We knew when we set out to make a film on such a divisive issue that we weren’t going to make everybody happy. However, we have heard from many gun owners following our screenings and the television premiere who felt we gave the issue a balanced look and reflected their views accurately.” That response, of course, doesn’t address the issue raised by Van Cleave, which he noted forcefully in his reply: “It’s not a ‘feeling’ – the 8 seconds of silence from gun owners shown after the question about felons is inexcusable. Within 1 or 2 seconds members responded to that question – like I said I have the proof. That edit actually changed the answer members gave to the question. Worse, that deception was intentional.”

This brand of defensiveness appears widespread among those associated with the documentary. Moments ago, the film’s people released this statement from Soechtig:

“There are a wide range of views expressed in the film. My intention was to provide a pause for the viewer to have a moment to consider this important question before presenting the facts on Americans’ opinions on background checks. I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.”

Here the Erik Wemple Blog stroke our gray beard and reflect: In the years we’ve covered and watched media organizations, we’ve scarcely seen a thinner, more weaselly excuse than the one in the block above. For starters, it appears to count as an admission that this segment of the documentary was edited. The artistic “pause” provides the viewer not a “moment to consider this important question”; it provides viewers a moment to lower their estimation of gun owners. That’s it. As far as the rest of the statement, adults in 2016 may no longer write the phrase “apologize if anyone felt that way” and preserve their standing as professionals. To compound matters, here’s the accompanying statement from Couric:

“I support Stephanie’s statement and am very proud of the film.”

That, from the Katie Couric of Yahoo News, of “CBS Evening News,” of “60 Minutes,” of the “Today” show and so on.

Many of those who sampled the discrepancy between the video and the audiotape were already enraged by the depiction of these gun owners. The statements from Soechtig and Couric will surely intensify the backlash, as well they should. An apology, retraction, re-editing, whatever it is that filmmakers do to make amends — all of it needs to happen here.
   944. McCoy Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:29 PM (#5230229)
Judging by all the hookers I've seen by my house and by the convention center. . . .that's gonna be a lot of blow.
   945. bobm Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:35 PM (#5230232)
[853] In a Cartesian Universe of geometric space the center (point 0,0,0) is the point where you are standing

In a Seinfeldian Universe, first and first is the nexus of the universe.
   946. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:36 PM (#5230234)
#943 is a beverage worthy version of #675. Couric, and others, should be fired.
   947. Stormy JE Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:41 PM (#5230238)
#943 is a beverage worthy version of #675.
Indeed.
Couric, and others, should be fired.
Indeed.

I'd fire them less for the fraud and more for the contempt upon being confronted.
   948. McCoy Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:42 PM (#5230240)
Why should Couric be fired for narrating a film? Now if she produced it that would be a different story but should Brad Pitt be fired because of his portrayal of Beane in Moneyball?
   949. SteveF Posted: May 26, 2016 at 11:53 PM (#5230250)
Couric is listed as an executive producer, for whatever that's worth.
   950. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:04 AM (#5230256)
Katherine Heigl was on Howard Stern last month, talking about what her Producer credit from one of her movies actually meant: she had a big say in what clothes her character wore.

That said, an entertainment movie isn't a documentary, and that editing stunt is a low and pathetic scam.

One problem: Couric should be fired from what? A completed film, funded by a channel where Couric doesn't work?
   951. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:04 AM (#5230257)
Why should Couric be fired for narrating a film?
She's also the executive producer. (EDIT: Coke Zero to Steve.) If nothing else, Yahoo News ought to re-evaluate its relationship with her.
   952. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:05 AM (#5230258)
Isn't the guideline right there in the name?

Right. #NeverTrump means never voting for Trump. Some will vote for Hillary, some will vote third-party, some hope to vote for Mitt, and a bunch will stay home.


No, I think that's too narrow a reading, and I think Sam has it correct: #NeverTrump means being fully 100% committed to not having Trump in the White House, which ultimately means voting for Hillary to ensure that. It doesn't simply mean "I'll vote third party" or whatever.

So I would argue that it essentially means voting for Hillary; that's the way people - such as David, and he's the quintessential #NeverTrumper - have been talking about it. I believe David has said that he is voting for Hillary -- and he lives in NJ, so this doesn't seem dependent on what state someone lives in. You simply cannot afford the chance -- any chance -- that Trump will win, so you vote for Hillary.

That's what #NeverTrump means to me: Voting for Hillary.

Its not "#NeverVotingForTrump." It's #NeverTrump. Meaning that we have to ensure a Trump loss at all costs, which means voting for Hillary.

EDITED because my initial post didn't go far enough.
   953. SteveF Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:08 AM (#5230259)
Katherine Heigl was on Howard Stern last month, talking about what her Producer credit from one of her movies actually meant:

Yes. It's pretty hard to know what degree of creative control is exercised by those with an executive producer/producer credit. Normally I'd just assume Couric wrote them a check, but that doesn't seem like the case here based on what Bubble posted about how the film was funded.
   954. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:09 AM (#5230260)
No, I think that's too narrow a reading, and I think Sam has it correct: #NeverTrump means being fully 100% committed to not having Trump in the White House, even if that means voting for Hillary to ensure that. It doesn't simply mean "I'll vote third party."
Sam's in the tank for Hillary and you're in the tank for Trump. How about letting us #NeverTrump folks decide what we are and what we're not, ok?
   955. McCoy Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:14 AM (#5230262)
Katherine Heigl was on Howard Stern last month, talking about what her Producer credit from one of her movies actually meant: she had a big say in what clothes her character wore.

I would think Couric would have more power than that on a documentary that she choose to be a part of.
   956. McCoy Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:19 AM (#5230265)
The number of air travelers hit a record during the summer of 2015, yet there were no major problems with delays at security checkpoints. A year later, hundreds of infuriated passengers are missing flights every week as they wait hours to navigate security.

What changed? A lot more than most travelers are aware of. Nearly a year ago, teams working for the Department of Homeland Security ran a series of covert tests to see if they could sneak banned and potentially dangerous items past security screeners. It turns out, they could. “We found layers of security simply missing,” DHS Inspector General John Roth testified before Congress last November. The details of the DHS security audit are secret, but such tests are meant to mimic what terrorists and criminals might try to bring onto a flight.


As people have said for a long time. Security at airports is really just security theater.
   957. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:29 AM (#5230272)
Sam's in the tank for Hillary and you're in the tank for Trump. How about letting us #NeverTrump folks decide what we are and what we're not, ok?


#NeverTrump means not leaving the slightest chance that Trump will be elected if you can help it, which means voting for Hillary.

Otherwise it's just logically inconsistent and BS preening.
   958. Jay Z Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:36 AM (#5230273)
“He needs an experienced person to do the part of the job he doesn’t want to do. He seems himself more as the chairman of the board, than even the CEO, let alone the COO.”


Then let's just make the mystery experienced person President and get rid of Trump, who provides no value whatsoever. We don't need an owner of the government. We do actually need a CEO, someone chosen to lead for a limited to who is responsible to constituents.

Trump doesn't know or understand government. He isn't experienced, isn't wise, and has a poor temperament. He can't be a steady centrist. Not a visionary or directional leader either. And given his bully boy tactics, he isn't capable of building a team, just a succession of lackeys.

Trump wants to be an imperial president and say "you're fired" and insult people, people in his own party, people in "his" own administration, without taking any responsibility for his own actions or theirs. These attitudes are consistent with his actions in life to date.

Trump is dangerous not only because of his manifest incompetence but because of his desire to change the presidency itself. No, George Washington's ideas about the presidency aren't good enough any more, we must surely change because of the presence of our Lord And Saviour, Donald Trump.

Hillary is miles better than Trump because any competent pol is miles better than Trump. I'm from Wisconsin and I hate Scott Walker, slimy conniver that he is. I would have no problem voting for Scott Walker over Trump. It's clear cut. That's how bad Trump is. Hillary could combine the worst tendencies of Nixon and Gerald Ford, lean Republican to boot, and still be miles better than Donald Trump.
   959. Howie Menckel Posted: May 27, 2016 at 12:48 AM (#5230276)

“There are a wide range of views expressed in the film. My intention was to provide a pause for the viewer to have a moment to consider this important question before presenting the facts on Americans’ opinions on background checks. I never intended to make anyone look bad and I apologize if anyone felt that way.”

..............

Gun control is one of the many issues where I suspect I irritate some regulars by not having "a take," as dopey Jim Rome would say. But that answer above seems preposterous, absent some legitimate counterpoint.

Couric also seems stuck between claiming more influence than she really has, or admitting that she doesn't have nearly what it appears. but that's her problem.
   960. zzz Posted: May 27, 2016 at 01:09 AM (#5230286)
Then let's just...


...stfu already.

Excuse me, but never has so much bullshit been written by so many about one man as on these threads.

I'll be taking my own advice, so there.
   961. bobm Posted: May 27, 2016 at 01:10 AM (#5230287)
Ex-State Dept. Advisor Says Clinton’s ‘Sloppy Communications’ May Have Blown Counterterrorism Ops

Bill Johnson, the former State Department’s advisor to the Special Operations Command Pacific (SOCPAC), made these explosive allegations in an article published late on Wednesday by Newsweek. The report states “secret plans to eliminate the leader of a Filipino Islamist separatist group and intercept Chinese-made weapons components being smuggled into Iraq were repeatedly foiled.”

[...]

Johnson made sure to note that he has no proof the leaks came as a result of Clinton’s sloppy communication habits, but he provided very strong circumstantial evidence.

For example, Johnson said that frustration with the leaks led SOCPAC to stop providing the State Department with prior notice about the operations. Almost immediately after that decision was made, Johnson said missions started going as planned again. Furthermore, Johnson claimed to have witnessed Clinton’s sloppiness first hand in 2010 when she was visiting the Pacific Command HQ. Johnson told Newsweek that Clinton said she needed to be in contact with Foggy Bottom and requested a waiver that would allow her aides to bring personal phones inside the secure areas. However, the report says Johnson “refused, citing alarms and lockdowns that would be automatically triggered by any attempt to bring unauthorized signal-emitting units into the building.”

To get around the problem, Johnson said Clinton “had her aides go out, retrieve their phones and call the seventh floor from outside” on unsecured lines.

“My relationship with that group started downhill when I refused to let them bring phones and computers into my office [at the Special Operations Command],” Johnson said. “It was really an eye-opener to watch them stand outside using nonsecure comms [communications] and then bring messages to the secretary so she could then conduct a secure [call] with the military” and the State Department.

Johnson’s account is supported by other media reports that indicate Clinton continued to use unsecured mobile devices even after she received multiple warnings about the security risks associated with that practice. The Inspector General report also discussed several warnings that Clinton received about using unsecured devices.
   962. zzz Posted: May 27, 2016 at 01:22 AM (#5230292)

You either embrace the centerless universe (what Keats called "negative capability") or you worry yourself sick.


There is much to be said for this perspective.

Or rather, little.
   963. Jay Z Posted: May 27, 2016 at 01:29 AM (#5230294)
...stfu already.

Excuse me, but never has so much bullshit been written by so many about one man as on these threads.

I'll be taking my own advice, so there.


Struck a nerve, eh? Trump is the master of bullshit. On that matter he is manifestly qualified.

I don't predict elections, control them, bet on them. Trump could well be elected. That won't change what kind of man he is.
   964. McCoy Posted: May 27, 2016 at 01:49 AM (#5230296)
Wind powered energy devices are killing all of the eagles!!

Anyway, if raising money is all that is needed to do a debate with Bernie and Donald then they should simply sell the commercial breaks and donate the money to charity.
   965. Lassus Posted: May 27, 2016 at 07:42 AM (#5230317)
#NeverTrump means not leaving the slightest chance that Trump will be elected if you can help it, which means voting for Hillary.
Otherwise it's just logically inconsistent and BS preening.


NON-BINARY THINKING!

How does it work?
   966. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 08:23 AM (#5230325)
NON-BINARY THINKING!

How does it work?


Either it does or it doesn't!

;)
   967. . Posted: May 27, 2016 at 08:31 AM (#5230326)
"Never" is a binary word.
   968. . Posted: May 27, 2016 at 08:39 AM (#5230328)
The usual suspects' beloved Iran is back in the news:

TEHRAN — More than 30 college students were arrested, interrogated and within 24 hours were each given 99 lashes for attending a graduation party that included men and women, Iran’s judiciary has announced.

The punishments, which were believed to be part of a wider crackdown by a judiciary dominated by hard-liners, were meted out in Qazvin, about 90 miles northwest of the capital, and were carried out in record time, Mizan, a news agency affiliated with the judiciary, reported on Thursday, citing the city’s prosecutor.

The Qazvin prosecutor, Esmail Sadeghi Niaraki, said that more than 30 female and male students — the women were described as “half naked,” meaning they were not wearing Islamic coverings, scarves and long coats — were arrested while “dancing and jubilating” after the authorities received a report that a party attended both by men and women was being held in a villa on the outskirts of Qazvin.

An arrest warrant was issued, he said, and the defendants were sentenced to 99 lashes after being questioned.


Classy.
   969. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 08:48 AM (#5230330)
Desperate times call for desperate measures ... DC Republicans plead for Rubio to come back and save his Senate seat from a horde of weak candidates

It seems that even Marco Rubio’s humiliating presidential campaign, which culminated in his 46-27 loss to Donald Trump in the Florida GOP primary, couldn’t destroy the myth of Marco Rubio. On Thursday, Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn publicly called on Rubio to seek re-election to the Senate this year, and NRSC chair Roger Wicker told CNN it was “a very real development.” Rubio himself still doesn’t sound incredibly interested, and he touted the campaign of his friend, Lt. Gov. Carlos Lopez-Cantera. However, Rubio didn’t quite close the door on another 2016 campaign, only calling the idea “unlikely.” Florida’s filing deadline is June 24.


Desperate times indeed ... RNC scrambles to calm state GOP officials

The Republican National Committee is scrambling to respond to increasingly frantic concerns from state GOP officials that the party has not provided enough field organizers and will be badly outgunned by Democrats in battleground states.

POLITICO surveyed nearly two dozen GOP chairmen, officials and operatives in key swing states who said the RNC hadn’t delivered on promises, imperiling their ability to launch the robust voter-turnout operation needed in the general election.

It’s a development that could spell trouble for Donald Trump, who trounced his primary competition despite the lack of a traditional field organization but is now relying on the national party for its infrastructure, and it has implications for the fragile Republican Senate majority, which is also depending on the RNC’s ground game.

In traditionally Republican states that could become competitive this election season, concern is mounting. Arizona’s state party chairman, Robert Graham, has only one RNC-paid staffer on hand — and had to fight with the national party to keep that person employed.


But hey magical Trump and his amazing ability to squeak out a nomination against a divided field will save them, or at least put out a Tweet storm and insult a bunch of GOP politicians who have failed to endorse him.
   970. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 08:55 AM (#5230331)
Desperate times call for desperate measures ... DC Republicans plead for Rubio to come back and save his Senate seat from a horde of weak candidates
The current field has proven to be unimpressive, although that has nothing to do with Trump.

There's not much upside for Rubio jumping in at the last minute to run for re-election: Never mind that he doesn't want to be in the Senate, a loss would cripple his political future, perhaps even doom it.
   971. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:00 AM (#5230332)
Johnson made sure to note that he has no proof the leaks came as a result of Clinton’s sloppy communication habits, but he provided very strong circumstantial evidence.
If that's "very strong" evidence, I'd hate to see what weak evidence was. (A horoscope?) He doesn't even have evidence that any leaks actually occurred (a couple of his ideas didn't work out), let alone that Hillary was responsible for them.
   972. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:02 AM (#5230334)
Desperate times indeed ... RNC scrambles to calm state GOP officials
No problem. Get Bob Arum to work on it.
   973. . Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:03 AM (#5230335)
LOL. The evidence is that the operations were compromised.

Putting the nation's secrets on a rogue server because of your paranoid lunacy is inherently disqualifying for the presidency. Is she going to abuse her power in a similar way as president and then tell a never-ending series of public lies about it? Of course she is.
   974. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:17 AM (#5230340)
Jason, I agree 100% with 970.
   975. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:28 AM (#5230347)
And here's a bigger concern, Mouse...

Donald Trump has exposed Marco Rubio:
For all of Rubio's high-minded talk, however, it seems that when push comes to shove, he doesn't have the courage to stand up for his stated convictions.

It's one thing to begrudgingly argue that as dangerous as he thinks a Trump presidency would be, that he thinks a Clinton presidency would be even worse. But to actually say that he would be "honored" by the chance to speak on Trump's behalf at the GOP convention, and to downplay his previously stated problems with Trump as mere "policy differences," is to prove the Rubio skeptics right.

That is, far from being an inspirational moral leader, Rubio has shown himself to be more of an opportunistic politician with his finger to the wind. He latched on to the Tea Party energy when he needed it to launch a long-shot Senate bid against an establishment figure in 2010. He embraced the idea of comprehensive immigration reform in 2013 in the wake of a GOP "autopsy" suggesting it was necessary to win in a changing electorate, but then downplayed it as it became a hindrance to his presidential campaign. Now he's desperate to reconcile his past words about Trump — from just over two months ago — with his political need to fall in line behind his party's nominee.

For all of Rubio's rhetoric about responsible leadership, he's now willing to embrace a demagogue just because that demagogue has an 'R' next to his name. Trump, for all his faults, has managed to expose Rubio's true character — and it is not pretty.
Yeah, I agree with Phil in that I don't like where this is going. Rubio is getting some seriously shitty advice right now.
   976. . Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:38 AM (#5230352)
The lede here is that Little Marco has said he will support Trump and is trying to even speak on Trump's behalf at the convention.

What a shock.
   977. GregD Posted: May 27, 2016 at 09:57 AM (#5230360)
The current field has proven to be unimpressive, although that has nothing to do with Trump.

There's not much upside for Rubio jumping in at the last minute to run for re-election: Never mind that he doesn't want to be in the Senate, a loss would cripple his political future, perhaps even doom it.
This sounds right to me. People on the sidelines always look better than people in the fray. But that doesn't mean they are. If Rubio really wants to be governor, a campaign for Senate now would be classic high risk/low reward. The flip side would be if he knew for certain that Grayson would defeat Murphy on the Dem side, the general would get much easier.

   978. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:09 AM (#5230369)
This sounds right to me. People on the sidelines always look better than people in the fray. But that doesn't mean they are. If Rubio really wants to be governor, a campaign for Senate now would be classic high risk/low reward. The flip side would be if he knew for certain that Grayson would defeat Murphy on the Dem side, the general would get much easier.
But who knows, Greg/Mouse? Rubio somehow believes it's in his interest to say "honored" in reference to an opportunity to speak in Cleveland. :(
   979. zzz Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:14 AM (#5230372)
Rubio has shown himself to be more of an opportunistic politician with his finger to the wind.


Say it isn't so!
   980. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:18 AM (#5230376)
But who knows, Greg/Mouse? Rubio somehow believes it's in his interest to say "honored" in reference to an opportunity to speak in Cleveland. :(


Rubio has turned into a sort of version of John Edwards. Superficially a good politician, seems like he should be ... but just isn't for a variety of reasons that appear to be linked to character flaws.

I am not saying they are exact analogues or anything, just both were hyped way beyond what they accomplished, both young and telegenic with appealing messages and life stories on the surface and who end up with a single term in office, a run at the presidency and then bouncing around a bit on the edges (obviously projecting the last bit for Rubio).
   981. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:23 AM (#5230380)
Rubio has turned into a sort of version of John Edwards. Superficially a good politician, seems like he should be ... but just isn't for a variety of reasons that appear to be linked to character flaws.

I am not saying they are exact analogues or anything, just both were hyped way beyond what they accomplished, both young and telegenic with appealing messages and life stories on the surface and who end up with a single term in office, a run at the presidency and then bouncing around a bit on the edges (obviously projecting the last bit for Rubio).
"Character flaws?" What you describe above could be said of most "young and telegenic" politicians, whatever their party or ideology. Opportunism über alles.
   982. BDC Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:29 AM (#5230389)
I hope Rubio avoids some of Edwards' more egregious character flaws. The kid may have turned out to be a bit of a dunce but he doesn't deserve that :)
   983. The Good Face Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:31 AM (#5230393)
Other than the usual politician starter kit of character flaws (overweening pride, ambition, lust for power, etc.) I don't think Rubio has any glaring character flaws. He's just not especially bright and seems to be easily influenced/persuaded by smarter men.
   984. GregD Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:33 AM (#5230395)
BM, it is an interesting comparison in many ways.

I doubt Rubio has made a disaster of his private life or that would have come out. But who knows?

The other difference of course is money. Rubio's financial situation is bad. He's been dependent on being bailed out by a couple of rich donors who supported his political aspirations. One possibility--the one I'm sure he has in mind--is cashing in for the next year and a half before running for governor, so he doesn't have to worry again. But his ability to cash in presumably depends on having the backing of those donors in getting a fat, short-term job since it's not clear he has much high-dollar value to anyone but them. So if they pressure him to run, he's caught betwixt and between.

The weird thing about Rubio is that he's had a chance of being president and a chance of hawking food supplements on TV to stay afloat.
   985. Stormy JE Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:34 AM (#5230397)
Whaddaya know, Marco took note:
Funny piece by @philipaklein. Easy to be a "keyboard cowboy".I actually ran & spent year away from home trying to prevent choice before us
Of course, that doesn't justify "honored" or the other comments over the last 24 hours.
   986. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:36 AM (#5230399)
Rubio has turned into a sort of version of John Edwards. Superficially a good politician, seems like he should be ... but just isn't for a variety of reasons that appear to be linked to character flaws.

I am not saying they are exact analogues or anything, just both were hyped way beyond what they accomplished, both young and telegenic with appealing messages and life stories on the surface and who end up with a single term in office, a run at the presidency and then bouncing around a bit on the edges (obviously projecting the last bit for Rubio).


There are worse comparisons for Rubio than John Edwards, and I wouldn't be surprised if I'd been hooked on him in late 2003 or early 2004 for many of the same reasons some Republicans were smitten with Rubio. The problem with both of them, though, wasn't their lack of formal qualifications, it was just that when you scratched below the veneer, there just wasn't any "there" there. The only difference is that while Edwards was revealed to have a low character, Rubio's proving that he has no character.

And it may be rude to say this, but if either of them had been born with a face like John Kasich, very few political operatives would have pinned their party's presidential hopes on him.
   987. JL72 Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:41 AM (#5230402)
Desperate times indeed ... RNC scrambles to calm state GOP officials


I will be interested to see how this plays out. Conventional wisdom (and demonstrated in recent elections) is that a candidate needs a ground game to get voters excited and to the polls in November. Cruz developed one, which is why he stayed in so long.

By all accounts, Trump does not have much of one. But that has not been a problem so far. Perhaps it won't matter in the general election. Or he gets his up and running with the help of the RNC.
   988. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:41 AM (#5230403)
Whaddaya know, Marco took note:

Funny piece by @philipaklein. Easy to be a "keyboard cowboy".I actually ran & spent year away from home trying to prevent choice before us


Of course, that doesn't justify "honored" or the other comments over the last 24 hours.

The responses to Rubio's comment on your link were both brutal and well deserved.
   989. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:42 AM (#5230405)
LOL. The evidence is that the operations were compromised.
No. That's just jargon designed to make it sound like far more than it was. Nothing in the article says that the operations were "compromised." It says that they failed. They - or at least this one guy - surmised that the operations (two, despite the vague wording elsewhere in his piece to make it sound like more) were "compromised," but he admittedly has no evidence of that. They did not, for instance, intercept a communication between the badguys in which people expressed knowledge of the operation. They did not arrest somebody who divulged that he knew about the operation. Nor did they actually discover a leak; although he says that one could stand outside the embassy and intercept communications, it's phrased in the hypothetical. He didn't do this such that he knows that this particular information – or any classified information – was actually intercepted outside the embassy.

Stripping away the verbiage, it says that two missions failed, and he assumes that the failures were not coincidence or bad luck but because of leaks. He couldn't affirmatively identify the source of these leaks, but it could've been from State. He has no way to know whether it was - or whether Hillary had any role whatsoever if it was - but he cut State out of the loop and the next operation worked, so Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock.

Putting the nation's secrets on a rogue server because of your paranoid lunacy is inherently disqualifying for the presidency. Is she going to abuse her power in a similar way as president and then tell a never-ending series of public lies about it? Of course she is.
1) This story has nothing to do with her server.
2) This story has nothing to do with Hillary, per se.
3) Hillary did not "put" the "nation's secrets" on any server. That is desperate spin. There is no directory labeled ~/user/hclinton/nuclearlaunchcodes on the server. She used insecure email on an insecure server¹ in such a way that if classified info were sent to (or by) her, it could potentially be exposed. That was reckless.
4) Not wanting her conduct scrutinized is wrong, but it's hardly "paranoid" or "lunacy," both terms implying thoughts far outside the norm, when in fact most politicians want/try to evade FOIA. They shouldn't, but it doesn't set her apart from them. The problem is that she conducted State Dept. business, while most of the others don't have access to such info.
5) That's reckless conduct and a violation of her obligations, but calling it an "abuse of power" is bizarre; that's not what the phrase connotes. She... sent and received emails; she didn't order someone killed.
6) Of course she'll abuse her power as president and lie about it; all politicians do. She'll be a terrible president. Only one person is likely to be worse, and unfortunately it's her main opponent, who doesn't even have the decency to hide the fact that he intends to abuse his power.



¹I like the phrase "rogue server," as if it were the poor server's fault. I just picture a server with a bandanna covering its face, sneaking around robbing banks.
   990. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:47 AM (#5230413)
He's just not especially bright and seems to be easily influenced/persuaded by smarter men.


Not a very strong personality, it's amazing he's gotten as high as he has.

Chris Christie is a kick-down, suck-up kind of guy, a classic schoolyard bully, he went New Jersey on Rubio because he sensed weakness... and then he started sucking up to Trump.

So if they pressure him to run, he's caught betwixt and between.


Would he have any better chance at getting elected Governor than re-elected to the Senate? Yes, the 2018 electorate is almost certainly gonna be more favorable to the GOP candidate than 2016's, Scott was re-elected in 2014 despite having terrible approval ratings among the populace at large. OTOH is Rubio refuses to run now, sits out a year... come 2018 he may not even be able to win a GOP primary anymore.

Personally I'd rather be a Senator than a Governor, I'm lazy, a Governor really HAS to work, he's responsible for running things, a Senator doesn't have to do a damn thing he doesn't want to do.
   991. Lassus Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:48 AM (#5230414)
On a base level, Rubio lacks charisma. Honestly, all politicians should take at year (at the very LEAST) of theater training and learn how to speak so people will listen to you.
   992. . Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:48 AM (#5230415)
They - or at least this one guy - surmised that the operations (two, despite the vague wording elsewhere in his piece to make it sound like more) were "compromised," but he admittedly has no evidence of that.

Yes, I know. Non-pedants are able to discuss reasonable suppositions and possibilities while understanding the lack of 100% airtight proof. You should try it some time; it's quite liberating and you might even have something of value to add.

That's reckless conduct and a violation of her obligations, but calling it an "abuse of power" is bizarre; that's not what the phrase connotes.

It's precisely what the phrase connotes, in every particular.(*) I'm speaking Saneglish again, a language in which you are clearly not fluent.

(*) Right down to her "It's been approved, never speak of the Secretary's emails again" edict to the professionals in the State Department.
   993. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:48 AM (#5230416)
Maybe Rubio is saying that he'd be honored to speak at the convention as a trick; he gets on stage, and then instead of delivering the prepared remarks, launches into an impromptu fiery denunciation of ClownHitler. Otherwise, yeah, I've got nothing. Utterly pathetic.

Though not entirely unexpected. I will still save my anguish for if/when Cruz caves like that.
   994. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:49 AM (#5230417)
Yes, I know. Non-pedants are able to discuss reasonable suppositions and possibilities while understanding the lack of 100% airtight proof.
And by "lack of 100% airtight proof," you mean 0% evidence.
   995. JL72 Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:54 AM (#5230420)
Personally I'd rather be a Senator than a Governor, I'm lazy, a Governor really HAS to work, he's responsible for running things, a Senator doesn't have to do a damn thing he doesn't want to do.


But being Governor is considered a better entry on the resume than Senator for exactly that reason. And I think Marco still has his eye on the big prize.
   996. BrianBrianson Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:54 AM (#5230421)
Only one person is likely to be worse, and unfortunately it's her main opponent,


Must I remind you that John McAfee is running in the Libertarian primary?
   997. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:56 AM (#5230423)
Before the page flips, here's a re-post of an entry someone may have missed:

932. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:16 PM (#5230109)
And Andy, I'm renewing my offer to double down on the $500 at 2-1 if it's Trump vs. Hillary. At this point, the race is at worst a toss-up.(*)

Hmmmm, I wonder where you were when BM was offering 3 to 1 and JoeB was offering 10 to 1?

Ah, the confidence that a few early polls can bring. It was only a couple of months ago (March 4th, to be exact) that you were pimping to buy out of your original bet for $50.

But sure, for you I'll still give 2 to 1, in spite of this near toss-up election. All you have to do is to post your $1000 with Jason within 7 days, in the form of a cashier's check made out to Jason. Once Jason confirms that he's received it, I'll send him a similar check for $2000. As soon as a winner is declared, Jason will endorse both checks and co-sign them both over to me (if Hillary wins) or to you (if Trump wins).


(*) I'd of course want any other non-Bush/Kasich/Little Marco R if somehow Trump is denied the R nomination.

Sure, but if Hillary loses the nomination or drops out for any reason, for you to win the bet either Trump or the substitute candidate would still have to win the election. If Sanders should win over any Republican, nobody wins our bet, and we'll both have our consolation prizes.


That same person might also have missed this followup comment:

935. Bitter Mouse, Space Tyrant Posted: May 26, 2016 at 09:36 PM (#5230143)

Hmmmm, I wonder where you were when BM was offering 3 to 1 and JoeB was offering 10 to 1?

Was? I still am. 3 to 1. Practically FREE money. I mean look at the polling averages. Hard to believe I am this loose with my money.


   998. The Good Face Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:58 AM (#5230424)
Not a very strong personality, it's amazing he's gotten as high as he has.


Well, he's Latino, ambitious, reasonably handsome, can parrot the words of others reasonably well, and is willing to be the front man for powerful/wealthy interests. I have no difficulty seeing how a guy like that could have a pretty good political career. Especially in Florida.

Chris Christie is a kick-down, suck-up kind of guy, a classic schoolyard bully, he went New Jersey on Rubio because he sensed weakness... and then he started sucking up to Trump.


Christie is no genius, but he's smarter than Rubio and is looking like a guy who will get a plum position in the Trump administration.
   999. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 10:59 AM (#5230425)
And by "lack of 100% airtight proof," you mean 0% evidence.


But he talks about the 0% evidence as if it were 100% airtight proof, so there is that.

I too like the phrase "Rogue Server" and your description made me laugh.
   1000. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: May 27, 2016 at 11:01 AM (#5230427)
a plum position in the Trump administration


Doorman at Trump Tower?

Or did you mean plump position? (Yes I feel bad for saying it).
Page 10 of 17 pages ‹ First  < 8 9 10 11 12 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogChampionship Series OMNICHATTER!
(306 - 9:34pm, Oct 13)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

NewsblogMajor League Baseball has an opioid problem. Now what?
(28 - 9:29pm, Oct 13)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)

Sox TherapyLet’s Get On With It
(14 - 8:29pm, Oct 13)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Time Cube

NewsblogMLB Rumors: Curt Schilling Interested in Phillies Manager, Red Sox Coaching Job
(12 - 8:28pm, Oct 13)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Time Cube

NewsblogMLB rumors: Giants to interview ex-Phillies skipper Gabe Kapler for open managerial position
(5 - 8:22pm, Oct 13)
Last: .

NewsblogDavid Freese, 2011 World Series MVP with Cardinals, retires after 11 seasons
(12 - 8:21pm, Oct 13)
Last: Sit down, Sleepy has lots of stats

NewsblogSeveral errors led Phillies to this point, and one excuse Friday doesn't hold up
(15 - 8:06pm, Oct 13)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogCards’ front office says playoff baseballs have lost juice
(11 - 5:28pm, Oct 13)
Last: spycake

NewsblogOT - NBA thread (pre-season)
(441 - 5:19pm, Oct 13)
Last: Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle

NewsblogTyler Skaggs: Fentanyl, oxycodone, alcohol led to death| LA Times
(45 - 5:11pm, Oct 13)
Last: Howie Menckel

Newsblog The Cooperstown Case for Yadier Molina, Russell Martin, and Brian McCann - The Ringer
(102 - 3:11pm, Oct 13)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogBaseball's top salaries are declining, as evidenced by smaller qualifying offer
(15 - 11:48am, Oct 13)
Last: Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant

NewsblogLos Angeles Angels employee details team's knowledge of Tyler Skaggs' drug use to federal DEA investigators -- ESPN
(4 - 10:57am, Oct 13)
Last: pikepredator

NewsblogThe 'purge' Mets' Brodie Van Wagenen, other GMs should fear
(4 - 10:53am, Oct 13)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogNationals vs. Cardinals: Washington or St. Louis? How each city stacks up
(25 - 11:39pm, Oct 12)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Page rendered in 0.8561 seconds
46 querie(s) executed