You don't go crazy, you need a media savvy candidate who can make their own soundbites to dominate the news cycle and drown out Trump's noise.
Congress Releases Barr's summary of the Mueller Report (SEE STAFF POST)
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
Real life isn't a video game. You aren't entering a 25 cent coin for a life, picking E Honda and trying a 100 hand slap.
Political allegiances in America are probably some of the most entrenched in the whole world. Your candidate is literally going out to win an election on such small margins of sway.
Either between getting enough "sometimes I stay at home" voters out, working on the genuine fence-sitters who will flip or a mixture of both. For Dems it's probably a decent portion of stay at home. People like that need to be inspired, not "live-streamed to on Twitch" like it's some Saturday night games show. Irrespective of your rating of Obama's reign, his campaigns inspired. Many of your voters are fickle people, don't blame me, they seem to need to be inspired to bother exercising their right to vote.
Your candidate needs to be able to stand up for themselves, yes, but your candidate also needs to remember the potential voters they are trying to win the hearts of while putting aside the white noise caused by voters who they'll never reach. Not even if they were to "out shitpost" Trump. One quick example, diehard second amendment absolutists or gun nuts are never voting Dem, even if the Dem candidate managed to savagely mock Trump during some televised debates.
Said people probably hysterically post their love and amazement if Trump wins some trollish stand-off. But so? The answer to that isn't to get mad and think "we need to win the next troll off". Complete waste of time.
Many observers of some of the absolute madness that comes out of American politics, especially when it seems like a fucking game show, will feel similarly to me. Win an election, don't try and win the game.
I was responding to someone suggesting "wild policies". I don't disagree that being able to get media attention is important.
You have good points but to me the wrong approach.
You are very right that you have to match him in public appeal.
But I think you are very wrong that to win that appeal is by being aggressive to lie to behave like an idiot, etc..
No you have to make it simple to the people and you have to talk sense. Show them that you can create millions of jobs on climate change. Show them what it means to have great healthcare. Don't talk down on all the people but talk with the people. You need to win their trust and show them in simple ways how you will make their lifes better and talk in a simple way why Trump hasn't done that.
Trump is saying what many people are believing (he is a populist after all). But the Democrats can do this to but with a constructive and healthy policy.
I didn't say you have to be weak to Trump or ignore him. I say the opposite. You know before he opens his mouth what he is going to say.
This creates a great benefit for the Democrats. But they don't use it. They only attack him on his rhetoric. But that doesn't mean a thing to these voters. It only strenghtens their views.
Start talking of the real issues that voters have and Trump will lose. But do it the wrong way and you will lose.
I don't get it, Trump is so easily understood and still the Democrats don't get it.[/QUOTE]
Dems need to hammer the entire GOP on their stance regarding climate change in the wake of the ongoing disaster in the Midwest. That's our impending future right now.
Yeah, need to not only haul in Barr and Mueller, but you need to haul in Rick Gates, George Nader, Michael Flynn off the bat. I mention those names as they're the cooperating witnesses right now, who received MASSIVE pleas considering their specific efforts regarding Trump/Russia conspiracy.
Like seriously, Rick Gates was charged with 38 federal crimes that weren't directly Russia collusion '16 related, but he got a sweetheart deal just because of Trump investigations he's assisting with. Now it could all be inauguration related so that will be SDNY, but in terms of '16 election collusion, he was in that room with Manafort giving data to a GRU spy, I mean simply Putin's acquaintance, Kilimnik. They used that to explicitly fuck over Manafort for lying to them about it in his other unrelated cases, even though he already had a plea. There's way too much smoke there.
And not to mention fucking Flynn. That man should never see the outside of the prison, but Mueller was literally giving him a no jail time recommendation that even caused the judge to freak out on them for it.
If that's not being factored into the overall conclusion then we have a serious problem that the House can help solve. Nothing will be resolved until we know explicit details on that, and why decisions were made and not made in regards to its importance and a factor in the conclusion of Mueller's own investigation.
That question will be answered one way or the other, so I'm fine with waiting and seeing where the new developments take us. Hate to go FYGM, but unlike other people here, I have no issue tuning out the gloating from the right and Greenwald types. This is too just another move in the game, not the game itself. It never was.
I'm just judging by trends. The midterm elections were ran entirely on things that affected the American people, and the Dems had a clear message for them which is why they won. The President can keep claiming a strong economy, but when the middle class now have to pay thousands of dollars by April 15 because of Trump's tax plan, they dont give a shit about the economy at that point. The Dems need to go after him on things that have affected people negatively. Trump has broken a lot of promises over the past few years that they can hammer him with.
Dude, I’m be honest and real. Bullshit is sitting on this forum thinking “WE CAN STILL GET HIM!” I totally get it wasn’t all Anti-Trump, but you should also see there’s still so much, “We have a President that...” Focus. On. The. Issues. If you think I’m being disingenuous as a voting Democrate, you might want to step back and see you’re pissed and fighting people on the same side.
I think we will never see the full release. I hope I'm not right, but that's my guess.
I can see you don't actually care to read what I wrote. Thanks.
Oh please, you’re the one fighting people on the same side with your incessant posts disparaging Democrats as not caring about the issues. Spare me the crocodile tears.
Glenn Gs best buddy having a celebratory meltdown. Thanks, "leftist" Glenn Greenwald.
F to the person with xfinity.This has been my WiFi network name for the last year. It's no longer ironic, lol :-/
This is actually several months old.
The release of that video was a bombshell. It was the beginning of the end.
I'm not a fan of Yang, but he has the right idea with UBI. Dems need something out of left field like that
The Dem candidate needs some kind of Signature Policy, like The Wall or Obamacare
What was HRC flagship policy? I honestly don't recall
I know it is, it's going viral again though.
If it were just made I wouldn't have had much comment or probably posted it because it's "easy" to create something reactionary after the fact.
The fact it is like 5 months old is just a window into how certain the majority of people were Trump was gone ages ago. Or for me, more so a selective peak into how I feel American news presenters may rely too heavily on certain phrasing/confirmation bias.
It's 101, until something this serious is pretty much certain or confirmed, it's a big risk implying you know it's certain before you do.
I knew it was bad but I did not realize that it was this bad.
Yeah, I'm not feeling any type of way but confused why everyone here and in the media is allowing a hand picked AG and the biggest liar to ever sit in the oval control the narrative on what the report concludes. But most people have the attention spans of gnats and expect everything "right fucking now" in our culture of instant gratification.
It's that mindset that needs to stop and the reason your feeling the way you are today.
The Democrats have to stop fearing Trump and begin to take the limelight.
Why do you think they go after AOC.
You need someone like her but someone a little less radical and someone who is razor sharp with figures to.
And someone that common men in the street can understand and can rally behind without fear of to much upset in their life.
No candidate can do this in the field of the Democrats imo.
Why do you think they go after AOC.
You need someone like her but someone a little less radical and someone who is razor sharp with figures to.
And someone that common men in the street can understand and can rally behind without fear of to much upset in their life.
No candidate can do this in the field of the Democrats imo.
Absolutely, hammer him with every falsehood, every failed promise, every lie, that goes for during his election, his first term and all the shit he will throw during the next election. But don't shy away from that.
The left and right don't win elections, the middle do, those are the people the Dem candidate needs to win over. And that doesn't mean their polices have to be central, not at all, but their appeal has to be. You need to be inspirational, and potent, and quotable. Hilary was an awful candidate, and she was the most qualified candidate for the Presidency in an absurdly long time. It isn't a job interview, it's not the best person wins, it's the most likeable person does. It's a popularity contest. Your base might respond to your policies, but the independent voters are voting based on character.
Biden said he didn't think he'd have beaten Trump if he'd have ran last time, I don't think that's true. Personally, I'm not a fan, I don't think just because he makes for great memes makes him a good candidate, but I do think he was the anti-Clinton, he's very charming, and witty, and sharp.
I'd like to think the fear of political dynasties was a motivating factor last time, but I don't think it is, especially given the huge love for Trudeau online.
I mean Medicare for all and the Green New Deal are right there
Why are we accepting Barr’s narrative? Because he’s the one who gets to give it per the Special Council law.
We're not accepting their narrative yet. We can still count on at least the House Dems to start a push to get the full report released. We don't need to continue creating fantasy narratives in our heads that only serve to disappoint and disillusion us later.
Remember that the first month was taken up by a government shutdown.
Since then they passed the For the People act which is major election reform, two gun background check bills, and the rejection of the emergency declaration.
They also passed some russia related bills, but what bills you send to die in the senate is a little like what proposals you put on your website. It's not the best indicator of what you're campaigning on.
Neal Katyal who drafted the special counsel regulations says there are problems with the letter.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/24/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
Without a slam dunk from the FBI, there's no way the Republican-controlled Senate would vote to convict, meaning any attempt to charge him just looks like sour grapes.
The case is dead, Jim. Now let's not Benghazi this and move on. We can be better than the Republicans.
So basically a public option, manufacturing jobs, and not voting for the iraq war.
That’s why I don’t watch any cable news garbage. These people are trash.
Yep, I have’t watched cable news since I cut the cord.
Stop trying to “go high” when they “go low”
It didn’t work and it’s not going to magically start working.
There’s a timeline where the Cuban Missile Crisis escalated up to human extinction. We certainly live in the stupidest one though.
No one seems to want to talk about how the media has been tearing apart Barr's letter all night (or in Fox News' case, ignoring it).
I agree it will be the outcome, but if the Congress get the full report to get to decide to impeach him or not, it will go public, and it would be useful in 2020.
I'm still reading through the thread (decided to pass the time with some friends while waiting for the report), but just a couple of things:
1. The spamming of these "know it all" Twitter pundits needs to stop. They obviously don't know anything more than any one else, but are rather just saying things that its readers like to hear. "Trump conspired with the Russians in ways x, y, z." "Trump definitely obstructed justice beyond a reasonable doubt." Et cetera.
Are there any other actual lawyers here (lol, I know there are)? People always forget that prosecutors of criminal activity have to meet the legal burden of proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't matter if it LOOKS like there was a crime. It doesn't matter if you FEEL that a crime has been committed. I have to close cases all the time; when I simply can't prove a case, I don't try to force the issue. Just the other day, I had to close a case when I was 99% sure in my gut that the allegation in one of my cases was true. But at the end of the day, the evidence didn't support my "gut feeling." And here, even though it LOOKED like the evidence may have been damning, there very well just might not have been enough to support a conviction.
2. If I'm understanding things correctly, Barr didn't just look at this report on Friday and conclude that Trump didn't obstruct justice. Barr's report says that he had previously consulted with Rosenstein and Mueller "over the course of the investigation" about the obstruction issue. So they developed their legal conclusion well before the submission of the final report, I'm assuming. There's no way that he ONLY reviewed this over the weekend and just came up with his conclusion.
Additionally, the summary says that Mueller laid out evidence "on both sides" of the issue. Sounds to me like there was enough exculpatory evidence to decline to prosecute; doesn't sound like the inculpatory evidence was overwhelming enough to support a conviction. Remember: beyond a reasonable doubt (this is just me speculating, but having it described as evidence on "both sides" sounds like it may have been 60/40 or 55/45...not like 90/10 or 95/5)
3. The report will be made public. Barr's report says that they just need to take out the confidential stuff.
1. The spamming of these "know it all" Twitter pundits needs to stop. They obviously don't know anything more than any one else, but are rather just saying things that its readers like to hear. "Trump conspired with the Russians in ways x, y, z." "Trump definitely obstructed justice beyond a reasonable doubt." Et cetera.
Are there any other actual lawyers here (lol, I know there are)? People always forget that prosecutors of criminal activity have to meet the legal burden of proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt. It doesn't matter if it LOOKS like there was a crime. It doesn't matter if you FEEL that a crime has been committed. I have to close cases all the time; when I simply can't prove a case, I don't try to force the issue. Just the other day, I had to close a case when I was 99% sure in my gut that the allegation in one of my cases was true. But at the end of the day, the evidence didn't support my "gut feeling." And here, even though it LOOKED like the evidence may have been damning, there very well just might not have been enough to support a conviction.
2. If I'm understanding things correctly, Barr didn't just look at this report on Friday and conclude that Trump didn't obstruct justice. Barr's report says that he had previously consulted with Rosenstein and Mueller "over the course of the investigation" about the obstruction issue. So they developed their legal conclusion well before the submission of the final report, I'm assuming. There's no way that he ONLY reviewed this over the weekend and just came up with his conclusion.
Additionally, the summary says that Mueller laid out evidence "on both sides" of the issue. Sounds to me like there was enough exculpatory evidence to decline to prosecute; doesn't sound like the inculpatory evidence was overwhelming enough to support a conviction. Remember: beyond a reasonable doubt (this is just me speculating, but having it described as evidence on "both sides" sounds like it may have been 60/40 or 55/45...not like 90/10 or 95/5)
3. The report will be made public. Barr's report says that they just need to take out the confidential stuff.
the thing about the cable/24-hour news stuff with all "UNPRECEDENTED", "BEGINNING OF THE END", "BOMBSHELL" everyday stuff is...well it always comes down to the ratings, doesn't it. Tempered, soberly delivered news doesn't make the numbers go up. There are good people at those channels and I won't say good journalism doesn't happen at CNN or what not, but you can never completely compartmentalize that from the ratings/money issue.
also, I love ya'll, but some of this thread was just straight up embarrassing
also, I love ya'll, but some of this thread was just straight up embarrassing
I feel like too many people got roped into the mentality that Mueller's investigation was going to be "the end" of Donald Trump's presidency. I always came from the perspective that, no matter the results of Mueller's investigation, we would end up with at least one full term with him. The goal was to pull out some of the corrupted individuals that did things in a not-so-kosher kind of way - which it did. The goal wasn't ever really to isolate "Individual #1/Trump" - the media was the one who framed the investigation that way.
The only thing that will get Trump out of office is the same thing we've known would get him out of office the day after he was elected: to prepare for 2020 as much as we can. I remain skeptical of whether or not the Democratic party has prepared for it or not - especially with the dozen of "throwaway" nominees that have thrown their hats into the ring - and the DNC seemingly backing Beto O'Rouke and ignoring Bernie (again). But that's just my interpretation/understanding of the current atmosphere.
Yes, it sucks that the Mueller investigation didn't have as much traction as some expected it to have. Expectations ran amok and some went as far as to think that Mueller would indict or (indirectly) impeach Trump while still in office. The most we can do now is buckle up, strap ourselves in, and make sure that we put a capable person in the operations room of the roller coaster.
The only thing that will get Trump out of office is the same thing we've known would get him out of office the day after he was elected: to prepare for 2020 as much as we can. I remain skeptical of whether or not the Democratic party has prepared for it or not - especially with the dozen of "throwaway" nominees that have thrown their hats into the ring - and the DNC seemingly backing Beto O'Rouke and ignoring Bernie (again). But that's just my interpretation/understanding of the current atmosphere.
Yes, it sucks that the Mueller investigation didn't have as much traction as some expected it to have. Expectations ran amok and some went as far as to think that Mueller would indict or (indirectly) impeach Trump while still in office. The most we can do now is buckle up, strap ourselves in, and make sure that we put a capable person in the operations room of the roller coaster.
It's convenient to ignore so we can just all level digs at one another instead of collectively realizing that we don't actually know what the fuck is even going on right now and Barr's misdirecting the ever loving fuck out of us
Trump and the republicans won the press conference. It doesn’t matter what comes out going forward unless new people are arrested. Mainstream people do not sit on forums and listen to podcasts about this stuff. They go and live their lives and make ends meet.
Is there a gif of kenard shooting ol boy (spoiler proofing) from the wire? That is fitting for now.
Also will the senate subpoena anyone that had something to do with this case as Trump was asking in his quick presser? Also let people vent, it is a let down for many that people are proclaiming victory. It’s ok
Is there a gif of kenard shooting ol boy (spoiler proofing) from the wire? That is fitting for now.
Also will the senate subpoena anyone that had something to do with this case as Trump was asking in his quick presser? Also let people vent, it is a let down for many that people are proclaiming victory. It’s ok
Glad to see the fringe left joining the likes of 9/11 Truthers with the release of Barr’s notes. A proud day to be sure.
“Mueller is a hack/Barr is holding back!” is the new “Thermite paste!”
Nothing funnier than watching a bunch of crybabies who basically accused Trump of being a Russian spy turn their backs on their Lord and Savior, Bobby Mueller. In fact, it’s easily more entertaining than watching this same group of dimbulbs herald James Comey, the man who basically assured Trump of victory in 2016, as a force for truth and justice when he was on the media circuit pushing his shit-tacular book to any fool who would listen.
And a giant “fuck you” to the press. Instead of acting responsibly, and carefully vetting their sources and double checking their facts, the American media opted to act like vain, shrieking imbeciles when confronting Trump. And because of their folly, they have assured this moron another 4 years in office. Nice job with the rhetoric!
For anyone who cares, Matt Taibbi’s newest blog is a perfect summary of every damn blunder journos have made over the last two years:
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million
“Mueller is a hack/Barr is holding back!” is the new “Thermite paste!”
Nothing funnier than watching a bunch of crybabies who basically accused Trump of being a Russian spy turn their backs on their Lord and Savior, Bobby Mueller. In fact, it’s easily more entertaining than watching this same group of dimbulbs herald James Comey, the man who basically assured Trump of victory in 2016, as a force for truth and justice when he was on the media circuit pushing his shit-tacular book to any fool who would listen.
And a giant “fuck you” to the press. Instead of acting responsibly, and carefully vetting their sources and double checking their facts, the American media opted to act like vain, shrieking imbeciles when confronting Trump. And because of their folly, they have assured this moron another 4 years in office. Nice job with the rhetoric!
For anyone who cares, Matt Taibbi’s newest blog is a perfect summary of every damn blunder journos have made over the last two years:
https://taibbi.substack.com/p/russiagate-is-wmd-times-a-million
