Peak Trump today. So good. I just think it’s a little too early in his treatment to making these calls.

You’ve already lied by saying I assured everyone the video was true. But here we are with your blind trust in the man’s claims. The issue is under investigation by Minnesota police, so we’ll just have to wait.

Aah yes, the polls. I’m under no delusion that Trump might lose, but relying on polls is a fool’s errand these days.

Right, the guy who claimed he was bribed. I’ll reserve judgement until he offers some evidence.

You mean the guy claiming he was set up?

You're saying that the benefit (you and other committed supporters liked it) outweighs the negatives (exposure of the SS agents to the virus and the loss of votes of those who feel this cements their view regarding his poor response to Covid). That sounds narcissistic...and/or crazy because I'd think you would want him reelected.

No, I just don’t think your fears (derived from the anti-Trump propaganda) are anything beyond the typical hysteria. I think it was cool he greeted supporters. It is a situation unworthy of a cost/benefit analysis. It has nothing to do with my mental health, which is just fine.

That sounds like an interpretation that would appeal exclusively to Trump supporters. Surely you're aware that he's perceived negatively on his COVID response (irrespective of reality - just look at the polls). This stunt doesn't seem likely to improve that perception. That was the point of my question. This doesn't seem that it can help his chances, only hurt (neutral at best).

I imagine you also believe Trump won the debate. If so, wake up to the fact that he probably gained no votes from his performance. Your positive views of the man does not translate to any more votes than the one you cast.

I believe Biden won the debate and even said so.

As for his little ride and wave, I just do not possess the same anxiety towards his actions, and I actually liked what he did. The response sounds like grasping at straws to me. I could care less if they translate to votes.

OK, give it to me. Play the role of Kayleigh Mcenany (before she tested positive) and explain what's good about Trump being driven around by a Secret Service man (risking his exposure) and waving at supporters. Also let me know if you think this positive spin will gain him votes.

It let’s the people know he’s ok. The man is running the country, after all, and he’s in the at-risk category. It also has the added bonus of revealing to everyone how ridiculously his opponents will twist anything he does. A wave from a car can send them into fits. Now they pretend to be worried for law enforcement after months of dismissing wholesale violence against police. It’s a thing of beauty.

Now the press secretary has tested positive for COVID.

"I don't want to suffer, so you should just keep suffering."

No one has ever made this argument, as far as I’m aware. Conservatives are skeptical of human reason and believe a moderate reform is far better for everyone than radical revolutionary change. They believe that we ought not to sacrifice present society on the whims of a few revolutionaries. It actually sounds like they have more empathy than the revolutionary types.

How can this stunt possibly be given a pro-Trump spin?

As easily as you’ve given it an anti-Trump spin, except without having to use another’s opinion to form ones own.

Commies not welcome. Ruin your own country.

SUBJECT: Inadmissibility Based on Membership in a Totalitarian Party

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual to address inadmissibility based on membership in or affiliation with the Communist or any other totalitarian party.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/policy-manual-updates/20201002-PartyMembership.pdf

I was comparing his haters to a poisonous snake, in this case those who signal their virtue by wishing death on the president.

Expressing sympathy for Trump and denouncing those who don't is just vacuous moral signaling; an attempt to display moral high ground when it in fact signals the opposite.

This is true. We’ve known for quite some time the evil in some people’s hearts. It’s like getting mad at a snake for being poisonous. The embarrassing part, I suppose, is that their evil exceeds that of the one they hate.

He’ll get more done in quarantine than Biden has done in 47 years.

Trump goes all over America doing massive rallies and nothing. Spends a little time with a Democrat and he’s infected with covid.

They’re idiots, as far as white supremacists go. They don’t even realize that their leader is a black Cuban.

I remember Tom Perez, chair of the DNC, suggesting that Republicans are “going to keep forcing millions of Americans to choose between their safety and their vote.”

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/493224-republicans-put-lives-in-danger-to-try-to-steal-an-election-now-they-want-to

But there is always more:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/09/the-democrats-vote-by-mail-conundrum/616535/

What's the problem? It's common practice to dig up dirt on political opponents and to utilize whatever dirt is available (consider Trump's use of Wikileaks, not to mention Stone's coordination with Assange). It WOULD be a problem if the formal Russian investigation by the FBI and Mueller were a product of a political witch-hunt, but the IG has already assessed that and indicated it was not.

Crossfire Hurricane was set up to investigate whether individuals associated with President Trump's campaign was coordinating with the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

The problem is that they investigated the wrong campaign.

One can still express a brutal truth with kindness and respect. Managing a series of lies is a great deal more difficult and stressful than telling the truth. And if the lying is discovered, no matter how courteous, they indict your character.

Nothing else developed an allergy to peanuts. Nothing else developed a fear of spiders. So what, then, is responsible?

I understand the need to define parts of the body for the sake of understanding. But no matter what part of the body we can point to we are still pointing to the body. Though I am able to fathom why a being who cannot see the back of his own head may come to believe he is not the whole, and may identify with some part or other, further examination proves otherwise.

Personally, I'm voting in person on election day to ensure my vote is tabulated on that day.

That’s a good idea. I fear that the whole “it’s dangerous to vote in person” idea is a form of voter suppression, and it’s good to see someone unswayed by it.

Great. So if Trump would win the Democrats could argue that the Republicans manipulated the mail-in votes. The same kind of switcheroo that Republicans had with the FBI and Comey as we have seen. Or whatever :shade:

I’m not sure how they could do that when the place and manner of federal elections is regulated by each state.

Lmao. And our resident Trumptard is still pushing the same line too.

Yet your DNC fellow-travellers are beginning to see the error in their ways.

But you have yet to get the memo. Only about one-hundredth of 1 percent of in-person votes are rejected, whereas rejection rates of 1 percent are common with mail-in votes. If your ballot is rejected your vote doesn’t count.

And rejected ballots are on the rise. There go all your votes to the trash bin. Brilliant.

With the coronavirus creating a surge in mail-in balloting and postal delays reported across the country, the number of rejected ballots in November is projected to be significantly higher than previous elections.

If ballots are rejected at the same rate as during this year’s primaries, up to three times as many voters in November could be disenfranchised in key battleground states when compared to the last presidential election, according to an Associated Press analysis of rejected ballots. It could be even more pronounced in some urban areas where Democratic votes are concentrated and ballot rejection rates trended higher during this year’s primaries.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-ap-top-news-oh-state-wire-az-state-wire-mi-state-wire-881c098ab2847dea9d87604bab9568d6

I enjoyed your argument and reading it, but I look at it a little differently.

I would argue that the conditioning and predispositions are formed by the will. We don’t just have likes and dislikes as if they dropped in our laps. They are causa sui. What I mean is, when information enters a person’s biology it becomes a part of his domain, or at any rate, of him. Insofar as a person is his biology, he literally controls what the information does from the moment it contacts his senses. Ironically, he couldn’t do otherwise.

It would be a mistake to call this control a conscious choice, but nonetheless, the self manipulates the outcome—not as a little homunculus making decisions and pulling levers, but as nothing more or less than the entire, physical organism controlling every process within its being. Even the seemingly automatic and “subconscious” processes such as the heartbeat can be found to be determined in a similar manner. They are willed, and freely, by one thing in the universe and nothing besides.

Obviously I’m equating will, body, person and self, but only because I believe they are one and the same. I think the sooner we come to admit this the better.

NYC elections board says nearly 100,000 Brooklyn voters received wrong ballot return envelopes

A misprint by a third-party vendor caused nearly 100,000 Brooklyn voters to receive absentee ballot return envelopes with the wrong address and names printed on them, the New York City Board of Elections said, and voters will be sent new ballots.

In New York, absentee voters must place their completed absentee ballots into a return envelope, known as an "oath" envelope, that includes the voter's name, address and voter ID. The oath envelope is then placed inside a second envelope to be returned to local election officials.

Voters affected by the recent error instead received an oath envelope with the personal information of another voter, raising questions about whether the ballots would be counted in the fall election. The incident comes amid widespread discussion -- and frequent misinformation -- about the security of mail-in voting.

Sounds familiar to the case in California earlier this year.

California rejected 100,000 mail-in ballots because of mistakes

According to polling, almost twice as many Biden supporters as Trump supporters say they’ll vote by mail this year. Over 500,000 mail-in votes have been rejected this year, far outpacing 2016. Perhaps this is why Democrats have pivoted away from championing mail-in voting.

It doesn’t settle it because “the IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”

But given that the Steele dossier was largely sourced from suspected Russian spies, and payed for by the Clinton campaign, it appears that any “Russian collusion” to dig up dirt on an opponent was a Democrat affair.

An amazing letter containing declassified information was released yesterday regarding intel into the Trump/Russia saga.

• In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S . Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee. The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.

• According to his handwritten notes, former Central Intelligence Agency Director Brennan subsequently briefed President Obama and other senior national security officials on the intelligence, including the "alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016 of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services."

• On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Corney and Deputy Assistant Director o f Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding "U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S . elections as a means o f distracting the public from her use o f a private mail server."

Document

A lot of huffing about Trump on social media today, especially regarding his so-called refusal to condemn white supremacists. Though Trump has already condemned white supremacists, Wallace and Biden pushed the canard that Trump must continue to do so for some reason, even if a high profile white supremacist such as Richard Spencer threw his vote behind Biden. Wallace’s loaded questions and distortions favored Biden.

Is this post referring to itself?

Only a human can refer to itself. The post is not human. Therefor, no.

You can, a black guy in Milwaukee admits that he was deterred from voting by a fake anti Clinton add in the report.

Now we know where the real fake news was.

Was the ad standing in the way of the voting booth or something?

Trump’s consistent pissing on the political theater is something I love about him, but he interrupted too much. Biden won in my estimation. Chris Wallace was his shill.

So, why do it then?

Why campaign on facebook? Ask the winner of the last election.

Deter (verb): to discourage or restrain from acting or proceeding:
Example Sentence: Trump campaign strategy to deter millions of Black Americans from voting in 2016

Your mistake indeed.

I guess the civil rights groups who said this was voter suppression made the same mistake. Nonetheless, one cannot deter someone from voting, or suppress a vote, by showing anti-Clinton ads on Facebook.

My mistake. I thought “deterring people from voting” meant “voter suppression”. It does mean that in regular parlance but perhaps not in your world.

@Maw believes you can suppress a vote with Facebook ads, confusing voter suppression with political campaigning.

There's reason to hope she will quickly evolve from the error of such ways. After all, the constitution itself has, and was designed to.

Perhaps that’s true. We cannot know until we read her SC opinions, but she herself claims to be an originalist.

Amy Coney Barrett is a so-called “originalist”, meaning she adheres to the original text of the constitution rather than some modern interpretation of it. We can assume she’ll be more like Clarence Thomas than her predecessor.

Incoming jacobinmag article...

Our resident lawyer will believe anything so long as it conforms to his preconceived worldview. If you want to take advice from a commie go read Zizek.

It’s not a news report. But you’d know that if you watched it.

The genetic fallacy (also known as the fallacy of origins or fallacy of virtue)[1] is a fallacy of irrelevance that is based solely on someone's or something's history, origin, or source rather than its current meaning or context. This overlooks any difference to be found in the present situation, typically transferring the positive or negative esteem from the earlier context. In other words, a claim is ignored in favor of attacking or championing its source.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy