leh-nerd skin-erd

I’ve never understood this. Let’s take the war waged on freedom waved by the DOJ/FBI, and propped up by prominent members of the establishment media against President Trump. What’s the appropriate presidential demeanor when you’re accused of treason, and you feel the National press is in on the assault? We can break it down by year if you prefer. What does one say in year one, obviously thinking no one will actually believe this absurd story. Soon though, you find it engulfing 25% of your administration. By year two, would you expect the presidential demeanor to shift a bit, become more relaxed as 50% of your administration wasted away? Year three, as the scandal of a potentially treasonous American president moved ever forward, taking valuable time away from the things you were hoping to accomplish, 75% of the most important job in the world wasting away, allegations, fbi raids, governmental tyranny at its worst, how would one normally act at that stage? Who is an exemplary Presidential president in your mind, and what scandal would you suggest they weathered that compared to “Trump is guilty of treason?”.

The word on the street is that you have been diagnosed with Small Cox. (Apoogies, that is a staple amongst my peers and colleagues for 4 decades a s still draws a laugh now and again. And yes, my peers and colleagues = my dopey but lovable friends.)

Oh no, YOU don't get to ask that question...not up in here...NOT UP IN HERE!

Thanks for clarifying his role. Then he was even worse at his job than I initially thought. He was Edsel-bad.

Damn it BG! I was not going to click on the Weijia Jiang link, but then you indicated she was ogle-worthy. I decided to move on. Then I thought "Why would BG think men would want to ogle this lady? What's going on with that?'. Still, I held out. I'm focusing on my conference call. Seconds turn into minutes. Minutes turned into more minutes. I was onto the next page, when another poster quoted you. There it was..."ogle". I cracked. I clicked the link. I feel dirty and ashamed. And intrigued. Her twitter photo makes her look like she could be the evil genius behind a reprogramming camp outside Beijing. She looks mean, yet, behind her eyes is a hint of ruthlessness. That has traditionally not been a deal-breaker for me. I'm trying to be a better man, and you're not helping.

You could be right, but it's irrelevant to me one way or the other. Perhaps there is no agenda whatsoever from the typical pollster. Perhaps it's was an honest miss. I try to consider the agenda of the person/people providing me the intel, see how it fits my views, and go from there. At the end of the day...pollsters are in the sales business. As a result, I'm skeptical. Regardless, the simple fact is he was wrong, and wildly so. If Transplant thinks I'm a (*^*&%^$^#for pointing that out, I'll find my way to make peace with it and move on.

I think you are so tied up with emotional baggage you lose track of some of the fundamentals of simple human interaction. You're so busy tossing around insults, making assumptions and as a result appear closed-minded and overwrought. Let's try again. You didn't suggest The Gospel According To Nate was an alternative to other polling data, the opinions of others, you stated as a matter of fact including your declarative statement "Except this is wrong" when bills59 shared his thoughts. Given your stance, I thought it sensible to check out your source, and found the link to Silver's commentary on the election of 2016. Why does it trouble you that I brought that up? Did I misrepresent what he said? Your commentary can best be summed up as "My guy is always right!" and you're exasperated when someone points out the obvious, that he's not? All I'm suggesting is that some of this stuff isn't all that complicated, and as a pollster, I'd think you would want to make your bones on the difficult to project, not the slam dunks. Nate Silver missed the biggest political upset in the history of the country, and missed by a wide margin. He wasn't close, his data was clearly skewed, and your explanation and reasoning is "He was only wrong because everyone else was too!'. Call me crazy, but isn't it the job of the pollster to stand out from the crowd? When you first started dating your wife, did you go with "I have the same limitations as everyone else!!!". You know who else was right on the outcome of many of the elections cited? Me. I had John McCain getting trounced 4 minutes into the first debate. I had Romney getting rolled because he's an empty suit who had virtually no idea how to press an advantage with a vulnerable candidate, and who misunderstood that taking the high road did not mean allowing yourself to be cuckolded by your rival. 2018 was a no brainer, especially in light of the full on Russian assault by the dems, the DOJ, FBI and msm with a fairy tale that incredibly, people believed. I missed on 2016 and Trump, just like Natestradaumus, but it's been perpetually satisfying ever since to remind people that polls are as good as the data that goes into them, and even then, sometimes not so much. Let's agree to disagree. I know you have fingered Joe Biden to be the next President, and you might be right. I also think you may have an Al Roker fetish, but to each his own.

Is it the slick imagery that gives credence to his post? I love the Hill-o-Graphic but old Nate had Hillary winning by 19 laps, and she was gassed by early October. Maybe though, this time he's right? https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ Who will win the presidency? Chance of winning Hillary Clinton 71.4% Donald Trump 28.6% Chance of winning Hillary Clinton 71.4% Donald Trump 28.6% Chance of winning

To a certain extent, the Debbie Downer approach is understandable. These people seem to struggle with any creative thought and simply follow the lead when the lead is there to follow. Imagine truly believing the "Trump is a Russian mole" story. In retrospect, how silly was the story, and how gullible did you have to be to buy it? You have leaders like Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff, Jerry Nadler all telling them that Trump is a candidate of Russian origin. Imagine hearing Slim James Comey--a guy who went our of his way to leak confidential information to avoid answering to, well, someone like James Comey--saying it. Imagine hearing a former CIA director like John Brennan literally call the President of the US treasonous, and to have reporter after report cite anonymous deep cover sources that say the same thing. Imagine a massive investigation costing millions of dollars run by anti-Trump prosecutors kicking in doors, staging early morning raids on 70 year old men and leaking time and place for maximum optics. Imagine the full weight and power of the US Government willing to crush anybody that dares to oppose the investigation, and willing to offer sweetheart deals to "witnesses" who were willing to make up stories--any type of story that would serve the intended purpose of the "witch hunt" namely, to get Trump. Honestly, I don't know if they bought the story right from the start, it it took a while or if they caved to the peer pressure of like-minded friends and associates. However they got there, they jumped right in and bought the whole shebang hook, line and sinker. Imagine the anticipation these people had as the Mueller testimony was scheduled. It was time for the government to pony up, to pay them back for their faithful subservience. Imagine the joy they must have felt when finally the day was upon them when Trump would be outed as a Russian spy, created in a lab in Leningrad 70 years earlier and sent to the US to hide in plain site, an amazing caricature of a business tycoon ready to do Russia's bidding. They really had to be almost giddy to prove the millions of Trump supporters wrong--these arrogant, supposedly well-educated Obama/Clinton submissives ready to be validated. Then, imagine Robert Mueller, the hero of the revolution, he comes out after three years, $40m and having dumpster-dived a whole lot of garbage cans and basically says "I'm old, I'm tired, I'm not 100% sure where I am, or what this is all about, but we got nothing. Free Donald Trump.". Amazing. In a second, they realized they got massively tea-bagged by the all people they placed all their trust in. The funniest part about it is that all the dems did was count on their ignorance, count on their lack of creative thought, and recognition that these dullards would not recognize a slightly reimagined "Manchurian Candidate". That's gotta leave a mark.

Sorry Goat, I used "ergo" and the first person to use it automatically wins bigly.

As does yours, ipso facto, ergo, full circle, everyone wins.

I think I'm failing to understand you though that muffled goat head. Bongino wants people to feel guilty? I think given his status as a former police officer and secret service agent, Bongino is less on the "you should feel guilty" bandwagon and more on the "go f yourself" side of things. Potato, poh-tah-toe I suppose.

I think I understand conceptually, but there are industries and people knocking the snot of the financial side of this deal. I was reading about the Harvard Board of trustee' reply to President Trump's request to return $9m in aid given the true financial status of the institution. The reply is...uh, no, we need this money. For some it's a windfall, for others, the pain runs deep. Obviously for Dan Bongino, it runs deep.

Apparently, he feels the same about people like you as evidenced by his commentary. Everyone wins.

The guy lost a friend he’s apparently had for several decades, obviously feels strongly about the circumstances. An emotional response is pretty typical in that scenario. But, what you’ve said is true...the emotion is about how he feels after his friend took his own life. I think it makes him a human being.

I’ve said this before on a variety of topics. The government leaks like a sieve, the major news outlets trip over themselves to push the latest anonymous leak like its gospel, only to see it fizzle out and die. That said...there were no hero’s of the medical community spilling secrets about the wave of death about to come? 60 minutes....CNN......The WaPo all were on the wrong side of this issue? There were no sources screaming out to the American people or requesting admittance to a congressional committee? No brave whistleblower to defeat the empirical tyrant who cares not for the people? China, the WORLD Health Organization and the connected mainstream media conspired to &$#@ the American people. I’m not even certain the MSM did so intentionally, I think generally speaking unfettered ideology leaves them blind to many issues they might otherwise see. This much is obvious: Trump is the imperfect and stunningly unlikely hero of the American people yet again. I always laugh when he says “People are saying they never thought it could be done...they’ve never seen anything like it!”. All true.

"dog whistle" is simply a made up phrase that means something only to a person who has a particular point of view. Imo, dog whistle is a dog whistle for making %$## up and trying to make others feel bad.

I don't know about that. You think that it's unreasonable to speculate that the initial transmission came from China, from Wuhan, and that the Chinese government was less than forthcoming about the who/what/when/where/why? Meanwhile, it's 100% appropriate to rip apart/mock/lecture/second guess everything done/said/imagined here in our own country? What about the potential impact on Trump supporters, say like a Nicholas Sandman? As for the family nearby, "Organized crime" typically implies Italian syndicate, no? If the triad from China killed the people, why on earth do we have to dance around it? And why would we want some people jumping to the conclusion that the Italian syndicate s knocking off families near Albany? I think if I follow your line of thinking, to avoid any one getting their feelings hurt, reporters and the police should just report "some people did some bad things to some other people". I feel like I heard this lately, and it made me uncomfortable given the subject matter. As for Trump, Wuhan and China-- an inflammatory comment is entirely in the eye of the beholder. Did it incite you to go make fun of Asian-American children? It didn't and has not struck me like that at all. Were you out throwing stones at the little Santa Barbarba who children were rolling bones on the street corner during the Gotti trial? I'd bet not. I've listened to many of the press conferences and while I would acknowledge that there is always someone looking to get upset with someone, that's simply the way it is. Look at you--you were taking shots at poor old Jared Kushner just for being some guy's son-in -aw. I can actually say with a fair degree of confidence that by and large, the vast majority of Americans are not out harrassing children for their heritage over DJT referring to the virus as having started in China We don't learn and grow by pretending something that is, is not.

I agree--I saw this as very complicated and something that would be difficult to prepare for at the state and federal level. However, from what I have seen, heard and read, it seems that FEMA worked with the admin to rip up the old playbook and design on the fly. Looking back from where we are right now, plenty of blame to go around if thats what someone is looking for, but by and large they adapted and got &^%$ done.

Interesting. I can understand the Kung Flu version, though I personally think it's pretty humorous, but I think transparency is both reasonable and necessary. A few years ago, a family was murdered not far from where I live. Family of 4, Mom and Dad with two middle-school aged children. The murder remains unsolved, but the scene was by all accounts horrific, with a message being sent based on the order of the murders and the brutality of it all. It seems the conventional wisdom was that the father was involved in illegal activity with the Chinese triads, and there have been reports of same in the media. The general consensus is that there was no threat to other members of the community for that reason. Would you consider that to be unreasonable reporting..given that the possibility of mistrust in the community? I don't really see an alternative, with this particular virus... especially given the international coverage of the "Wuhan Flu" and "Chinese Virus" as initially reported just about everywhere.

It's one of the foundations of our democracy. Separate note--are you comfortable with others calling Covid-19 the Wuhan Virus, or Chinese Virus? with Presdent Trump referencing China in his press briefings?

I think President Trump took the threat seriously, I think FEMA was prepared, I think it was an excellent decision to invoke the DPA, I think the emergency stockpile was appropriately utilized and Jaren Kushner did a good job of explaining it to the American people, I think President Trump has shown the exceptional leadership skills often very difficult to develop after a lifetime/career in what amounts to the climate-controlled cubicle farm of public employment, and he's done an exceptional job of hi-lighting the problems our government (federal and state) has in communicating and working together during a crisis. I think he's done an excellent job pointing out the flaws in planning on the state level, the challenges with knee jerk reactions on requests to FEMA from the states, and in bringing the story directly to the American people via daily pressers and twitter.

Good stuff DR. I'm less convinced that anyone falls any day, it just seems that the corruption is simply part of life in Washington. A friend of mine is a well-connected attorney from Long Island, at one point very well-connected at the NYS lottery. He told me that with few exceptions, corruption and graft are just a way of life in NY politics. I don't think surprises anyone, but it's damn disheartening when you hear it from someone in the know. With all the supposed 'journalists' doing the Lord's work on keeping us safe, and it's one big cesspool that they live, swim in and get rich along the way. In Washington, it's like that on steroids. I like Barr, I think he's a warrior in the great war, I just don't feel it. Then again, does it really matter? After all...the honorable Michael Cohen is Tibsy's deep throat...his Sammy the Bull aka Rat...and he's going to take down Trump in 2058.. Actually, if I follow Tibsy's line of thought, Trump will be indicted on new charges after he gets done serving time for sexual assault, for bribery with respect to strippers, after he serves a life sentence for being a Russian operative, and certainly after his removal from office earlier this year after impeachment. Thanks for the recap!

In a perfect world, the perpetrators are indicted and media coverage begins just prior to the election. I have no issue whatsoever with this hitting at that time. In fact, given a choice between outing liars/cheats/thieves like Biden, Rice, Obama, Brennan, Clapper et al mid-term, or 3-4 months before the election, I'm all for maximum political effect. @Tiberius "rush" to judgement is hysterical though.