[Al Phalpha]

I'll admit right up front that polls can be confusing, as evidenced by the polls in 2016 which had Hillary Clinton winning the Presidency by a wide margin, yet she lost to Trump. Now, according to the Real Clear Politics average, only 25% of Americans polled say that the country is headed in the "right direction"; Kamala Harris had (supposedly) a major role in leading the country in that (wrong) direction, yet (also supposedly) she leads Trump in most of the major polls for election on November 5. I don't get it. How can you lead the country in the WRONG direction for over three years and miraculously turn it into the RIGHT direction overnight? I'm not saying the polls are wrong; I'm just saying as the King of Siam said, "It is a puzzlement."

[johnu]

I'm a big fan of the Rachel Maddow show, even though it is only on 1 day a week these days. I especially like her opening monologue which frequently goes into depth on some seemingly odd happening in history that has the audience wondering where is this going?, and then tying things together at the end with something going on in today's world. On those days, unless you have extensively studied that subject, you will probably learn something new.

Rachel Maddow talks about Timothy Mellon

Last weeks episode talks about an expedition in 2012 to search for the remains of Amelia Earhart!!!

The short story is that a very rich person contacts the expedition leader and offers $1 million if he can join the expedition. As expected after 75 years without a trace, nothing is found. In the aftermath of the failed expedition, the millionaire claims that he saw airplane wreckage in previous expedition underwater photos including a banjo, severed hand, 75 year old rolls of toilet paper!!!, and the heads of Earhart and her navigator in cellophane bags connected by a hose to a nitrogen tank. Needless to say, nobody else could "see" those crash artifacts.

BTW, that millionaire was none other than Timothy Mellon, heir to the Mellon banking fortune and he sued the expedition company because they didn't investigate the area of the pictures that only Mellon thought were related to the Earhart crash. Not surprisingly Mellon lost his lawsuit, but he dragged out the proceeding which financially damaged the expedition company.

What does this have to do with today's political world? Oh, Mellon donated $75 million to Trump's campaign making him the single biggest contributor, and also donated $25 million to RFK Jr, also making him the biggest contributor to that campaign.

[johnu]

Al Phalpha, on 2024-August-05, 18:42, said:

I'll admit right up front that polls can be confusing, as evidenced by the polls in 2016 which had Hillary Clinton winning the Presidency by a wide margin, yet she lost to Trump. Now, according to the Real Clear Politics average, only 25% of Americans polled say that the country is headed in the "right direction"; Kamala Harris had (supposedly) a major role in leading the country in that (wrong) direction, yet (also supposedly) she leads Trump in most of the major polls for election on November 5. I don't get it. How can you lead the country in the WRONG direction for over three years and miraculously turn it into the RIGHT direction overnight? I'm not saying the polls are wrong; I'm just saying as the King of Siam said, "It is a puzzlement."

The question you should be asking is whether America is better off now than it was 4 years ago. The answer isn't up for discussion as the facts speak for themselves. 4 years ago America was in a recession that only the Great Depression was worse. The details of the recession are a matter of public record.

Sure, there are lingering problems in America's recovery. As the economy restarted in 2021 and 2022, supply failed to keep up with demand, Russia invaded Ukraine, causing inflation to spike, although it has returned to normal levels. What is Convicted Felon Trump's "solution" to inflation??? He's against it. Specifically, he would lower prices!!! Duhhhh. His tariffs, tax cuts for the rich, crackdowns on immigration are expected to increase inflation. Also, tariffs hit the middle and low income classes the most since they spend a higher percentage of their income on goods.

You claim to be an American who's lived here forever. How is it possible that you know next to nothing about the relationship between president and vice-president? The president and only the president sets policy. The VP may consult on many decisions, but as Truman once said, the buck stops here. Once the president makes a lawful decision, it's the VP's job to support that decision. When the president makes an illegal, unlawful decision like trying to overthrow the results of a presidential election, it's the VP's job to support the Constitution like Pence did and follow the law. VP's are free to run their own campaigns and differentiate themselves from the previous president. As to why Harris is leading Trump in some polls now, Trump's constant barrage against Biden's age is now boomeranging, as Trump's own cognitive decline and increasingly apparent dementia is now front and center.

As for crime, yes, there was a spike in crime, exemplified by the 88 felony charges against Convicted Felon Trump who has been convicted on 34 of them. And crime did spike in the aftermath of Trump's last year in office but as the economy has recovered crime has also returned to normal. It takes news companies a while to figure this out as crime gets good ratings, while organizations like Fox Propaganda Channel will continue to mislead the public about crime figures. I will note that if Trump does get elected, there will be an immediate stop to stories about a nationwide crime wave, not because the crime figures will change but because a crime wave doesn't fit their narrative.

[pilowsky]

per Axios:

5 mins ago -
Politics & Policy
Harris picks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as VP in 2024 election

[kenberg]

pilowsky, on 2024-August-06, 07:08, said:

per Axios:

5 mins ago -
Politics & Policy
Harris picks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as VP in 2024 election

Tim Walz. You betcha,

[kenberg]

Al Phalpha, on 2024-August-05, 18:42, said:

I'll admit right up front that polls can be confusing, as evidenced by the polls in 2016 which had Hillary Clinton winning the Presidency by a wide margin, yet she lost to Trump. Now, according to the Real Clear Politics average, only 25% of Americans polled say that the country is headed in the "right direction"; Kamala Harris had (supposedly) a major role in leading the country in that (wrong) direction, yet (also supposedly) she leads Trump in most of the major polls for election on November 5. I don't get it. How can you lead the country in the WRONG direction for over three years and miraculously turn it into the RIGHT direction overnight? I'm not saying the polls are wrong; I'm just saying as the King of Siam said, "It is a puzzlement."

To quote from another long ago musical, I'm just a cockeyed optimist. Trump our next president? Every whipperwill is selling me a bill and telling me it just ain't so.

People have been waiting. Harris and Walz are young (well, by comparisin), energetic and intelligent. And they have the best interest of the country at heart. Donald Trump has never had an interest in anything other than Donald Trump. Stormy Daniels does not really count as an interest. Of course no one should cross Trump. "Little Brian" Kemp is the "disloyal" governor of Georgia. Apparently this awful person actually believes that Biden won the presidential election in 2020. We can't have that. And so on. And so on. And so on.

Cults flourish, peak, recede. I have a little cautious optimism that the Trump cult is enterring the receesion phase. He is an awful person. It's as simple as that.Trump is awful, not Little Brian.

Oh. BTW. Trump's main canpaign messaging consists of name calling so it's ok to say he is awful. I admit he is much better at name calling than I am. One of his few well developed abilities.But Vance might outdo us both. Cat Ladies. That's good.

[awm]

There are a few things to understand about this election:

1. Americans are vaguely unhappy about the state of the world. This is driven in part by inflation and wars overseas, and in part by news reports suggesting an invasion at the border (not really true) and a crime epidemic in Americas cities (definitely not true). It’s easy to see why they might answer “wrong way” on a question about how things are going. But they are more likely to vote on their personal economic situation, which for most people s quite good.

2. Nonetheless Kamala Harris might be struggling if this election were solely a referendum on the current administration. However, by nominating a former president the Republicans have made this more of a choice election. Many Americans remember how things were at the end of the Trump administration (thousands dying from COVID while the president suggests horse paste, Trump trying to overthrow the government to stay in power, etc).

Vague unhappiness about things happening in the news is one thing, voting a felon back in the White House so he can repurpose the government for “retribution” against his enemies is quite another.

[PassedOut]

pilowsky, on 2024-August-06, 07:08, said:

per Axios:

5 mins ago -
Politics & Policy
Harris picks Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz as VP in 2024 election

An excellent choice, in my opinion: progressive and articulate, steady and outgoing, not harsh and not extreme.

[kenberg]

Reuter lists comments from various people about the choice of Walz

https://www.reuters....ent-2024-08-06/

Here are some:

Trump: "TIM WALZ WOULD BE THE WORST VP IN HISTORY! Even worse than Dangerously Liberal and Crooked Kamala Harris - HE'S THAT BAD. He'll unleash HELL ON EARTH and open our borders to the worst criminals imaginable. He'll rubber stamp Kamala's GREEN NEW SCAM and light TRILLIONS of dollars on fire."

Vance: "The biggest problem with the Tim Walz pick, it's not Tim Walz himself. It's what it says about Kamala Harris, that when given the opportunity she will bend the knee to the most radical elements of her party."

Joe Manchin: "All of the candidates were strong and any one of them would have been a great pick, but I can think of no one better than Governor Walz to help bring our country closer together and bring balance back to the Democratic Party."

I grew up in Minnesota but that was a long time ago so I browsed on Wikipedia.

An excerpt, on his time as Representative of a Republican leaning district:

Quote

He beat incumbent Republican Gil Gutknecht in the general election on November 7, and took office on January 3, 2007. After the election, Politico described Gutknecht as having been caught "off guard", and Walz as having "resolved never to get caught like that himself.... He packaged himself as a moderate from Day One, built an office centered on constituent service and carved out a niche as a tireless advocate for veterans."^[32]

Walz was reelected in 2008 with 62% of the vote, becoming only the second non-Republican to win a second full term in the district. He won a third term in 2010, defeating state representative Randy Demmer with 50% of the vote. He was reelected again in 2012, 2014, and 2016.^[33]

And then

Quote

Walz was ranked the 7th-most bipartisan House member during the 114th Congress (and the most bipartisan member from Minnesota) in the Bipartisan Index created by the Lugar Center and the McCourt School of Public Policy, which ranks members of Congress by measuring how often their bills attract co-sponsors from the opposite party and how often they co-sponsor bills by members of the opposite party.

He is serving his second term as governor of Minnesota. We Minnesotans tend to avoid extremes, well, unless the state has changed a lot since I lived there. We would be unlikely to twice elect someone who would release HELL ON EARTH. Maybe Minnesota has changed, but not that much. Manchin's comment appears to be closer to the truth.


As I say, I can be a cockeyed optimist and my optimism suggests that these insane rants of Trump will actually help the Harris-Walz campaign. I believe that there are more than a few Republican strategists who agree with me but getting DT to tone down hiis rants is like trying to stop the winds of a tornado. He is who he is.

[pilowsky]

Lake Wobegon is back in the game.
Kinda funny lookin' though.

[Winstonm]

Walz is a terrific choice. He is the antithesis of Trump, making Trump look small in comparison.

[kenberg]

pilowsky, on 2024-August-06, 16:13, said:

Lake Wobegon is back in the game.
Kinda funny lookin' though.

A bit ike a moose in a china shop. But I like moose.

[Al Phalpha]

kenberg, on 2024-August-06, 08:31, said:

To quote from another long ago musical, I'm just a cockeyed optimist. Trump our next president? Every whipperwill is selling me a bill and telling me it just ain't so.

People have been waiting. Harris and Walz are young (well, by comparisin), energetic and intelligent. And they have the best interest of the country at heart. Donald Trump has never had an interest in anything other than Donald Trump. Stormy Daniels does not really count as an interest. Of course no one should cross Trump. "Little Brian" Kemp is the "disloyal" governor of Georgia. Apparently this awful person actually believes that Biden won the presidential election in 2020. We can't have that. And so on. And so on. And so on.

Cults flourish, peak, recede. I have a little cautious optimism that the Trump cult is enterring the receesion phase. He is an awful person. It's as simple as that.Trump is awful, not Little Brian.

Oh. BTW. Trump's main canpaign messaging consists of name calling so it's ok to say he is awful. I admit he is much better at name calling than I am. One of his few well developed abilities.But Vance might outdo us both. Cat Ladies. That's good.

Thank you for your response. I respect your opinion. But my question remains. If only 25% of the country thinks the country is headed in the right direction, why do the polls show that Kamala is leading in the polls? She is Biden's surrogate yet Biden, who was sidelined by the party, endorsed her to carry on his vision...which only 25% think is "right" for the country. I, like you, probably don't have much longer to live. So I'll not grieve over it. I'll leave it to my offspring. I will say to your assessment of Harris/Walz having "the best interest of the country at heart" my assessment is that they only have the best interest of The Party at heart. A sad state of affairs in my opinion. I agree with you, wholeheartedly, that Trump is a jerk. I only wish that he'd stick to the issues rather than the childish name-calling bullshit. Tell me how you plan to make it better, not how the other guy made it worse.

[thepossum]

I must admit to being pleasantly surprised and wonder where they have been hiding him
At least Gov Walz (maybe VP Walz) can make us all laugh while the planet falls in a heap
I make no comment on US politics at all other than its rare to have a news item make you smile

[kenberg]

Al Phalpha, on 2024-August-06, 18:35, said:

Thank you for your response. I respect your opinion. But my question remains. If only 25% of the country thinks the country is headed in the right direction, why do the polls show that Kamala is leading in the polls? She is Biden's surrogate yet Biden, who was sidelined by the party, endorsed her to carry on his vision...which only 25% think is "right" for the country. I, like you, probably don't have much longer to live. So I'll not grieve over it. I'll leave it to my offspring. I will say to your assessment of Harris/Walz having "the best interest of the country at heart" my assessment is that they only have the best interest of The Party at heart. A sad state of affairs in my opinion. I agree with you, wholeheartedly, that Trump is a jerk. I only wish that he'd stick to the issues rather than the childish name-calling bullshit. Tell me how you plan to make it better, not how the other guy made it worse.

The Harris enthusiasm, and now the Harris/Walz enthusiasm, surprised me and many others. I have some thoughts but my to daughters will soon arrive for a family lunch so I'll be brief. I think people watched Biden physicaly and verbally stumble, and watched Trump rant, thought "These are my choices?", and now see their hope for better being granted. Most people, me included, are not prepared to speak at length on policy matters. Harris/Walz bring something that they very much feel has been lacking, and they are responding.

More later.

[mycroft]

Wow. Someone in the 20-seriously-20s is saying that the Democrats - the "family argument masquerading as a political party" Democrats - are putting Party over Country? Do I hear a Fiddler? On the Capitol Roof?

"Projection...Projection! [one, two, three, four, one] Projection!"

What next? Are we going to hear "they don't want to Represent, they want to Rule"</beau>?

Well, either that or we have somebody here who believes that "compromise for the good of the country" is "accept what the Republicans want, and point out that doing nothing would be worse." Which, I will admit, has been the talking point of the "Good Centrist Media" (and the "Look Reasonable on Camera" half of the Republican Party) for decades, so you can't blame some people for believing it. And they've gotten away with it, too, because of dreams of a BiPartisan past. I still disagree with the move (at least the timing of the move), but getting rid of "I remember the days when it was possible to have reasonable discussions in government with the members across the aisle" Biden might just have been the best thing for winning the votes of the massive numbers of people who weren't alive in that era (or whose opinions and rights weren't "reasonable" back then either).

Or, you know, it's a talking point spewing astroturfer who doesn't even play bridge [ETA: myhands shows he does, a bit.] Still waiting to see an on-topic comment. Any one. Any thread but this one. There's a nice easy one to go to right now, you don't even have to put your declarer skills on display. What's your opinion on weak 2s with a side 4-card major?

[barmar]

Al Phalpha, on 2024-August-06, 18:35, said:

Thank you for your response. I respect your opinion. But my question remains. If only 25% of the country thinks the country is headed in the right direction, why do the polls show that Kamala is leading in the polls? She is Biden's surrogate yet Biden, who was sidelined by the party, endorsed her to carry on his vision...which only 25% think is "right" for the country. I, like you, probably don't have much longer to live. So I'll not grieve over it. I'll leave it to my offspring. I will say to your assessment of Harris/Walz having "the best interest of the country at heart" my assessment is that they only have the best interest of The Party at heart. A sad state of affairs in my opinion. I agree with you, wholeheartedly, that Trump is a jerk. I only wish that he'd stick to the issues rather than the childish name-calling bullshit. Tell me how you plan to make it better, not how the other guy made it worse.

First of all, I don't think she's leading in the polls, it's about even.

As for why, I think there are a few reasons.

She is a refreshing change of pace from the same old white guys. Many democrats were not enthusiastic about Biden because of his age and the age-related problems he seemed to be having. Harris isn't seen as just his surrogate, she's a good replacement for him. Democrats wanted someone they wouldn't be ashamed of voting for.

She's energetic, and she has energized the democratic base. I think enthusiasm for her, especially among young people, is not unlike the enthusiasm for Obama during his first campaign.

I hope this will be enough so she can win the battleground states.

[hrothgar]

Al Phalpha, on 2024-August-06, 18:35, said:

Thank you for your response. I respect your opinion. But my question remains. If only 25% of the country thinks the country is headed in the right direction, why do the polls show that Kamala is leading in the polls?

Perhaps a simplistic measure like "right direct / wrong direction" isn't a particularly good way to understand nuanced questions...

And perhaps a wrong direction number that has (pretty much) been hovering down in the 20s since COVID hit isn't a good way to evaluate a variety of different leaders

[Al Phalpha]

mycroft, on 2024-August-07, 10:03, said:

you don't even have to put your declarer skills on display. What's your opinion on weak 2s with a side 4-card major?

Frankly, I fail to see any correlation between my declarer skills and my political philosophy. But since you asked........
1. I will never preempt 2♠holding 4 hearts.
2. I will never preempt 2♥holding 4 spades.
3. I will never preempt 2♦period. There are too many other good uses for a 2♦ opening than as a preempt. A 2♦preempt is the most worthless bid in the game imo.
This discussion probably belongs in another thread. I'm sure Barmar will move it (or delete it entirely). But since you brought it up I felt compelled to answer your question.

[kenberg]

About shiftng attitudes and poll numbers: Apparently DT posted the following on his Truth Social site (I don't plan to sign on).

Quote

"What are the chances that Crooked Joe Biden, the WORST President in the history of the U.S., whose Presidency was Unconstitutionally STOLEN from him by Kamabla, Barrack HUSSEIN Obama, Crazy Nancy Pelosi, Shifty Adam Schiff, Cryin' Chuck Schumer, and others on the Lunatic Left, CRASHES the Democrat National Convention and tries to take back the Nomination, beginning with challenging me to another DEBATE," the post read. "He feels that he made a historically tragic mistake by handing over the U.S. Presidency, a COUP, to the people in the World he most hates, and he wants it back, NOW!!!"

The easiest thing to say is that people are tired of this. But I think there is more to say.It looks nuts.Calling it weird is too weak. Back with Biden at the debate an ordinary person could watch Biden and say "uh,oh, something is wrong here". That same ordinary person can read this and have the same reaction. People might disagree with things Harris or Walz say but DT's statement is just dismissed as a drunken rant.

People, more than a few, are finally seeing DT for what he really is, and they don't like it.

Biden's troubles at the debate caused people to think that whether they agree with Biden's policies or not, maybe electing him to four years in office was risky. And now, with Trump, they could well conclude the same. We now have a new candidate of whom we can say "She is showing no signs of dementia". In our current situation, this is a big plus. And, frim what I have seen, she may have further appeal.