seahawk wrote:

If you do not see Russia as the enemy, he did nothing wrong.

Well, we don´t get that information, and we are certainly no more enemy than Russia.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

If you do not see Russia as the enemy, he did nothing wrong.

Well, we don´t get that information, and we are certainly no more enemy than Russia.

best regards
Thomas

Maybe Trump sees this differently. Maybe he sees Europe as less trustworthy.

seahawk wrote:

Maybe Trump sees this differently. Maybe he sees Europe as less trustworthy.

Which doesn´t matter at all, since it wasn´t his information to share. He can disclose the US arsenals nuclear codes if he wants to, but not code word material from his, now ex, intelligence partners.

best regards
Thomas

Baby steps Tommy, wait until Putin visits oval office.

Joke aside, Trump supporters doesn't care all this drama. Intellectuals may discount them as inbred, six toes third eyed hill billys. They don't care if one or three branches of government gets dismantled. But they have same number of votes.

Trust trumps truth, even assuming there is truth in what liberals are saying. Otherwise it is just another Benghazi for Trump supporters.

All he need to do something good for another voting block to get 3 Million more votes.

dtw2hyd wrote:

But they have same number of votes..

i think the diehards are dying out. No matter where you look, most of the people doing Trump propaganda have become very, very quiet in deed.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

Still trending down....

best regards
Thomas

pvjin wrote:

RoySFlying wrote:

But really, what is all the fuss about? If both the US and Russia are supposedly fighting ISIS what harm is there in sharing information that by now is dated? The whole has been told that there were plans to use laptops to perpetrate an attack. Saying that we heard it mentioned by someone in a hotel in Damascus is hardly a real threat.

Exactly. No harm done here at all, some people here just hate Russia so much they don't want to see any co-operation between Trump and Putin.

The thing is since that Putin is about 1000% smarter than Trump and not suffering from some kind of disorder, and Trump always according to himself, is smarter than all of his advisers, makes people with a bit sence little nervous.

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

But they have same number of votes..

i think the diehards are dying out. No matter where you look, most of the people doing Trump propaganda have become very, very quiet in deed.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

Still trending down....

best regards
Thomas

When you are an intellect you should know you are a minority and your thought process doesn't align with majority.

Why do you think Trump voters will read any chart or care the published approval numbers.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Why do you think Trump voters will read any chart or care the published approval numbers.

Unless there is a population explosion in the US, those polls have to reflect people turning away from Trump. Not everyone that voted for Trump is stupid.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Why do you think Trump voters will read any chart or care the published approval numbers.

Unless there is a population explosion in the US, those polls have to reflect people turning away from Trump. Not everyone that voted for Trump is stupid.

best regards
Thomas

So are you saying 100 randomly picked phone calls can predict what a hill billy going to do in next election???

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Why do you think Trump voters will read any chart or care the published approval numbers.

Unless there is a population explosion in the US, those polls have to reflect people turning away from Trump. Not everyone that voted for Trump is stupid.

best regards
Thomas

Well the voters in the midwest are getting ready to have some issues with this person that promised to save US jobs and fix NAFTA. Right now, more jobs are about to be outsourced, and NAFTA looks like it will stand, as it turns out that a lot of the economies of trump support bases depend on exporting to Canada and Mexico.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 0fbbbab693

A lot of Trumps bluster can't stand up to the very real inter dependencies on cross border trade.

KLDC10 wrote:

Dina Powell denies the report. In case it has escaped your collective attention, the President did not simply sit in the Oval Office on his own with the Russian Foreign Minister - he was surrounded by staff and advisers.

But apparently "anonymous sources" now constitute iron-clad proof.

So now that he has admitted it, he has again set up his staff by making them out to be liars. How many times will they let their boss trash their reputations, notice this time the Vice President didn't say a word. He's been burned at least twice by lying in public for Trump. He's not going to do it again, he has eyes on the Presidency either sooner (impeachment) or later.

STT757 wrote:

So now that he has admitted it, he has again set up his staff by making them out to be liars. How many times will they let their boss trash their reputations, notice this time the Vice President didn't say a word. He's been burned at least twice by lying in public for Trump. He's not going to do it again, he has eyes on the Presidency either sooner (impeachment) or later.

The tweets this morning certainly seem to carry that implication. I'm not sure why he wouldn't just let his staff deal with it on his behalf.

dtw2hyd wrote:

So are you saying 100 randomly picked phone calls can predict what a hill billy going to do in next election???

You need a few more than a 100, and this far out it is only good for a trend *now*, but statistics still is a valid method. And one that is pretty darn good if applied properly.

best regards
Thomas

KLDC10 wrote:

I'm not sure why he wouldn't just let his staff deal with it on his behalf.

In order for them to do that, he would need to tell them the truth. He can´t do that, because they may testify against him later.

best regards
Thomas

KLDC10 wrote:

STT757 wrote:

So now that he has admitted it, he has again set up his staff by making them out to be liars. How many times will they let their boss trash their reputations, notice this time the Vice President didn't say a word. He's been burned at least twice by lying in public for Trump. He's not going to do it again, he has eyes on the Presidency either sooner (impeachment) or later.

The tweets this morning certainly seem to carry that implication. I'm not sure why he wouldn't just let his staff deal with it on his behalf.

Putting Russia and collusion with the campaign aside, there's strong evidence of something being wrong with Trump. I don't know if it's dementia or something else but there definitely seems to be an organic personality disorder of some kind. The issues seem to be getting worse, for a 70 year old man who is under extreme pressure of the Presidency I don't see any way it will improve or even stabilize.

My own personal belief is he will publicly declare victory on some accomplishment, and then resign before he is even halfway through his first term. He has already made comments recently about missing his former life, and I think his family will eventually plead with him to make an exit for his health and their reputation. They will find something, tax reform, healthcare reform, immigration etc.. Get some kind of legislation approved, announce mission accomplished that he accomplished what he set out to do during the campaign and make an exit turning over the White House to Pence.

At least I hope this is what happens, this instability in not sustainable for much longer.

STT757 wrote:

He has already made comments recently about missing his former life, and I think his family will eventually plead with him to make an exit for his health and their reputation. They will find something, tax reform, healthcare reform, immigration etc...

His Twitter Account is a cry for help. With the crimes he now seems to like to confess to every day or two on twitter, he is basically begging to be impeached......

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

So are you saying 100 randomly picked phone calls can predict what a hill billy going to do in next election???

You need a few more than a 100, and this far out it is only good for a trend *now*, but statistics still is a valid method. And one that is pretty darn good if applied properly.

best regards
Thomas

French pollsters are pretty critical of the US method of doing polls, they say calling people randomly is unreliable.

In France they call a sample of people (usually 1000) that is representative of the French population (by age, job, diploma, etc.).

Aesma wrote:

French pollsters are pretty critical of the US method of doing polls, they say calling people randomly is unreliable.

It is cheap and fast.. any questions?

In France they call a sample of people (usually 1000) that is representative of the French population (by age, job, diploma, etc.).

In all fairness, there is no meaningful difference between picking a representative sample or a random sample and correct for deviations from being representative. Just the sample has to be large enough to get meaningful results. And that you can pretty much judge by the error margin, if it is +/-3% you are looking at a much worse one than one with +/-1% ... if they did their math right.

best regards
Thomas

The interesting question is who leaked the info.

The intelligence community then we are talking something close to treason and surely in violation of the contracts. But it could have been the Russians in a bid to shake up the intelligence community and have the focus more on their own, then on other matters.

seahawk wrote:

The interesting question is who leaked the info.

The intelligence community then we are talking something close to treason and surely in violation of the contracts. But it could have been the Russians in a bid to shake up the intelligence community and have the focus more on their own, then on other matters.

I think it is members of the staff that have more loyalties to the "Conservative Agenda" that would prefer to see Trump be ousted or put down in favor of moving Pence into Office.

That or the Russians leaked it back to the original holder of the intelligence, and in doing so caused a conniption fit within the intelligence circles.

It doesn't matter who is leaking, somebody leaking information within minutes.

BTT, didn't CNN WH reporter claim he was privy to this information while covering PEDban story, and discussed with WH the best way to report without revealing sources.

[twoid][/twoid]

seahawk wrote:

The interesting question is who leaked the info.

John Barron?

All intelligent community need to do is not to brief on methods and sources. Give the same summary to Trump and CNN.

Russians visiting first time, like in-laws or a team from acquiring entity, he was trying to impress. No harm no foul.

Also what is the deal with this Kissliak, every one claims he is a super spy, but he seems to meeting every one in the government. Did people forget about PNG?

I can't say I'm shocked. The man has proven himself time and again an unhinged, careless dolt. My question is simliar to the quesiton posed by others in this thread: what exactly is it going to take for his supporters to finally pull the plug? When will enough be enough? Or was he correct all along that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue, and his supporters would still rally behind him? Sadly, his supporters have shown time and again that the latter is true.

At this point, his supporters have laid bare their intentions. They're willing to put party over country to punish the "liberuls." Trump gave up highly classified info to an adversary nation, but that's OK because Hillary's emails. It's absolutely ridiculous. They're so fragile, they threw a collective temper tantrum and put a madman in charge of our country. I no longer care about insulting them, I don't care about including them in the conversation, and I'm certainly not willing to engage them. If you're willing to continue supporting a man who's singlehandedly destroying my country, then Hillary was right about you being irredeemable and you need to step aside while the rest of us pick up the pieces and move forward as a nation.

And he claimed that Hillary didn't know how to handle security and intelligence?

I have noticed that for the most part, the more vocal conservative defenders and those that tried to support Trump have gone relatively silent lately. I have had discussions with many other Republican friends and they at first tied themselves into knots to explain their support for Trump, but now have largely just stopped discussing it or avoid such.

Tugg

tommy1808 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

But they have same number of votes..

i think the diehards are dying out. No matter where you look, most of the people doing Trump propaganda have become very, very quiet in deed.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/tr ... l-ratings/

Still trending down....

best regards
Thomas

LOL.....538....HaHaHa

Weren't they the ones saying Hillary would win in a landslide?

Priceless

GDB wrote:

Mind you, these include many who want the Affordable Care Act to be maintained but are against 'Obamacare'.

Again dems are underestimating the ploy here. Let it pass in Congress and fail in Senate. Blame dems.

Republican base will be happy because they tried hard, Obamacare beneficiaries will be happy because it failed. Heartburn and sleepless nights to lot of people, but they will forget once it fails. There is no net negative effect on Trump.

Worst case he will veto his own bill.

socalgeo wrote:

LOL.....538....HaHaHa

Weren't they the ones saying Hillary would win in a landslide?

Priceless

Nope, they where actually the ones giving Trump a 28.6% chance of winning and got it bang right within their margin of error.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

socalgeo wrote:

LOL.....538....HaHaHa

Weren't they the ones saying Hillary would win in a landslide?

Priceless

Nope, they where actually the ones giving Trump a 28.6% chance of winning and got it bang right within their margin of error.

Best regards
Thomas

Ummmm ok - so according to you they said that Hillary had an 81% chance of winning. And somehow that was writhing the margin of error....

Ok , let's just agree to disagree on this...

socalgeo wrote:

Ok , let's just agree to disagree on this...

Let's instead just agree that you don't even know what an error margin is.
But I guess you are pretty good at Russian roulette, after all there is an 83.3% chance of an empty chamber "winning", so what could possibly go wrong, right?

Best regards
Thomas

socalgeo wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

socalgeo wrote:

LOL.....538....HaHaHa

Weren't they the ones saying Hillary would win in a landslide?

Priceless

Nope, they where actually the ones giving Trump a 28.6% chance of winning and got it bang right within their margin of error.

Best regards
Thomas

Ummmm ok - so according to you they said that Hillary had an 81% chance of winning. And somehow that was writhing the margin of error....

Ok , let's just agree to disagree on this...

Double check your math.... (81% versus 28.6%, I assume you are rounding up to 29% and then subtracting from 100....)

Also, still stuck on Hillary? Anything to say about Trump?

Tugg

einsteinboricua wrote:

Ahahahaha! Brilliant!

socalgeo wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

socalgeo wrote:

LOL.....538....HaHaHa

Weren't they the ones saying Hillary would win in a landslide?

Priceless

Nope, they where actually the ones giving Trump a 28.6% chance of winning and got it bang right within their margin of error.

Best regards
Thomas

Ummmm ok - so according to you they said that Hillary had an 81% chance of winning. And somehow that was writhing the margin of error....

Ok , let's just agree to disagree on this...

Another proud graduate of the Jesus Jugs Devos school of mathematics at Trump University. I'd explain statistics but apparently subtraction is a bridge too far...

dtw2hyd wrote:

GDB wrote:

Mind you, these include many who want the Affordable Care Act to be maintained but are against 'Obamacare'.

Again dems are underestimating the ploy here. Let it pass in Congress and fail in Senate. Blame dems.

Republican base will be happy because they tried hard, Obamacare beneficiaries will be happy because it failed. Heartburn and sleepless nights to lot of people, but they will forget once it fails. There is no net negative effect on Trump.

Worst case he will veto his own bill.

Actually that won't work anymore. The Republican's have failed so much on healthcare and been so strident about doing NOTHING to address issues that any law with the ACA's scope will have, that now there are gigantic issues that need to be addressed or healthcare in the USA will become a problem for many more people (even ones with insurance). This is and has always been all on the Republican's, they have just been doing a bang up job of avoiding it, but now they can't. It is in their hands, period.

The Republican's will need to address the problems and fix the ACA or replace the key elements properly. And as I have said before they really don't want the burden because there is no way (almost no way) they'll be able to address the problems or satisfy their base. And they'll lose the drum they've been beating on (or is that bleating on?) for the last eight years.

Tugg

MaverickM11 wrote:

socalgeo wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Nope, they where actually the ones giving Trump a 28.6% chance of winning and got it bang right within their margin of error.

Best regards
Thomas

Ummmm ok - so according to you they said that Hillary had an 81% chance of winning. And somehow that was writhing the margin of error....

Ok , let's just agree to disagree on this...

Another proud graduate of the Jesus Jugs Devos school of mathematics at Trump University. I'd explain statistics but apparently subtraction is a bridge too far...

Lol - you are right - my math was off. 71% not 81%. Simple mistake. No need to assassinate my character over it...

tommy1808 wrote:

Not everyone that voted for Trump is stupid.

Sounds like you are doing a U-turn, flip-flop, born-again modification

pvjin wrote:

RoySFlying wrote:

But really, what is all the fuss about? If both the US and Russia are supposedly fighting ISIS what harm is there in sharing information that by now is dated? The whole has been told that there were plans to use laptops to perpetrate an attack. Saying that we heard it mentioned by someone in a hotel in Damascus is hardly a real threat.

Exactly. No harm done here at all, some people here just hate Russia so much they don't want to see any co-operation between Trump and Putin.

This, combined with your winking Putin avatar, is the second-best thing I've read all day since David Brooks flipped tables in the New York Times

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/15/opin ... -data.html

Great piece in the NYT Op-Ed, thanks for the link. The final paragraphs are equal parts funny and terrifying. I think I now have the 2020 campaign slogan ready:

Donald Trump for President
Because there's no "there" there

The other classic descriptor about Trump, he's not a Corporatist or a Protectionist, he's an Infantilist. I think he's an Infantilist hell bent on Americide.

OA412 wrote:

I can't say I'm shocked. The man has proven himself time and again an unhinged, careless dolt. My question is simliar to the quesiton posed by others in this thread: what exactly is it going to take for his supporters to finally pull the plug? When will enough be enough? Or was he correct all along that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue, and his supporters would still rally behind him? Sadly, his supporters have shown time and again that the latter is true.

I can't speak for the far-right authoritarian and redneck coalition that makes up his core constituency, but I think he just lost a trim tab in Congress if you knomesayin

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 101744304/

dtw2hyd wrote:

Baby steps Tommy, wait until Putin visits oval office.

Joke aside, Trump supporters doesn't care all this drama. Intellectuals may discount them as inbred, six toes third eyed hill billys. They don't care if one or three branches of government gets dismantled. But they have same number of votes.

Trust trumps truth, even assuming there is truth in what liberals are saying. Otherwise it is just another Benghazi for Trump supporters.

All he need to do something good for another voting block to get 3 Million more votes.

Joke??!!! Kinda odd the only press in the room was RUSSIAN!!! And a photog to boot!

dtw2hyd wrote:

GDB wrote:

Mind you, these include many who want the Affordable Care Act to be maintained but are against 'Obamacare'.

Again dems are underestimating the ploy here. Let it pass in Congress and fail in Senate. Blame dems.

Republican base will be happy because they tried hard, Obamacare beneficiaries will be happy because it failed. Heartburn and sleepless nights to lot of people, but they will forget once it fails. There is no net negative effect on Trump.

Worst case he will veto his own bill.

And this is good governing, how?

Read what you wrote. It's something that sounds like the Keystone Cops. I feel like playing Benny Hill's theme song to that! I'm not blaming you, but THIS is what governing has come to?

Again, for the GOP ,it isn't about country, it's about their own personal power.

NY Times now reporting Trump asked Comey to end the Flynn investigation. That's the definition of obstruction of justice. Well, it would be for anyone but this loser and his mindless sheep.

Hillis wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

GDB wrote:

Mind you, these include many who want the Affordable Care Act to be maintained but are against 'Obamacare'.

Again dems are underestimating the ploy here. Let it pass in Congress and fail in Senate. Blame dems.

Republican base will be happy because they tried hard, Obamacare beneficiaries will be happy because it failed. Heartburn and sleepless nights to lot of people, but they will forget once it fails. There is no net negative effect on Trump.

Worst case he will veto his own bill.

And this is good governing, how?

Read what you wrote. It's something that sounds like the Keystone Cops. I feel like playing Benny Hill's theme song to that! I'm not blaming you, but THIS is what governing has come to?

Again, for the GOP ,it isn't about country, it's about their own personal power.

Dems should ask themselves two questions 1) Can they impeach Trump 2) Can they win 2020. Answer to both is NO.

Any attempt to impeach will energize Trump supporters, they will show up in droves and make him win. I think Dems will definitely try to impeach him on Comey memo and hand out 24 seats to Reps.

While Dems are making lot of noise, there is no evidence base is energized and will show to vote. It may just be noise.

Why I enjoy his presidency, USA is a clean slate now, no rules, no obligations, there is no "right way" to do things, even the crazy leaders around the world cannot predict what US going to do.

No country can nurse on us forever. No one can play us.

You are one tweet away from BFF to mortal enemy and in reverse.

Once we ride this out, absolutely no burden on future presidents and entire country.

jetero wrote:

NY Times now reporting Trump asked Comey to end the Flynn investigation. That's the definition of obstruction of justice. Well, it would be for anyone but this loser and his mindless sheep.

We're through ALL the holes in the Swiss Cheese now!

The new White House mantra is lather, rinse, and repeat.

Except instead of just the White House staff, make it the staff AND his supporters, and after this is done, wait until a new scandal is reported.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Dems should ask themselves two questions 1) Can they impeach Trump 2) Can they win 2020. Answer to both is NO.

Any attempt to impeach will energize Trump supporters, they will show up in droves and make him win. I think Dems will definitely try to impeach him on Comey memo and hand out 24 seats to Reps.

While Dems are making lot of noise, there is no evidence base is energized and will show to vote. It may just be noise.

Why I enjoy his presidency, USA is a clean slate now, no rules, no obligations, there is no "right way" to do things, even the crazy leaders around the world cannot predict what US going to do.

No country can nurse on us forever. No one can play us.

You are one tweet away from BFF to mortal enemy and in reverse.

Once we ride this out, absolutely no burden on future presidents and entire country.

Are you in Special Ed?

wingman wrote:

Are you in Special Ed?

Well, I have two Master Degrees with Artificial Intelligence major among others, if it counts.