Trump Tells FCC To Punish Journalist For Calling His Election Results 'Mixed' (arstechnica.com) 233
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: President Trump yesterday demanded that the Federal Communications Commission punish or rebuke an NBC journalist for saying he has "mixed results" in his election endorsements. In the latest example of how Trump is using the FCC to harass reporters and news organizations that he dislikes, he said Meet the Press host Kristen Welker "will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment" for what he claimed was a "purposeful inaccuracy." "Kristen Welker, the Unpopular 'Hostess' of the once great Meet the Press, now considered Meet the Fake Press, just stated that Donald Trump has 'mixed results' on his Endorsements of Candidates, when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100% for the U.S. Senate, and 98% for the U.S. House, recently and over the longterm. How can anyone be allowed to say this, working for freely given Public Airwaves? Results are attached. Because of this purposeful inaccuracy, she will be reported to the FCC for rebuke or punishment," Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.
A separate post from Trump yesterday said, "THE FAKE POLLS USED BY OUR CROOKED MEDIA ARE OUT OF CONTROL, AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE ABOUT IT. FCC TO THE RESCUE! President DJT." Trump also posted a rant on Friday about New York Times journalist Maggie Haberman, calling her "an unattractive person both inside and out" who "should be forced to turn over any and all money that she's made through her fake reporting on me." Trump referred to Haberman throughout his post as "Maggot Haberman." Trump's post about Welker included an image purporting to show he has near-perfect results in his endorsements this year. "The Press is a Disgrace to our Nation, and I hope that Chairman Brendan Carr, and the fine people of his Commission, will take this Threat to our Country very seriously," Trump wrote. Perhaps indicating that he will refer additional journalists for FCC punishment, Trump wrote that Welker "is not the only one. The Radical Left News is going out of their way to harass, demean, and libel anything 'TRUMP.'" The FCC website says the commission "cannot prevent the broadcast of any particular point of view," and that it "generally will not intervene" in complaints about "one-sided news reports" because "it would be inconsistent with the First Amendment to replace the journalistic judgment of licensees with our own."
As noted by Ars, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has "made it clear he takes orders from Trump, abandoning his previous position -- which he held under Democratic presidents -- that the FCC must operate independently of White House interference."
Carr could use the commission's regulatory authority over licensed broadcasters to open an investigation into Welker, potentially creating pressure on NBC and its affiliated stations through licensing proceedings or other FCC actions. The most likely vehicle would be the FCC's rarely enforced news distortion policy, which Carr has repeatedly revived to target coverage he considers misleading; historically, however, the policy required an unusually high evidentiary bar and was seldom enforced.
A separate post from Trump yesterday said, "THE FAKE POLLS USED BY OUR CROOKED MEDIA ARE OUT OF CONTROL, AND SOMETHING MUST BE DONE ABOUT IT. FCC TO THE RESCUE! President DJT." Trump also posted a rant on Friday about New York Times journalist Maggie Haberman, calling her "an unattractive person both inside and out" who "should be forced to turn over any and all money that she's made through her fake reporting on me." Trump referred to Haberman throughout his post as "Maggot Haberman." Trump's post about Welker included an image purporting to show he has near-perfect results in his endorsements this year. "The Press is a Disgrace to our Nation, and I hope that Chairman Brendan Carr, and the fine people of his Commission, will take this Threat to our Country very seriously," Trump wrote. Perhaps indicating that he will refer additional journalists for FCC punishment, Trump wrote that Welker "is not the only one. The Radical Left News is going out of their way to harass, demean, and libel anything 'TRUMP.'" The FCC website says the commission "cannot prevent the broadcast of any particular point of view," and that it "generally will not intervene" in complaints about "one-sided news reports" because "it would be inconsistent with the First Amendment to replace the journalistic judgment of licensees with our own."
As noted by Ars, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has "made it clear he takes orders from Trump, abandoning his previous position -- which he held under Democratic presidents -- that the FCC must operate independently of White House interference."
Carr could use the commission's regulatory authority over licensed broadcasters to open an investigation into Welker, potentially creating pressure on NBC and its affiliated stations through licensing proceedings or other FCC actions. The most likely vehicle would be the FCC's rarely enforced news distortion policy, which Carr has repeatedly revived to target coverage he considers misleading; historically, however, the policy required an unusually high evidentiary bar and was seldom enforced.
The inmates (Score:5, Insightful)
are in charge of the asylum.
Re:The inmates (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The inmates (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not an asylum, it's an actual prison. Everyone is a criminal.
Re: (Score:2)
are in charge of the asylum.
It's cute you think anyone is in charge. We moved past that phase a while ago. Now we're just in free-for-all territory, every man, woman, or otherwise for themselves and damned the consequences.
Re: (Score:3)
It's more a case of the fox being in charge of the chicken coop; or bank robbers gaining control of the bank.
The job of the press in a democracy is to hold officials up to scrutiny.
This is a crime right? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:This is a crime right? (Score:4, Informative)
With enough new RVs and other "gifts", SCOTUS will kiss his ass again.
Re:This is a crime right? (Score:4, Interesting)
SCOTUS ruled yesterday that ballroom construction can proceed, that the parties who brought suit don't have standing, that they were not "directly harmed"
i don't see how anyone could have standing if that's the criterion
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When kids are gunned down in a school they get "thoughts and prayers"
When a gun is brought to a function with the president he gets a steel belted, gold plated ballroom
I'd say the kids have standing
Re: (Score:2)
Well, technically, we're letting Natalie [cnn.com] do it, which is, of course, worse in every way imaginable, since she's immune to the sense of embarrassment that sometimes restrains him from acting on every little whim.
No, it is official presidential business... (Score:3)
... and thus automatically protected and absolutely without consequences.
Re:This is a crime right? (Score:5, Insightful)
He has permanent immunity from law now, we don't have to "let him" anymore.
It's not a crime when the President does it, remember when that was shocking when Nixon said it? Now the Supreme Court says it.
He's not immune from the law (Score:3, Informative)
Those sure were words. (Score:3)
I mean, I've zero love lost on the orange idiot, but you're cray-cray.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ever since the supreme court basically ruled that he was above the law, he's been crimeing pretty much non stop.
America is in *desparate* need of SCOTUS reform.
Re: (Score:3)
America is in *desparate* need of SCOTUS reform.
Be careful what you wish for...
At least wait until we are sure grownups will be doing the reforming.
Re: (Score:2)
A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it's been a good run.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes in many respects it's quite astounding it got to 250 years without something like this happening before. We're definitely in a new phase of American history. While the United States will continue in some form (Rome continued for a long time after the en of the republic), it's now a very different country now, and it isn't going to go back to normal.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh and in the 1940s we came extremely close to joining the other side. Much closer than we like to think about. And let's not forget about McCarthyism. Or Jesus Christ the shit Reagan did to get elected
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Interesting)
The whole reason to have a democracy is the recognition that leaders are idiots. If the leaders were good, then a monarchy or oligarchy would be more efficient. But it's not.
The system was designed to withstand morons and self-serving grifters. The only thing it can't withstand is if a large majority of the country wants to break it apart.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The system was designed to withstand morons and self-serving grifters.
It objectively wasn't. The system assumed those morons wouldn't be self-serving grifters. Modern politics is evidence that this was not considered in the design.
Re: (Score:2)
It objectively wasn't. The system assumed those morons wouldn't be self-serving grifters. Modern politics is evidence that this was not considered in the design.
Actually, it was. The whole point of a democracy is to have non-bloody rules to get rid of an unpopular government. The more hoops you have to go through, the less democratic a system is. At the end of Dashiell Hammett's "Glass Key" (the novel, not the movies), Paul Madvig comments that this time, the other side will win the election, and he will lie low for four years until the next vote. And yes, Paul Madvig is a self-serving grifter.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't. There is a difference between coping with the possibility of a grifter in office and the assumption that they all are.
The system was not designed to cope with an entire party subverting the mechanisms of government. There were arguments over that, the wrong decisions were made.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
and this view is now so ingrained that people don't expect anything anymore from Democracy and are ready to try something else.
WTF are you talking about? Who are these people that want to try something other than Democracy? They are all Russian or Chinese.
There are plenty of people tired of capitalism, but no one wants to move on from Democracy. Kim jong Un wants to move on from Democracy.
Re: (Score:3)
There are plenty of people tired of capitalism, but no one wants to move on from Democracy.
What would democracy without capitalism look like? Democratic socialism always ends up quickly abandoning either democracy or socialism. Social democracy (e.g. the Nordic model) works pretty well, but that's still fundamentally capitalist.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Informative)
It wasn't. There is a difference between coping with the possibility of a grifter in office and the assumption that they all are.
The system was not designed to cope with an entire party subverting the mechanisms of government. There were arguments over that, the wrong decisions were made.
Several of the architects of our government were upset at the idea of political parties becoming a part of the overarching governmental system at all, considering them an effective way to subvert their intended systems to hold politicians responsible for their actions. It's unfortunate they couldn't find a way to block the systemic gridlock from forming without throwing out the democratic baby along with the electoral bathwater.
Re: (Score:3)
The most relevant quote is this one:
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."
Re: (Score:3)
No it wasn't. The system has glaring flaws in that it requires all members to act in good faith. Soon as they dont, there are zero guardrails.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."
Citation: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18... [yale.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
The next president will be just a bit worse than Donald Trump. The president after that just a bit worse
No, Obama was better than his predecessor without question.
You are voting for a winner take all
Australia has ranked voting, which seems like a good idea but it didn't really solve the problem.
They don't give you a choice, not really. You pick the face, the party picks the plan
The problem is that both parties are full of sycophants, hanger-ons, leaches, and rent-seekers. The problem won't be solved as long as voters generally don't realize that. Currently, no more than 10% of the public realizes that.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, there is the hope with new elections the executive will be disciplined (whether that is better or worse, who can say) and Trump can spend the remainder of days hounded by lawsuits.
Better get cracking on it now though before this becomes the new norm.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Informative)
Well, there is the hope with new elections the executive will be disciplined (whether that is better or worse, who can say) and Trump can spend the remainder of days hounded by lawsuits.
Better get cracking on it now though before this becomes the new norm.
You can forget that. Texas is already removing nearly 100 polling places [pbs.org] in one county alone, which is totally not voter suppression according to Republicans.
Meanwhile, DHS is hunting for that elusive "vote fraud" [yahoo.com] the Pedo in Chief has been whining about for the past six years, yet has never been able to show said "fraud".
And don't forget the recent change to mail-in voting where the federal government will decide whether you're eligible to vote based on a nebulous list maintained by the government [abcnews.com], and the Postal Service gets to decide if they're going to deliver your mail-in ballot.
When you're done holding your breath, let us know.
Re:A republic, if you can keep it... (Score:5, Insightful)
Everything that can be done will be done to corrupt the vote. The only silver lining is MAGA incompetence. Judges will slow it down, but Democrats, if elected, will do nothing to change the long term trajectory. There is no excuse for this, Merrick Garland did not do his job.
Re: (Score:3)
Though I have some hopes for whatever replaces Trump, I do feel it is quite possible a far-left group elected as a majority will see voting restrictions and single votes (rather than some kind of ranked) as being just as advantageous to their extremism as they were to Trump's extremism, and will not change a thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing that Texas is doing will change where their electoral votes go, though.
Re: (Score:2)
"Well, there is the hope..."
Not among Republicans there isn't. With Republicans is the hope of subverting elections or ending them entirely. And let's not forget about Peter Thiel's plan. A bandaid over wounds inflicted by fascism is not hope.
"Better get cracking on it now though before this becomes the new norm."
It is the new norm. What we have now we've had since Reagan. Modern politics is no different than what came in with Gingrich.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, there is the hope with new elections the executive will be disciplined (whether that is better or worse, who can say) and Trump can spend the remainder of days hounded by lawsuits.
Better get cracking on it now though before this becomes the new norm.
It's already the new norm, and Trump has been hounded by lawsuits, investigations, and even convictions, for almost his entire adult life, and none of it has slowed him down. In fact, each movement against him seems to strengthen him somehow. And our political system isn't designed to punish the grifters, but to raise them up as demigods and saviors.
I shudder to think who the next GOP asshole will be. Someone with Trump's tactics and a bit more intelligence and restraint could be terrifying.
And the Democrat
Re: (Score:2)
We've made it through worse (Score:2)
We will have to see but still it's pretty fucking frustrating.
Re:We've made it through worse (Score:5, Insightful)
Saw some opinion poll figure the other day that said that as many as one in six people who voted for Trump regretted it.
Not 100% of people who voted for him, not even 50:50, but around 15%. So 85% of those who voted for him are quite happy with his performance.
Voters are beyond stupid, they're morons.
Re: (Score:2)
la Presidenta's voters are beyond stupid. Mostly, they do not pay attention and if they do, it is to the FOX sewer hose.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, regret implies being both unhappy and confident that the other person would have been better.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:We've made it through worse (Score:5, Informative)
The other person was a black woman. For a lot of americans, that is enough to count as 'worse'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We've made it through worse (Score:5, Insightful)
And of those 15%, 14% would do it again regrets or not.
Re: (Score:3)
Just remember that you can regret voting for Trump but still be happy that you didn't vote for the other candidate.
It's not like we've had really good presidential options in the US from either party for the past 10 years or so.
Re: We've made it through worse (Score:2)
And that is by intentional effort on both sides (and national media) to discourage participation both in primaries and local elections. It is perhaps too late, but this seems to be shifting in some places.
Re: (Score:2)
Just remember that you can regret voting for Trump but still be happy that you didn't vote for the other candidate.
It's not like we've had really good presidential options in the US from either party for the past 10 years or so.
Ten years? Obama seemed to be the last candidate that didn't insta-trigger a gag reflex, and that was only his first run. His second? Well, right back to lesser of two evils determination. At some point we will need to address the system that takes even the brightest hopes and turns them to shit. Or we can just keep doing this same old "Gee, why is voter engagement so low?" song and dance for eternity.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
So 85% of those who voted for him are quite happy with his performance.
This is too strong. There's a large distance between "Unwilling to tell a pollster they regret" and "Are quite happy".
Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:5, Insightful)
I honestly cannot think of another person more who has lied more than the current US president.
Re:Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:5, Interesting)
I honestly cannot think of another person more who has lied more than the current US president.
Hypocrisy would seem to imply that both Kristen Welker and Trump are lying, but what Welker said was absolutely true - Trump has had some mixed results with his endorsements as not all of those he endorses have won. Trump even confirms it in his rant, "when the recent WINS of Darline Graham and Mike Mazzei, stand at 100% for the U.S. Senate, and 98% for the U.S. House" -- Trump's longer-term success rate is lower, and his memory is apparently shorter...
From Trump Boasts His Endorsement is ‘Strongest in History of Politics’ [newsweek.com]
When looking at his long-term record, Trump has had more success in primaries than in general elections. In 2018, his primary success rate was 95 percent, while his general election success rate was 59 percent; in 2019, these were 80 percent and 67 percent, respectively.
The article then goes on to list his endorsement success rate over more years ranging all the way down to 43%. Seems like mixed results to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Republicans are immune to hypocrisy (Score:4, Insightful)
It's why they don't experience cognitive dissonance. By the time the first thought they could cause the dissonance is fully formed in their head it gets pushed out by the second thought.
There have been studies. Basically the part of their brain responsible for critical reasoning doesn't fire as much while the part of their brain that is responsible for the few response is overactive. There is basically a right-wing brain type. Nurture could counteract that with proper education and a good upbringing but the Epstein class knows that and they're going out of their way to make sure that doesn't happen.
Re:Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:5, Insightful)
and all politicians lie as much as Trump. Most of them at leas try to be subtle, where he doesn't.
no, not all lie as much as that. think back to all of the “day one” promises. is gas down to $2? is inflation lower? are your taxes lower? no new wars?
or were you told those things are no longer important after the election? ah. that’s it.
and you say we have TDS.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention the explosive diarrhea at the same time there may be a serious shortage of toilet paper. You can't make this shit up.
Re:Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:5, Insightful)
and all politicians lie as much as Trump.
You've fallen hook line and sinker for Trump's bullshit.
Re:Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:4, Insightful)
Let's just take one thing this year: Trump has claimed the war in Iran was ended, what, 30+ times now? Every time he said that was a lie. Every time he said the Iranians agreed to something it was lie. Every time he said their nuclear program was destroyed it was a lie. Every time he said their capability to control Hormuz was destroyed it was a lie.
Trump also pardons people who explicitly say they are lying to protect him and broke the law so as not have to go under oath to testify (Roger Stone)
Can we have a similar track of lying for Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Kamala Harris? The answer of course is no.
Re:Hypocrisy at it's finest. (Score:5)
Re: (Score:3)
For now itâ(TM)s criticism. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Soon it'll be for insufficient praise.
Have you seen the videos from his cabinet meetings? First thing they do is go around the table, thanking and praising Donald Trump!
Get it over with (Score:2)
Just shut it all down, sell the spectrum to the wireless carriers and call it a day. That is the ultimate end game here, right?
Yeah, I'm being sarcastic, but honestly it may not be such a bad thing for all broadcasting to just be online and beyond the sick twisted grasp of the FCC. Shame about those 22-25 million households that still watch OTA TV, though.
Broadcast IP (Score:2)
Not that anybody would have thought seriously and got somebody in power to grasp it...
But instead of the HD transition pushed by industry lobbyists, we should have had gov scientists come up with a better system than industry hacks around MPEG2. We should have used the whole space for broadcast Internet Protocol and pushed for broad spectrum use. You pay the government for packets to be broadcasted rather than spectrum monopoly handouts. It no longer limits you to video ... or MPEG2. Not that we shouldn
Trump harassing reporters ;) (Score:2, Funny)
The entire MSM in collusion with the Washington political swamp has been harassing Trump since he first announced he was running for President.
Re: (Score:2)
You weren't even smart enough to choose a non-agitprop username, Ivan.
What goes around comes around (Score:3)
The willingness of most of the Republicans to accede power to Trump to not incur his wrath and thus protect their reelection chances will come back to bite them when the Democrats retake control. Many of them probably privately worry about ow the courts and Congress have vested a lot more power in the executive and what it means long term, but lack the courage to stop it. From all accounts, the Democrats are already plotting payback when they get in the majority. In the end, the politics of retribution are not good for the US, and there deserves to be a pox on both their houses. Even if Trump issues a lot of pardons, the Republicans have proven you can still make peoples lives miserable through investigations, even if there is little merit to the investigation; a playbook the other side can and likely will adopt.
Journalists on all sides of the issues should be worried about how the President is using the FCC to go after critics, because they could be next when the other side gets in office, especially if the courts let him.
Seriously, what do you guys think of this? (Score:5, Interesting)
We all know that politicians like any other human being are often out of their depth when society gets into a critical situation. They have blind spots, ignore trends with the regular people and fumble. And talk trash about people issues without even noticing.
But this Trump thing you USians have going on seems to be an entirely new level of malignant corruption. I mean, like some satire of a corrupt government with some man-child in charge asking for rockets to be more pointy because pointy is more dangerous.
Is anybody taking this seriously anymore over there? Wouldn't impeachment of this President be overdue by now?
An inquisitive European is curious to know, please enlighten me. Seriously.
Re: (Score:3)
Note: no Trump supporter can read the previous explanation and understand it, which demonstrates that willful ignorance and gross stupidity that has become normalized.
I hope that helps.
Re: (Score:2)
Also: the 2 party system in the USA (fully controlled and funded by the rich) ensures that there are only 2 viewpoints and seesaw politics.
Re: (Score:2)
There is some apparently rarely discussed aspect to this: About 30% of the US population is evangelical, i.e. radical fundamentalist "Christians". This is about the same percentage of the population that still thinks Trump does a good job. While these two groups are not exactly the same, they seem to be mostly so. No idea why this does not get discussed, but maybe the US is far, far to tolerant to religious extremism and is not paying a high price for that.
As to removing the president, that should have happ
Re: (Score:3)
We all know that politicians like any other human being are often out of their depth when society gets into a critical situation. They have blind spots, ignore trends with the regular people and fumble. And talk trash about people issues without even noticing.
But this Trump thing you USians have going on seems to be an entirely new level of malignant corruption. I mean, like some satire of a corrupt government with some man-child in charge asking for rockets to be more pointy because pointy is more dangerous.
Is anybody taking this seriously anymore over there? Wouldn't impeachment of this President be overdue by now?
An inquisitive European is curious to know, please enlighten me. Seriously.
Some of them live in their own bubble of unreality. Murdoch and Fox News have had over 30 years of being their sole source of untruth to make that bubble. Americans tend to have a tenuous relationship with reality at the best of times but the MAGA crowd turn it to 11 and then some. When confronted with evidence they don't agree with they will find any excuse to handwave it away, no matter how much they suffer because of it, they'll vote for more of it because the Fox News man tells them to do so. And we're
Re: (Score:2)
Dictator does not like free press (Score:2)
What else is new. Why is this clown still in office?
textbook example (Score:3)
This looks like a "textbook example" of an authoritarian government abusing law enforcement to silence political criticism.
I don't see how a single person in congress feels they can back this sort of behavior.
"Mixed"? (Score:2)
How long? (Score:2)
Re:Trump is a loser (Score:4, Informative)
Jimmy Carter (notable for being a Democrat) was as low, as was George W. Bush, Harry S. Truman (another Democrat) was lower, by 2%. Only Nixon was substantially lower, by 10%.
Re:Trump is a loser (Score:5, Insightful)
None of them had cults of personality and all them were far, far, far better presidents than Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Those presidents didn't need any cults as there was no social media or alternative media.
Re: (Score:3)
True but the methods of social media go back a long ways, Yellow journalism [wikipedia.org]
This type of reporting was characterized by exaggerated headlines, unverified claims, partisan agendas, and a focus on topics like crime, scandal, sports, and violence.
Something like X is just that outrage porn but now drip fed directly into peoples spongey skulls.
Re: (Score:2)
Cult of personalities long predate social media.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Trump has multiple propaganda networks and shills on his side constantly propping him up and sanewashing his crazy ramblings.
In a media landscape that wasn't constantly providing distractions from his incompetence and grifting, he'd be lower than Nixon.
Re:Trump is a loser (Score:4, Insightful)
It's worth noting that this is not a consistent measurement over time. The way these polls are conducted and their reach have changed a lot over the years. I'm not sure if that works for or against your point, but I'm just saying be careful making the comparison.
Re:Trump is a loser (Score:5, Informative)
A key part of the MAGA movement is absolute shamelessness: this is true of the leaders and the members. They are shameless about their own lies, about holding themselves to different standards from others, about being fascist, about being racist, about hurting other people, about hurting themselves, and above all, about being stupid. They don't merely take pride in being shameless; they recognise that being shameless opens up a wider set of actions to them at any point in time than those that would be available if they allowed shame to limit them. And they recognise that their opponents will spend time pointing out their shamelessness, expecting that to have an impact, rather than accepting it as an amoral and pragmatic decision and fighting them as they are, tooth and nail. So it's been very useful to them. Of course, there are risks to being shameless: your actions may lose you popular support, for example. But that is why part of their program of shamelessness includes seizing control over speech and education, and above all, of cheating in elections and courts. They want the question of whether they have popular support to become irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3)
The electorate knew they were getting exactly what it said on the side of the box when they voted for Trump a second time. Clearly, there are people who don't answer these polls and are pleased as punch about everything that's going on.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Years ago I read a paper (in arxiv) that claimed that the the way US primaries work favour extreme candidates. In numerical simulations, primaries ran state by state favoured more extreme candidates (that would stick to keep an advantage in each election); while elections held simultaneously would favour more central candidates able to bring everybody together in a single shot.
We wouldn't want to have an Election day with hourly results (which would influence the motivation of the voters depending on whethe
Re: (Score:3)
Trump the Duck-man has slotted in an appalling cast of ignorant media figures into positions of power, including a realty star trucker as Transportation Secretary and the wife of a dead wrestling promoter as the Education Secretary. Sec-Trans has decided that taking his family on a summer road trip is his most important duty and Sec-Ed wants to end student loans for things like nurse t
Re:Trump is a loser (Score:4, Informative)
So you say one in three of US voters support him. That's terrifying.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing this 1/3 correlates pretty strongly with the high % of Americans who can't read above the 6th grade level.
Re: (Score:2)
That's probably a underestimate. But, yes.
The real problem, though, is that many of them intensely support him. I think many of his supporters tend to be more firmly committed than were Nixon's.
Re: (Score:2)
Calling him a loser is incorrect. That he has occasionally lost is correct, but find someone who hasn't. Sometimes it seems he's playing a different game than the one we expect him to play.
But I rather agree with the rest of your characterization. And think it leaves out quite a few correct pejoratives.
Re: Fascism (Score:2, Interesting)
How come your quite wrong definition of fascism matches every communist/marxist/socialist dictatorship ever then?
Re: Fascism (Score:5, Interesting)
in the trenches, i.e., effectively, Fascism and Communism meet at the same point in the circle.
In a perverted way, the American trait of only caring about things that effect them personally is coming back to bite them. They thought that dolt couldn't hurt them. Wait until the bond yields really spike, they are spiking now. However, bond traders are spiking them because they are betting the American political system cannot handle the debt load nor the AI fever rush to an economic black hole (they like to call it a singularity but we know what it really will be). Americans are already whining about interest rates for home loans, they can only expect higher rates.
Americans thought putting some asshole in the White House who would "crack down on immigration". What they failed to see was the police state they were advocating would be a surveillance state watching their every move, and now they do not like it. And they managed to trash their "Christianity" in the process. I would argue it was always a fake Christianity built to promote wealth and hatred of anyone they didn't like. And if you want to see how fake it really is, read the first three synoptic gospels of the Christian bible side-by-side so you can see the glaring differences (John was on mushrooms, we can ignore that one). Nowhere in those first three does Jesus claim to be divine. He was a apocalyptic Jew who thought god (pick one) was going wipe out everyone that didn't believe and make him King-O-the-Jews, that last is what Pilate executed him for (sedition, basically).
They thought they were electing a "baby Christian" when he just exposed how vapid and totally amoral is the Christian Right. Now their numbers are dropping and youngins do not want much to do with them regardless of how their mouthpieces spin it.
Then that dumbass sold Americans on tariffs and how they would right the "balance of payments", a fake issue but they were led to believe it was a real issue. From: https://www.cato.org/publicati... [cato.org] (those raging leftists at the CATO institute), they explain how tariffs lower imports and exports, and that Americans pay for the damage. That article relies on a paper, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2... [jstor.org] published in 1936 which how the relationships involved. Apparently, el Bunko's fiscal "advisors" are that uneducated that they continue to go out there and claim tariffs are good.
The tariffs represent money stolen by el Bunko from the U.S. economy and then pissed off on the wealthy is his Big Stupid Bill.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Anyone who paid attention to him over the last 8 years - like really paid attention to Trump, not what the media says about him - will have noticed a very clear and steady cognitive decline. I'm not an ornithologist but he's exhibiting what seem to be the signs of onset dementia. Look at how he talks, and how he composes himself. How he constantly mispronounces things, gets names completely wrong, slurs, loses the plot. "Weaving." His outer circle of public relations try to cover for it ("what the president