|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On February 23 2019 01:51 xDaunt wrote:Here's a Rasmussen poll on public perception of the Trump/Russia investigation: Show nested quote +Most voters say top Justice Department and FBI officials are likely to have acted criminally when they secretly discussed removing President Trump from office and think a special prosecutor is needed to investigate.
Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe senior federal law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their discussions in May 2017 to oust Trump, with 37% who say it is Very Likely. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% consider that unlikely, with 19% who say it’s Not At All Likely that they broke the law. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Fifty-one percent (51%) think a special prosecutor should be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove the president from office. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, but 11% are undecided.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters said in April of last year that a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigations of Trump and Hillary Clinton in a legal and unbiased fashion.
Only 36% say no disciplinary action should be taken against the senior law enforcement officials who discussed removing the president from office. Twenty-one percent (21%) say they should be fired, while even more (25%) think they should be jailed. Twelve percent (12%) are calling for a formal reprimand of these officials.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
By a 50% to 40% margin, voters think it’s likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Trump from winning the presidency. As in virtually all surveys related to Trump, however, there is a wide difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans.
For example, while 77% of Republicans - and 52% of voters not affiliated with either major party - think senior law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their secret discussions to remove Trump from office, just 40% of Democrats agree.
GOP voters feel much more strongly than the others that the officials in question should be fired or reprimanded.
Seventy-nine percent (79%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing say it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove the president from office. Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance, just 12% agree.
Sixty percent (60%) of voters who think it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law say they should go to jail.
The high-level discussions by Justice Department and FBI officials about removing Trump from office followed the president’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. But voters don’t rate Comey’s FBI performance too highly. Nearly two-out-of-three Republicans (65%) and a plurality (46%) of unaffiliated voters said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking to anti-Trump media while serving as FBI director. Just 29% of Democrats agreed.
Fifty percent (50%) of voters still say it is likely that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election, a matter that is the subject of investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, a former FBI director. But 51% think it’s unlikely that Mueller’s investigation will result in criminal charges against the president.
Democrats are hopeful that they can impeach Trump if election collusion with the Russians is proven, but just 27% of Democrats - and 16% of all voters - think the new Congress should focus first on impeachment. These are some pretty interesting figures. I'm surprised that so many people think that the FBI/DOJ broke the law in their investigation of Trump. It's a fairly complicated story factually to understand. It's also a story that has received minimal, to the extent that it has received any, coverage from mainstream media outlets. It takes a lot of effort and individual initiative to understand what the relevant law enforcement officials did wrong and how the investigation went awry. In fact, the lack of understanding of the story and the correlating lack of media coverage is reflected in the fact that a majority of the same people who responded to the poll also believe that the Trump campaign likely colluded with the Russians. It may be that McCabe's book tour in which he talks about the discussions with Rosenstein about the 25th Amendment is so easily digestible and patently repugnant that it is singlehandedly turning people against the investigation (note that this poll was taken right after McCabe started his tour).
Is it possible, highly possible, very likely, or 100% a guaranteed fact that Fox wall-to-wall declaring the investigation criminal - including prominent figures on the network openly calling for the FBI to be arrested (that horrid Jeanine woman) - might have a teensy-tiney bit of influence on people's views of the criminality of this matter?
|
On February 23 2019 03:21 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2019 01:51 xDaunt wrote:Here's a Rasmussen poll on public perception of the Trump/Russia investigation: Most voters say top Justice Department and FBI officials are likely to have acted criminally when they secretly discussed removing President Trump from office and think a special prosecutor is needed to investigate.
Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe senior federal law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their discussions in May 2017 to oust Trump, with 37% who say it is Very Likely. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% consider that unlikely, with 19% who say it’s Not At All Likely that they broke the law. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Fifty-one percent (51%) think a special prosecutor should be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove the president from office. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, but 11% are undecided.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters said in April of last year that a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigations of Trump and Hillary Clinton in a legal and unbiased fashion.
Only 36% say no disciplinary action should be taken against the senior law enforcement officials who discussed removing the president from office. Twenty-one percent (21%) say they should be fired, while even more (25%) think they should be jailed. Twelve percent (12%) are calling for a formal reprimand of these officials.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
By a 50% to 40% margin, voters think it’s likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Trump from winning the presidency. As in virtually all surveys related to Trump, however, there is a wide difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans.
For example, while 77% of Republicans - and 52% of voters not affiliated with either major party - think senior law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their secret discussions to remove Trump from office, just 40% of Democrats agree.
GOP voters feel much more strongly than the others that the officials in question should be fired or reprimanded.
Seventy-nine percent (79%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing say it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove the president from office. Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance, just 12% agree.
Sixty percent (60%) of voters who think it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law say they should go to jail.
The high-level discussions by Justice Department and FBI officials about removing Trump from office followed the president’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. But voters don’t rate Comey’s FBI performance too highly. Nearly two-out-of-three Republicans (65%) and a plurality (46%) of unaffiliated voters said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking to anti-Trump media while serving as FBI director. Just 29% of Democrats agreed.
Fifty percent (50%) of voters still say it is likely that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election, a matter that is the subject of investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, a former FBI director. But 51% think it’s unlikely that Mueller’s investigation will result in criminal charges against the president.
Democrats are hopeful that they can impeach Trump if election collusion with the Russians is proven, but just 27% of Democrats - and 16% of all voters - think the new Congress should focus first on impeachment. These are some pretty interesting figures. I'm surprised that so many people think that the FBI/DOJ broke the law in their investigation of Trump. It's a fairly complicated story factually to understand. It's also a story that has received minimal, to the extent that it has received any, coverage from mainstream media outlets. It takes a lot of effort and individual initiative to understand what the relevant law enforcement officials did wrong and how the investigation went awry. In fact, the lack of understanding of the story and the correlating lack of media coverage is reflected in the fact that a majority of the same people who responded to the poll also believe that the Trump campaign likely colluded with the Russians. It may be that McCabe's book tour in which he talks about the discussions with Rosenstein about the 25th Amendment is so easily digestible and patently repugnant that it is singlehandedly turning people against the investigation (note that this poll was taken right after McCabe started his tour). Is it possible, highly possible, very likely, or 100% a guaranteed fact that Fox wall-to-wall declaring the investigation criminal - including prominent figures on the network openly calling for the FBI to be arrested (that horrid Jeanine woman) - might have a teensy-tiney bit of influence on people's views of the criminality of this matter?
Sure, various conservative outlets have certainly demonized the investigation. But how much reach do those outlets have? I'd expect that figure to be somewhere near the partisan liberal/conservative divide. 30%? Maybe 40%? Against those figures, 56% is a surprisingly large number. And even if you want to ding the figure for being Rasmussen and arbitrarily discount it by 5%, you're still over 50%.
|
Every country has its own take on worker rights and unemployment. If a union negotiates too good conditions, hiring cheap labour from abroad through loopholes or just moving the whole production out of the country are likely consequences. Also, the curse of temporary contracts is a big issue when employers fear they commit too much by hiring somebody permanently. Public hospitals are awful with this in many European countries.
That being said, I am all for strong unions as it is the only way there can be a balance in power. Employers should fear a large scale strike just as much as employees fear losing their jobs.
|
The fact that the main three questions in the survey were
1* Should a special prosecutor be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove President Trump from office?
2* How likely is it that senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove President Trump from office – very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely?
3* What type of disciplinary action should be taken against senior federal law enforcement officials who discussed removing President Trump from office. Should they be jailed, fired, formally reprimanded, or should no disciplinary action be taken?
means we've got some pretty significant priming going on. "Should we investigate X?" then asking "is it likely something was done worth investigating" is not a terribly good way to gauge opinions on the latter.
Not as bad as some of their past polling has had, but combine this with the fact that "I don't know/I don't have an opinion" is not a valid opinion in the poll, a Rasmussen opinion special, and it's tough for me to really interpret these numbers in a meaningful sense-at least for the second question.
For reference, I'm pretty sure this lack of a neutral option is why their presidential approval ratings skewed +19 relative to virtually every other pollster at the start of Trump's presidency.
(it's also in likely voters for...convenience, maybe? But it's important not to interpret even these primed numbers as having any application to the general public)
Edit: I'll also say that asking opinion polling questions about "was X illegal" or "how likely do you think it is people broke the law" is pretty silly to me, but that's just me and 538 I think.
Edit2: It also seems like they've walled off the detailed survey results behind "platinum members" which is kind of a new low for Rasmussen...I'm not a fan.
Edit3: I'm also extremely confused as to how 56% think it's likely the law was broken but only 25% think they should be jailed. I guess the remaining 31% want a fine? Forget this, I'm confused as to how 37% said it's very likely the law was broken, 19% said it was likely, 36% said it was unlikely, and 19% said it's not at all likely. The keen eyed among you will note these numbers add up to...111%. Umm...wat. Copyeditor, do your job! Or let me see the actual poll without paying you! My guess is one of these numbers is supposed to be 10% less, and it's probably unlikely or very likely.
|
This looks to be the first indication of prosecutors having an eye on the Trump Org's general finances, as opposed to just the hush money payments to mistresses. Cohen is set to speak to Congress next Wednesday, and he may well divulge everything he knows as a parting shot at Trump.
Michael D. Cohen, President Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, met last month with federal prosecutors in Manhattan, offering information about possible irregularities within the president’s family business and about a donor to the inaugural committee, according to people familiar with the matter.
Mr. Cohen, who worked at the Trump Organization for a decade, spoke with the prosecutors about insurance claims the company had filed over the years, said the people, who did not elaborate on the nature of the possible irregularities.
While it was not clear whether the prosecutors found Mr. Cohen’s information credible and whether they intended to pursue it, the meeting suggests that they are interested in broader aspects of the Trump Organization, beyond their investigation into the company’s role in the hush money payments made before the 2016 election to women claiming to have had affairs with Mr. Trump. Mr. Cohen pleaded guilty last summer to arranging those payments.
www.msn.com
|
New NYT article on Klobachar isnt flattering. While she is certainly smart, driven, and effective, she also comes off as vindictive, petty, and cruel. She strikes me as a narcissistic bully who likes to shift the blame to her subordinates (sound familiar?). That shit will only get worse if she is in the WH given the media scruity and the fact she will try her damndest to not come off as the "weak female."
That's a no from me dog. Not even for VP. Plenty of other less volatile choices available.
|
On February 23 2019 15:32 On_Slaught wrote:
New NYT article on Klobachar isnt flattering. While she is certainly smart, driven, and effective, she also comes off as vindictive, petty, and cruel. She strikes me as a narcissistic bully who likes to shift the blame to her subordinates (sound familiar?). That shit will only get worse if she is in the WH given the media scruity and the fact she will try her damndest to not come off as the "weak female."
That's a no from me dog. Not even for VP. Plenty of other less volatile choices available.
Yeah, same. That bit about calling the new (prospective?) employers of people trying to stop working for her to fucking sabotage their attempts to leave is a bit of a dealbreaker for me.
|
On February 23 2019 03:28 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2019 03:21 iamthedave wrote:On February 23 2019 01:51 xDaunt wrote:Here's a Rasmussen poll on public perception of the Trump/Russia investigation: Most voters say top Justice Department and FBI officials are likely to have acted criminally when they secretly discussed removing President Trump from office and think a special prosecutor is needed to investigate.
Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters believe senior federal law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their discussions in May 2017 to oust Trump, with 37% who say it is Very Likely. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 36% consider that unlikely, with 19% who say it’s Not At All Likely that they broke the law. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Fifty-one percent (51%) think a special prosecutor should be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove the president from office. Thirty-eight percent (38%) disagree, but 11% are undecided.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters said in April of last year that a special prosecutor should be named to investigate whether senior FBI officials handled the investigations of Trump and Hillary Clinton in a legal and unbiased fashion.
Only 36% say no disciplinary action should be taken against the senior law enforcement officials who discussed removing the president from office. Twenty-one percent (21%) say they should be fired, while even more (25%) think they should be jailed. Twelve percent (12%) are calling for a formal reprimand of these officials.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on February 17-18, 2019 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.
By a 50% to 40% margin, voters think it’s likely senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in an effort to prevent Trump from winning the presidency. As in virtually all surveys related to Trump, however, there is a wide difference of opinion between Democrats and Republicans.
For example, while 77% of Republicans - and 52% of voters not affiliated with either major party - think senior law enforcement officials are likely to have broken the law in their secret discussions to remove Trump from office, just 40% of Democrats agree.
GOP voters feel much more strongly than the others that the officials in question should be fired or reprimanded.
Seventy-nine percent (79%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job Trump is doing say it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove the president from office. Among voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance, just 12% agree.
Sixty percent (60%) of voters who think it’s Very Likely senior law enforcement officials broke the law say they should go to jail.
The high-level discussions by Justice Department and FBI officials about removing Trump from office followed the president’s firing of FBI Director James Comey. But voters don’t rate Comey’s FBI performance too highly. Nearly two-out-of-three Republicans (65%) and a plurality (46%) of unaffiliated voters said Comey should be prosecuted for leaking to anti-Trump media while serving as FBI director. Just 29% of Democrats agreed.
Fifty percent (50%) of voters still say it is likely that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election, a matter that is the subject of investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, a former FBI director. But 51% think it’s unlikely that Mueller’s investigation will result in criminal charges against the president.
Democrats are hopeful that they can impeach Trump if election collusion with the Russians is proven, but just 27% of Democrats - and 16% of all voters - think the new Congress should focus first on impeachment. These are some pretty interesting figures. I'm surprised that so many people think that the FBI/DOJ broke the law in their investigation of Trump. It's a fairly complicated story factually to understand. It's also a story that has received minimal, to the extent that it has received any, coverage from mainstream media outlets. It takes a lot of effort and individual initiative to understand what the relevant law enforcement officials did wrong and how the investigation went awry. In fact, the lack of understanding of the story and the correlating lack of media coverage is reflected in the fact that a majority of the same people who responded to the poll also believe that the Trump campaign likely colluded with the Russians. It may be that McCabe's book tour in which he talks about the discussions with Rosenstein about the 25th Amendment is so easily digestible and patently repugnant that it is singlehandedly turning people against the investigation (note that this poll was taken right after McCabe started his tour). Is it possible, highly possible, very likely, or 100% a guaranteed fact that Fox wall-to-wall declaring the investigation criminal - including prominent figures on the network openly calling for the FBI to be arrested (that horrid Jeanine woman) - might have a teensy-tiney bit of influence on people's views of the criminality of this matter? Sure, various conservative outlets have certainly demonized the investigation. But how much reach do those outlets have? I'd expect that figure to be somewhere near the partisan liberal/conservative divide. 30%? Maybe 40%? Against those figures, 56% is a surprisingly large number. And even if you want to ding the figure for being Rasmussen and arbitrarily discount it by 5%, you're still over 50%.
I'm led to believe Fox News has fairly enormous reach/penetration into the media market. But even if they don't reach everywhere, the media drives the cultural conversation. I doubt there's anybody in America more than 2 steps removed from someone who regularly watches Fox (or CNN).
In that regard I don't find those figures particularly interesting. Conservatives asked want the FBI investigated because Fox, enough liberals are probably convinced that it's worth doing just to dis-spell the cloud of suspicion that's hovering.
Which is why Republicans in general should have 100% supported this investigation from day one.
It takes a special kind of partisan not to be able to see that Trump looks dubious as all hell.
|
On February 23 2019 17:37 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2019 15:32 On_Slaught wrote:
New NYT article on Klobachar isnt flattering. While she is certainly smart, driven, and effective, she also comes off as vindictive, petty, and cruel. She strikes me as a narcissistic bully who likes to shift the blame to her subordinates (sound familiar?). That shit will only get worse if she is in the WH given the media scruity and the fact she will try her damndest to not come off as the "weak female."
That's a no from me dog. Not even for VP. Plenty of other less volatile choices available. Yeah, same. That bit about calling the new (prospective?) employers of people trying to stop working for her to fucking sabotage their attempts to leave is a bit of a dealbreaker for me.
Isn't that also illegal?
|
On February 23 2019 08:32 TheTenthDoc wrote:The fact that the main three questions in the survey were Show nested quote +1* Should a special prosecutor be named to investigate the discussions among senior Justice Department and FBI officials in May 2017 to remove President Trump from office?
2* How likely is it that senior federal law enforcement officials broke the law in their discussions to remove President Trump from office – very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely?
3* What type of disciplinary action should be taken against senior federal law enforcement officials who discussed removing President Trump from office. Should they be jailed, fired, formally reprimanded, or should no disciplinary action be taken? means we've got some pretty significant priming going on. "Should we investigate X?" then asking "is it likely something was done worth investigating" is not a terribly good way to gauge opinions on the latter. Not as bad as some of their past polling has had, but combine this with the fact that "I don't know/I don't have an opinion" is not a valid opinion in the poll, a Rasmussen opinion special, and it's tough for me to really interpret these numbers in a meaningful sense-at least for the second question. For reference, I'm pretty sure this lack of a neutral option is why their presidential approval ratings skewed +19 relative to virtually every other pollster at the start of Trump's presidency.
Totally agree. The questions are biased, loaded, and leading; the response options are insufficient as well. This is literally Unit 1 of Statistics 101 (this is actually taught in September of high school and college statistics courses; my students could write better survey questions and take a more accurate poll than this one).
The objective for Rasmussen, of course, is to be able to release these skewed percentages and shape public discourse, as they recognize that most Americans aren't statistically-literate (i.e., understanding that this is bad form for creating a fair survey) and most Americans are too lazy to read the specifics of the poll. They'll read an article title, maybe a few numbers, and assume it's all accurate.
|
On February 23 2019 15:32 On_Slaught wrote:
New NYT article on Klobachar isnt flattering. While she is certainly smart, driven, and effective, she also comes off as vindictive, petty, and cruel. She strikes me as a narcissistic bully who likes to shift the blame to her subordinates (sound familiar?). That shit will only get worse if she is in the WH given the media scruity[sic] and the fact she will try her damndest[sic] to not come off as the "weak female."
That's a no from me dog. Not even for VP. Plenty of other less volatile choices available.
This is exactly the double standard female politicians face. AOC gets a lot of scrutiny the other way, but she found a way to make it work. But only because she is being the youngest congresswomen ever, not a candidate for POTUS.
We love narcissistic bullies when they are male politicians. But when they are female, they have to be feminine. But not too feminine, or we don't have any way to respect them as politicians.
This is exactly why in the US no female will get elected in 2020. They will always put off the wrong vibe. And it isn't just males thinking that. Females probably judge female politicians with the same unfair standard.
User was banned for this post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The hell is happening in this thread?
|
|
|
|
|
On February 24 2019 01:41 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
The hell is happening in this thread?
Nuclear test site
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
