Jump to content


MotownSports Fan
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

67 Excellent

About clark1mt

  • Rank
    MotownSports Fan
  • Birthday 03/12/1984


  • Location
    DC Environs


  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 1. How rich is he really? He's almost certainly underwater in debt. 2. At 12:01 on January 20, he won't have any actual power either. Any power he does retain will come from his followers, but once he's no longer useful to them, how many people will stick by him? If he had a competent legal team, he wouldn't be using Rudy Leaks so much.
  2. I see him accepting a pardon without the understanding of the admission of guilt.
  3. He doesn't need to. He can see it live.
  4. Someone on one of the channels a few days ago opined that Trump on the ballot is a huge driver for Republican turnout. It's why 2018 was such a "Blue Wave"; the Trumpers didn't care enough to vote when they couldn't vote specifically for him. 2022 should be interesting. Historically the incumbent's party does poorly in midterms, but the Senate seats that are up for election are majority Republican, much like this year. Among the D seats, only AZ and maybe NV are likely at risk of flipping. For R seats, WI, IA, PA at a minimum should be competitive, if not sure flips (especially WI). GA, NC, and FL (and OH) could also be close, depending on who runs and especially who wins the GA runoff for the special election.
  5. It's like people don't realize we remember 2016.
  6. It's true that donors don't necessarily equal votes, but there probably is a correlation. Donors are probably more likely to vote (because now they have a "stake" in the outcome), and thus donors can be viewed as a function of enthusiasm for a candidate, which transfers into voting. In other words, if people aren't excited enough about Trump to bother donating to his campaign, they might also not be motivated enough to actually make the effort to vote for him. Of course, there are caveats, mainly the idea that you'd have to account for the ability of people to be able to afford to donate to a candidate, and how the people who can't are distributed on the political spectrum.
  7. In a sane world this would be a story in the Onion, not the freakin' New York Times.
  8. Here's an article which fleshes it out a little more. https://www.newsweek.com/lindsey-graham-south-carolina-young-black-jaime-harrison-1538026
  9. Even with 25th Amendment legislation in place setting up a commission with the authorization to remove the president, the Amendment still allows the president to dispute his removal from power. If he does so, it still requires not just 2/3 of the Senate, but also 2/3 of the House to affirm the removal. So it remains a higher standard than impeachment if the president contests it.
  10. He won't. His only argument for holding it in person is to be able to scream and bluster, which somehow scores points with his base. If it's virtual, he can easily be cut off if he breaks the rules. But with his Covid diagnosis, Trump can't hope to swing public opinion his way on that; NOBODY (at least swing voters, anyway) is going to fault the debate commission, or Biden, for not wanting to be in the same room as him so soon. So Trump's backup plan has to be to say he won't participate and hope the debate is just canceled. This is a very possible outcome, but it's a gamble against the debate going on without him and just giving Biden 90 minutes of free national airtime, while the narrative will be Trump's cowardice after how the first debate went. So Trump will be hammered by his team about how badly that would go over for him, and he'll backtrack and participate.
  11. This also assumes that Trump wouldn't continue to commit federal crimes during a second term.
  12. I wouldn't be surprised if they're using Hope Hicks's positive test to claim they themselves now have it in order to give Trump an excuse to skip the remaining debates, which is something he probably wants given how badly he did at the first one.
  13. I believe this one was originally scheduled to start at 3 along with the others. The prospect of afternoon rain led them to move the time up, which clearly wasn't enough.
  14. In most cheating cases, it is (or largely appears to be) an individual acting on his own accord, usually as much for his personal benefit as for "the team, the team, the team". The difference in Houston is that it was pretty much an institutional problem, seemingly sanctioned by the organization and tolerated, if not encouraged, from the top of management on down to the players.
  • Create New...