That show I read it too, with the good news caveat of saying trump did try to make the gov race a trump referendum, and that still was not enough. The implication being even trump mind control only goes so far with.
I’m surprised they put this proposition on the ballot right now. It reminds me of a bathroom bill or something. Totally meaningless but designed to drive up a particular turn out. But there’s nothing else to turn out for here.
for a lot of those: it's a product of the US slowly losing its place as the shining city on the hill. when it was unquestioned, it's easy to assume whatever we were doing was the best. majority=good. order=good. status quo=good. now you have wealth inequality, lack of economic opportunity, population crunches. things get questioned.
as for 'melting pot = good', I doubt that was ever a majority opinion. it was just something people that wrote textbooks would pay lip service to. i don't think we need to catalog how every new group over the last 150 years was considered a plague on the pristine population that was here.
I've seen too many polls to believe there will be any reckoning here. Rs start with about 190 electoral votes. He just needs 80 more to get it done. I don't think he will, but I think it will be very close and probably differs based on who is nominated.
Pretty healthy win in Texas for Trump over any D.
https://www.texastribune.org/2019/11/04/democrats-dont-have-candidate-who-would-beat-trump-texas-today-poll/
It’s the best defense they have and I hope Ds have been working on how to counter it. Best is to workshop the best one sentence summary of the act in terms that are obviously corrupt. “We cannot allow a president to [undermine elections] by [inviting foreign interference] [trading our military for political favors]”. Something that no one can dismiss as innocent. Workshop it, repeat it ad nauseum.
I literally have no idea what the Addams family one is even saying. I get hunters hand in the cookie jar. I get the whistleblower is unknown. Everyone else is just a drawing of a someone in character of the show.
Remember the “deliverable” Trumps team had been insistent on: not an investigation, but the public announcement of the investigation.
that should clue you in to whether he was getting political advantage as an ancillary benefit to carrying out his duties, or if the political issue was the goal itself.
Thinking about this morning how much of the news is focused on proving the actions were wrong. Here, circumstantial evidence of knowledge of guilt. Yesterday's went the other way with testimony that the dude said he "didn't think anything was concerning" about the call.
With Watergate, you had a break-in. Something people could point to and say that was wrong and it was understandable at the 2nd grade level.
D's have a lot harder job this time than in the 70s.