President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[PaloAltoCougar]

...
I think the 2016 interference is overblown. The Russian meddling was basically some fake news articles released on social media and less than $1MM in Facebook advertising. The two campaigns spent nearly $2B on the election. If the Russians had so much influence on the election with so few resources, they must have amazing insight into the American electorate.

...

This Facebook advertising argument has been advanced several times here by intelligent people so I admit I may be missing something. But it's my understanding from various sources that most of the Russian meddling had nothing to do with ad buys, but rather was the work of Russian troll farms employing hundreds of people to plant innumerable fake stories and FB posts (which cost nothing other than the wages paid) (see, e.g., the NYT video on Russian kompromat). Why is the FB advertising budget a compelling argument for you?

[wapiti]

the problem is none of things we agree on are being done because of stupid politics.

But I think your last question/statement only sounds convincing to the Fox news audience. I don't think democrats are more concerned with re-living 2016 as they are with what happens in future elections. They did win in 2018. That narrative probably plays great at Trump rallies and on Ted's twitter feed and such. But it's not very convincing to the middle of the political spectrum and is a pretty lame response to why we aren't doing more to secure the voting system in the US and work to keep out foreign money and influence as much as possible. It shouldn't be any of their business.

You don't think democrats are motivated by making Trump look like an illegitimate president?

I'm pretty lukewarm on this issue. There are a bazillion things I'd rather see them working on. I think the social media giants are doing most of what can be easily done on their side anyway. And I don't think foreigners would be very effective at persuading the american electorate anyway.

If our voting systems are in danger of being successfully hacked, and I haven't heard that they are, then that should be addressed. We can't have hackers changing votes. But a federal solution to that would be about 100x more expensive than letting the states handle it individually.

[BlueK]

You don't think democrats are motivated by making Trump look like an illegitimate president?

I'm pretty lukewarm on this issue. There are a bazillion things I'd rather see them working on. I think the social media giants are doing most of what can be easily done on their side anyway. And I don't think foreigners would be very effective at persuading the american electorate anyway.

If our voting systems are in danger of being successfully hacked, and I haven't heard that they are, then that should be addressed. We can't have hackers changing votes. But a federal solution to that would be about 100x more expensive than letting the states handle it individually.

Well, Hillary herself and what few friends she still has maybe.

But this is way overblown, IMO, as a motivation and is primarily a Trump projection onto the other side because his ego makes him terrified he won't be seen as a legitimate winner of the 2016 election. The fact he has been known to say he actually did win the popular vote if it weren't for millions of non-citizens voting bears that out.

90% of the dems I think are just scared that the system is compromised in some way whether it be hackers or Russian trolls. They probably overestimate the threat. The problem is it's impossible to know by how much. We do know there was a substantial amount of foreign-inspired fake news and trollish activity on social media in 2016 meant to confuse and stir up trouble.

[Commando]

Embedded Tweet

[frank ryan]

This Facebook advertising argument has been advanced several times here by intelligent people so I admit I may be missing something. But it's my understanding from various sources that most of the Russian meddling had nothing to do with ad buys, but rather was the work of Russian troll farms employing hundreds of people to plant innumerable fake stories and FB posts (which cost nothing other than the wages paid) (see, e.g., the NYT video on Russian kompromat). Why is the FB advertising budget a compelling argument for you?

They’ve penetrated voting systems and databases. Their mission was successful, and Mueller and others have shared it’s ongoing.

[BlueK]

something has been happening in the last ten days or so that is sending Trump's numbers in the wrong direction again in RCP's average of the most recent polls. His approval number has been hanging on a little better, but his disapproval number has definitely been trending worse for him.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...oval-6179.html

[Pelado]

something has been happening in the last ten days or so that is sending Trump's numbers in the wrong direction again in RCP's average of the most recent polls. His approval number has been hanging on a little better, but his disapproval number has definitely been trending worse for him.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...oval-6179.html

People are hearing him speak and/or reading his tweets?

[BlueK]

People are hearing him speak and/or reading his tweets?

Or the effect of the Mueller hearings is moving sentiment more than the pundits thought?

[Commando]

something has been happening in the last ten days or so that is sending Trump's numbers in the wrong direction again in RCP's average of the most recent polls. His approval number has been hanging on a little better, but his disapproval number has definitely been trending worse for him.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...oval-6179.html

He's definitely putting the limits of human cognitive dissonance to the test! I've never witnessed so many ostensibly smart humans pretend they aren't eating a shit sandwich.

[beefytee]

Or the effect of the Mueller hearings is moving sentiment more than the pundits thought?

I guessing less the Muller testimony and more the chants of "scum, scum, scum, go back to where you're from!" and calling Baltimore rat infested. Those will particularly affect his disapproval rating while not touching his approval rating.

[BlueK]

I guessing less the Muller testimony and more the chants of "scum, scum, scum, go back to where you're from!" and calling Baltimore rat infested. Those will particularly affect his disapproval rating while not touching his approval rating.

The Baltimore comments were too recent to register on here yet except for maybe on the two newest ones that ran until yesterday. Chances are if it's going to affect the numbers, we'll be seeing it reflected on here within a few more days.

By the way, the numbers today of roughly 53% disapprove, 43% approve are almost exactly where it was the first week of November 2018 when the election was held and the Republicans lost in almost every swing district. Trump was also relentlessly beating the anti-immigrant/racially charged drum at that time. It doesn't help him even though he clearly thinks it does.

[Eddie]

Well, Hillary herself and what few friends she still has maybe.

But this is way overblown, IMO, as a motivation and is primarily a Trump projection onto the other side because his ego makes him terrified he won't be seen as a legitimate winner of the 2016 election. The fact he has been known to say he actually did win the popular vote if it weren't for millions of non-citizens voting bears that out...

I think there's some truth to the statement that Trump is worried about not being seen as the legitimately elected president. But limiting Democrats who see it that way to Hillary and a few friends she still has is an understatement.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/73700...mate-president

Jimmy Carter:

"Well, the president himself should condemn it, admit that it happened, which I think 16 [of the] intelligence agencies have already agreed to say. And there's no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election. And I think the interference although not yet quantified, if fully investigated would show that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf."

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...ngs-over-trump

Whatever your answer, there is no way to save the Trump presidency from being tainted by the cloud of illegitimacy.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...728-story.html

We need to talk about a forbidden subject: the legitimacy of the current president.

There’s been a code of silence around President Donald Trump’s shady victory in 2016. It’s one of those tiptoe-around-it things that the American family just doesn’t talk about. And with good reason. Whatever your politics, it’s perilous to question the soundness of an American election.

Raising the question of Trump’s legitimacy risks detonating a full-blown crisis of faith — kindling distrust not just in Trump, but also in the system that installed him.

But fear of facing the legitimacy question has not stopped Americans from harboring profound doubts, if only “deep down in places you don’t talk about at parties,” in Aaron Sorkin’s phrasing from “A Few Good Men.”

https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/r...230713224.html

While Mueller did not find sufficient evidence that Trump or his campaign had violated a criminal statute, the net effect was that the Trump campaign encouraged a foreign adversary to use and misrepresent stolen information on social media platforms to defraud U.S. voters. Because the presidency was won in this way, the president’s election victory brought forth nothing less than an illegitimate presidency.

If this process leads to impeaching Trump in the House of Representatives and also results in convicting him in the Senate, his illegitimacy would survive through Vice President Mike Pence’s succession to the presidency. Because the misdeeds were conducted to assure the entire Trump-Pence ticket was elected, both former candidates — Pence as well as Trump — have been disgraced and discredited. To hand the presidency to an illegitimate vice president would be to approve and reward the wrongdoing while the lingering stench of corruption would trail any Pence administration, guaranteeing an untenable presidency. If Trump is impeached, then Pence should not be allowed to become president. The vice president should resign or be impeached as well if for no other reason that he has been the chief enabler for this illegitimate president.

https://www.insider.com/joe-biden-sa...esident-2019-5

On Tuesday, Biden struck back at Trump. After a woman claimed she had a "very severe case of what's called Trump Derangement Syndrome," and that Trump is an "illegitimate president in my mind," Biden responded: "I absolutely agree."

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...tion-for-trump

Indeed, when I met recently with Jamieson, in a book-lined conference room at the Annenberg Center, in Philadelphia, and asked her point-blank if she thought that Trump would be President without the aid of Russians, she didn’t equivocate. “No,” she said, her face unsmiling. Clearly cognizant of the gravity of her statement, she clarified, “If everything else is a constant? No, I do not.”

There are more - along with other articles that state that the last 3 presidents have all had detractors call them illegitimate. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that it's more than Hillary and her buddies who follow this line of thinking.

[wapiti]

I think there's some truth to the statement that Trump is worried about not being seen as the legitimately elected president. But limiting Democrats who see it that way to Hillary and a few friends she still has is an understatement.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/73700...mate-president

Jimmy Carter:


https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...ngs-over-trump



https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...728-story.html



https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/r...230713224.html





https://www.insider.com/joe-biden-sa...esident-2019-5



https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...tion-for-trump



There are more - along with other articles that state that the last 3 presidents have all had detractors call them illegitimate. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that it's more than Hillary and her buddies who follow this line of thinking.

It's amazing that the Russisns were good enough to tip the election on a budget of less than a million dollars.

What did Hillary spend her billion on?

[BlueK]

I think there's some truth to the statement that Trump is worried about not being seen as the legitimately elected president. But limiting Democrats who see it that way to Hillary and a few friends she still has is an understatement.

https://www.npr.org/2019/06/28/73700...mate-president

Jimmy Carter:


https://thehill.com/opinion/white-ho...ngs-over-trump



https://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...728-story.html



https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/r...230713224.html





https://www.insider.com/joe-biden-sa...esident-2019-5



https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...tion-for-trump



There are more - along with other articles that state that the last 3 presidents have all had detractors call them illegitimate. But I don't think it's a stretch to say that it's more than Hillary and her buddies who follow this line of thinking.

So some dems talking about 2016 means election security is not an important issue to be concerned with for the future? Would it hurt the GOP in the senate to come up with their own bill? That don't even want to do that. Also whether or not voting machines were hacked or not last time doesn't mean there aren't some hostile nations out there that would love to do it. Other than from a purely crass and very cynical political motivation I don't understand the resistance against the federal govt. helping the states make sure their election systems are as secure as possible. It could easily harm both parties.

[tooblue]

It's amazing that the Russisns were good enough to tip the election on a budget of less than a million dollars.

What did Hillary spend her billion on?

I noticed you have dodged PaloAlto's question? And well, the Meuller report says they spent 1.25 million per month:

https://adage.com/article/digital/ru...mueller/312424