Trump Ready to Return to His Campaign Rallies

Donald Trump wanted to return to the campaign trail (pun intended, as he trails his opponent be several points) today. but he is now planning on heading out on Monday. His doctor says:

White House physician Sean Conley said in a memo released on Thursday that Trump had completed his course of therapy for COVID-19, remained stable since returning home from the Walter Reed medical facility on Monday and could resume public engagements on Saturday.

“There are medical tests underway that will ensure that when the president is back out he will not be able to transmit the virus,” McEnany said, adding Conley would lay out the details later. “He won’t be out there if he can transmit the virus.”


What does Dr. Fauci say?

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease doctor, told MSNBC on Thursday that guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control said a patient is considered infectious for 10 days from the onset of symptoms or until two negative molecular diagnostic tests 24 hours apart.

The White House and Trump both continue to refuse to say when Trump last tested negative for the disease? Why? What is he trying to hide?

I don't have a clue, all theories are welecome.

< Wednesday Open Thread | The Virus Strikes Twice >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    It's worth noting (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 05:19:52 PM EST
    for anyone inclined to dismiss or minimize how much political leverage the Trump cult has, where we are.

    The president has clearly lost it.  I know we have said that for years but it's finally really true.  It really could not be more clear.  The guy with the nuclear football would sunrise no one if he streaked across the south lawn nekid.

    This is probably the most dangerous time my life and I was 11 when missiles came to Cuba.

    But the thing is as he streaks there are 20 Republican Senators facing an election in 25 days cowering under their beds.  Terrified.  Not one has even expressed concern for his state.   And this is my point.   They are more afraid of the Trump base than they are of losing.

    Why.  Probably because they know they at least have jobs in Jan if they lose.  If Trump and the base turn on them not so much.

    So this is our problem.  The 40 freakin % of the country still voting for him.

    Let him play Il Duce.  It won't help.

    We can only hope he blows himself up.  Disgraces himself so completely the scales will fall from their eyes.  At least some of them.

    Also about the campaigning (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 05:41:14 PM EST
    I would guess his doctors would not and probably do not recommend he resume campaigning.

    To be very clear, I am wishing no harm to him.

    After Trumps miraculous recovery, after his cure, the best thing that could happen for the public health of the country would be that he has a relapse.  A bad one.

    Run Duce run.


    I am fully (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 06:31:57 PM EST
    expecting him to either decide at the last minute to not hold the rallies or collapse on the stage at a rally and have to be helicoptered out.

    helicoptered out a hero (none / 0) (#8)
    by leap on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 06:57:46 PM EST
    He gave his all. To present All of Himself to his cult. Whatta guy. So self-sacrificing to himself.

    My only hope is he (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 09:13:51 PM EST
    ends up like Il Duce.

    You remember (none / 0) (#12)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 07:43:10 AM EST
    Them comparing the Trump campaign to The Death Star?

    The Death Star exploded spectacularly just like the campaign.

    Jus sayin


    unmistakably purposeful eye rolling (none / 0) (#11)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 07:38:02 AM EST
    is not going to do it I'm afraid

    "For Republicans, fearful of a possible electoral disaster just weeks away, it has become safe at last to dis Donald Trump -- or at least to distance themselves from him in unmistakably purposeful ways," Politico reports.

    "A barrage of barbed comments in recent days shows how markedly the calculus of fear has shifted in the GOP. For much of the past four years, Republican politicians were scared above all about incurring the wrath of the president and his supporters with any stray gesture or remark that he might regard as not sufficiently deferential. Now, several of them are evidently more scared of not being viewed by voters as sufficiently independent."

    "This is far from an insurrection. Republicans in the main aren't outright repudiating Trump. But they are effectively rolling their eyes in exasperation with him, and especially his handling of the coronavirus pandemic."



    LOL (none / 0) (#14)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 10:00:59 AM EST
    They're all Susan Collins now or like Perdue who has been trying to put his head in the sand regarding Trump. We have the other 2 that break the mold on that with each vying to be the biggest Trumper.

    2 senate runoffs are possible (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:03:17 PM EST
    Now in your state?  I heard that some where.

    Here (none / 0) (#19)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:06:30 PM EST
    Definitely possible. (none / 0) (#29)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 01:17:44 PM EST
    The jungle primary is a definite runoff. The question remains about the Ossoff/Perdue race. People are speculating that it could also be a runoff as polling has neither of them breaking 50% lately.

    According to Latest Poll on 538 Site (none / 0) (#30)
    by RickyJim on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 02:13:57 PM EST
    Ossoff 44%, Perdue 43%, Hazel 4%.  I assume that the remaining 9% had no opinion.  Who is Hazel?

    I think that's the (none / 0) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 03:00:31 PM EST
    Libertarian candidate.

    He (or his people) understand that (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Peter G on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 06:28:45 PM EST
    "peaceful protester" is a label with positive cachet in American culture, at least since MLK. So a gathering to (ostensibly) express opposition to "rioting and looting" (derogatory euphemism for "Black Lives Matter") is labeled "Peaceful protesters for law and order." Very simple.

    K (none / 0) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 06:35:59 PM EST
    I sort of read it as



    He (none / 0) (#7)
    by FlJoe on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 06:52:48 PM EST
    has already referred to his rallies as "peaceful protests" as an excuse for holding his mass spreading events.

    Yes, there is also that. Unsurprisingly, (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Peter G on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 10:18:59 AM EST
    the Tr*mp people do not understand the First Amendment. As a result, they believe somehow that (mis)labeling the gathering as a "protest" rather than as a "rally" give is some sort of higher-level constitutional privilege to violate public health regulations. None of which is correct. But it is typically dishonest.

    Just heard (none / 0) (#9)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 07:17:54 PM EST
    They plan to have 2000 people?  wtf

    Someone just said, he has become Jim Jones.  Inviting them to come drink the koolaid and die.

    Interesting times


    Interesting (none / 0) (#13)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 08:53:13 AM EST
    is one thing, grotesque is another. Has Edgar Allan Poe been added to the writing team?

    I wonder with all the gnashing of teeth (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 08:11:34 PM EST
    about the evils of abortion this week anyone will mention that Trump miraculous Covid cure came from aborted fetal tissue?

    From Snopes

    What's True
    The manufacturer of REGN-COV2 has stated that it employs stem cells in its research, most commonly mouse embryonic stem cells and human blood stem cells. The "antibody cocktail" given to Trump is a combination of two human-made proteins and was developed using a decades-old cell line derived from embryonic kidney tissues obtained from an aborted human fetus in 1973.

    They go on to explain that no recently harvested fetal tissue was used.  As if that made a difference.


    Seems odd to me more has not been made of this.

    Absolutely right (5.00 / 2) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 08:42:21 AM EST
    Trump is not the disease.  He is a symptom.
    We have a bigger problem that will outlast Trump.

    Barack Obama told Pod Save America that President Trump is responsible for the rapid spread of false information on social media.

    Said Obama: "Social media, media infrastructure, the conservative media infrastructure. We've had this conversation before. That is a problem that is going to outlast Trump. Trump is a symptom of it and an accelerant to it. It has gotten turbocharged because of social media. And because the head of our government, of our federal government has resorted to it."

    A Threat? (5.00 / 3) (#112)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 17, 2020 at 07:24:31 PM EST
    I have no idea, but I'm curious (4.67 / 3) (#32)
    by Peter G on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 05:50:28 PM EST
    what agency is supposed to police the misuse of government/public resources to support an event that is falsely advertised as an official presidential activity at the White House, when it is in fact an entirely partisan campaign rally.

    Maybe that agency... (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by kdog on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 11:05:41 AM EST
    is us old pal...via the voting booth.  

    Ain't no police force that could be big enough to police the misuse of our government and our resources...under any administration, but especially this master-thieving one.  I guess it's our job.


    So, you have a plan to vote, kdog? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Towanda on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:37:44 PM EST
    No I'm washing my hair that Tuesday... (5.00 / 4) (#119)
    by kdog on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 09:55:00 AM EST
    Of course I have a plan to vote, ain't missed a chance to rock the booth yet since 1996.

    Look (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 09, 2020 at 05:49:04 PM EST
    at the invitation


    Don't know what that means but I don't like the sound of it.

    I am seeing (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 11:56:58 AM EST
    a LOT of people of color in line for Trumps death rally.

    What's up with that.

    I wouldn't have thought he had that many fans of color in the entire country.

    Plenty of misogynists (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by CST on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:22:45 PM EST
    Who aren't white.  

    Just like plenty of racists who aren't men.


    Maybe just a group (none / 0) (#17)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 11:59:16 AM EST
    going through the line?

    I (none / 0) (#22)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:39:29 PM EST
    noticed that. What is with the pale blue tee-shirts virtually everyone is wearing, the red hats of course but it looks like the WH must have given them out. The  majority does appear to be black. Is he paying these people? At least most of them are wearing masks.

    See (none / 0) (#24)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:40:05 PM EST

    They are (none / 0) (#25)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:59:51 PM EST
    Completely (none / 0) (#26)
    by FlJoe on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 01:04:22 PM EST
    Astroturfed crowd, can't even get real supporters to show up, sad.

    Surreal (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 01:06:32 PM EST
    Just surreal

    I don't believe I saw (none / 0) (#28)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 01:10:11 PM EST
    2000 blue shirts.

    I was wondering who would come to this.  


    Blexit (none / 0) (#21)
    by BGinCA on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:35:17 PM EST
    Candace Owens is paying for travel and lodging for Black people to attend T* rally at White House.

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/candace-owens-blexit-group-pays-attendees-travel-trumps/story?id=735 31036

    Bad link (none / 0) (#23)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Oct 10, 2020 at 12:39:31 PM EST
    Stable genius. (none / 0) (#33)
    by KeysDan on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 01:42:08 PM EST
    The NYTimes reported that Trump proposed that upon leaving Walter Reed, he would, at first, appear slow and fragile only to quickly tear back his dress shirt to reveal a Superman T-shirt underneath.  The Clark Kent transformation did not come about---perhaps Dr. Handsome Liar (a SNL nickname) could not find a cape.

    If his doctor is telling the truth (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 01:55:48 PM EST
    and he really is not shedding or spreading then he must have had it longer than they say.  Right?

    Which made me wonder if the reason he lost it in the first debate was because they were already giving him steroids.  I mean that was a steroid performance.  Which would mean they knew he had it before the debate.  Which is why he "was to late" to get a pre debate test.

    anything is actually possible.  


    Yes, (none / 0) (#36)
    by KeysDan on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 02:37:11 PM EST
    that is the timeline that squares with his disease course.  Maybe, Trump was patient zero at the Supreme Court soirée the Saturday prior to the debate, but a surer bet, in my view, for that distinction is the Handmaiden Judge.  The dates of her  and her husband's COVID infection remain elusive---summer, late summer, September.... A possible shedder.

    I think of that (none / 0) (#34)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 01:48:57 PM EST
    as the thing he almost did that they WANT us to know about.

    Hmmmm (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 05:30:38 PM EST
    Democrats are so convinced that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo could be considered for Joe Biden's attorney general that aides at the National Governors Association, which Cuomo chairs, are looking into contingencies for replacing him, Axios reports.


    Stacey Abrams (none / 0) (#38)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Oct 11, 2020 at 06:39:01 PM EST
    and Sally Yates are also rumored as being considered. While Cuomo would be a good pick I think Yates would be better and Abrams not a fit for that job at all. We need someone with a background in prosecuting.

    Trump tests negative twice for COVID-19 (none / 0) (#39)
    by ragebot on Mon Oct 12, 2020 at 05:16:23 PM EST
    Not according to NBC but according to (5.00 / 5) (#40)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 12, 2020 at 06:51:11 PM EST
    Dr. Handsome Liar. Using the rapid test, which is the least reliable, and without saying when the tests were actually done. But I'm glad he's back out on the road. Much greater opportunity to mess things up and backfire, not to mention greater risk of relapse.

    Yes, (none / 0) (#41)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 12, 2020 at 07:59:47 PM EST
    Positive antigen test results are usually highly accurate but negative results much less so, and need to be confirmed with a PCR or molecule test. It is already known that Trump has tested  positive, the concern for him and others is whether or not, with reliability, he is now negative.

     This reporting by the good doctor is curious--a molecule test, in the special case of the president, can have relatively quick turnaround for results.

    Moreover, the White House position is it would be a violation of Trump's privacy rights to tell when he last tested negative before testing positive , but that they can tell us he is testing negative now.


    The doctor's (presumably) candid assertion (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 12, 2020 at 08:25:28 PM EST
    that he is releasing only such health info as Tr*mp specifically authorizes, and that anything else is prohibited by HIPAA, makes the information he releases actually worthless, so long as Tr*mp grants only selective privacy waivers.

    The weakest link (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 06:39:05 AM EST
    But we knew that

    After days of questions from reporters, Joe Biden finally told WKRC that he was "not a fan" of court packing.

    At least it was a typically (for Biden) mushy mostly meaningless answer.

    Like Biden, (none / 0) (#45)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 08:54:29 AM EST
    I am not a fan of "Court Packing"--- a bad faith Republican project to set up the Courts, including the Supreme Court, so that the Courts will do their bidding with rulings that gain goals that they are unable or unwilling to achieve by legislation.  

    I am a fan of Court Reform that increases the number of Circuit Courts, increases the membership of the Supreme Court to 15, institutes ethics rules for Supreme Court Justices with provision for Congressional enforcement and sanctions for violations, such as temporary re-assignment to lower courts, and establishing certain jurisdictional restrictions for the Supreme Court.  All of which may be achieved without Constitutional Amendment.


    I think probably (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 08:57:21 AM EST
    the next question is what does THAT mean.  And on and on.

    I think it was a mistake to open the can of worms.  No one cared but the press.  


    Yes, (none / 0) (#48)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 09:56:12 AM EST
    and, I hope no Democrat uses the Republican's "Court Packing" terminology.

    As Chuck Terd says (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 11:24:01 AM EST
    "Biden's use of the term `court packing' was a clue to his feelings about it".

    Or words to that effect.

    Even a stopped clock......


    What Would Happen? (none / 0) (#49)
    by RickyJim on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 10:29:18 AM EST
    If we really separated the judiciary from politics by making all these judges part of the Civil Service?

    CNN banner (none / 0) (#44)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 08:46:08 AM EST

    W. T. F.

    A handy guide (none / 0) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 09:37:33 AM EST
    for when your mail in ballot will be counted

    Surprised only 4 states don't count before the election.  Two are WI and PA

    Watching the ACB hearings (none / 0) (#52)
    by ragebot on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 03:54:11 PM EST
    Gotta say she seems to have a formidable knowledge of the law.  Mostly a love fest with the pubs lobbing softballs while the dems to a great extent seem to be out in left field with their questions. Senator Leahy asking questions, which he said himself she would likely not know the answer to, like the number of peeps who died from COVID-19 seemed like the worst example till Senator Hirono got way out into the weeds with the question about should a judge ignore a 180 day limit to bring a suit.  No question the dems' endless questioning about how  ACB would rule on specific caste and ACB's stock answer she would follow the Ginsburg Rule gets old.  Have to say if I kept getting the same question my response would be 'asked and answered'.

    As a disclaimer I have to admit I have not watched the whole thing, never was a masochist.  

    Conservatives (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 04:40:49 PM EST
    are impressed with a blank sheet of paper. So it's a pretty low standard they have.

    Conservatives have pretty much given up and know it's the end so might as well make the best of it. Coney Barrett can be one vote out of 15 on the supreme court unless we want the court to remain illegitimate for a generation.


    "Formidable knowledge of the law'? (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 06:33:53 AM EST
    LOL! Judge Barrett couldn't even answer two simple and direct questions - whether a president has the right to unilaterally postpone an election (he doesn't), and whether voter intimidation is against the law (it is) - without turning into an overbaked word pretzel. I wouldn't trust that disingenuous woman if she was presiding over a case in traffic court.

    UPDATE: Under softball questioning ... (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 02:05:39 PM EST
    ... from Sen. Ben. Sasse (R-NE), Judge Barrett was unable to name the five freedoms protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

    This woman has no business being a judge, period. She's the very antithesis of someone you'd want for that position. She's a thinly veiled right-wing ideologue in whom the dogma is strong, as Sen. Dianne Feinstein publicly observed three years ago. And she's still not doing a very good job of disguising it.

    Heaven help us if she's ever asked to rule on the legality of the California GOP's strategic (and highly unethical) deployment of unauthorized ballot boxes in four counties, apparently for purposes of ballot harvesting. You just know in your heart how that would go.

    This is awful.


    Five freedoms? There are more than that (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Peter G on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 06:16:24 PM EST
    freedom of speech, of the press, association, assembly, petition, non-establishment of religion, free exercise of religion. Is his theory that freedom of association doesn't count because it is not literally mentioned? That assembly and petition are one? Or that the two religion clauses together form only one kind of "freedom"? Sounds like a trick question to me.

    Then that begs me to ask, ... (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:40:08 AM EST
    ... would you as a veteran defense counsel trust a judge who falls for a trick 1L / pre-law question?

    Because I sure wouldn't. But hey, I'm just a practicing pro-choice Roman Catholic who doesn't think all that highly of my Church's Illuminati / Opus Dei / Our Lady of Heavenly Zygotes crowd. Trump is their Mussolini.



    Sad to say, at this point, I do not (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 08:59:53 AM EST
    "trust" any federal judge.  And certainly not anyone nominated by this administration, given how they are screened.

    But I bet that she has memorized (none / 0) (#88)
    by Towanda on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:41:48 PM EST
    the Second Amendment,

    She (none / 0) (#89)
    by FlJoe on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:49:30 PM EST
    has probably already forgotten the "well regulated" part.

    And, in keeping (none / 0) (#91)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 04:53:20 PM EST
    with her originalism jurisprudence, Judge Barrett has no doubt found the language AK 47 and hand guns in the 2nd Amendment.  Just as her nominator Trump credited George Washington with seizing the airports at Yorktown.

    The Second Amendment refers to a right (none / 0) (#92)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 05:04:08 PM EST
    to "bear arms."  An AK-47, being a military weapon, is more clearly within the probable original understanding of "arms" than is an ordinary handgun. Putting aside what exactly it meant in the 1790s to "bear" arms. Did it include the right to keep them at home? To transport them in a personal vehicle? To go hunting? There is a lot of historical scholarship about this, with some sharp disagreement.

    Agreed, but (none / 0) (#96)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 06:14:41 PM EST
    Were not pistols a common military weapon back then? Especially among the officers?

    Surely the "probable original understanding" of the 2a included them?


    I am a criminal appeals lawyer and (none / 0) (#98)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 06:42:18 PM EST
    civil libertarian, not a social or military historian. I wouldn't know about "pistols" and whether, even if what you say about army officers is true, they were the 1790s equivalent of what today we call handguns.

    Sure, I'm no expert either. (none / 0) (#99)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 07:21:40 PM EST
    It's not unlike her answer on the ACA, ... (none / 0) (#107)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 02:09:26 PM EST
    ... in which she said she'd try to examine the law based upon the original intent of our country's founders when they wrote the Constitution - which, of course, would be all well and fine if our country's founders enjoyed health insurance coverage back in 1787.

    One more comment (none / 0) (#53)
    by ragebot on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 04:22:55 PM EST
    ACB has one of the best poker faces I have ever seen; would not like to play cards with her.

    Judge Barrett's poker (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by KeysDan on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 04:58:04 PM EST
    face slipped offf under the stressors of the exchange with Senator Booker.    She finally realized Senator Booker was taking her down a path that she would regret.  But, a little late.

    Did you see (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 05:16:43 PM EST
    Klobuchar? ACB sounded like an absolute brain dead chatbot incapable of answering questions. Amy asked ACB if voter intimidation was illegal and ACB did not even know and Klobuchar had to read her the law. A supreme court judge who doesn't even know the law? I guess the chat bot thing is easy when you're in a cult.

    Was she asked about this (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 04:36:12 PM EST
    The Supreme Court let the Trump administration end the census count more than two weeks early, dealing a blow to civil rights groups that said minorities will be undercounted as a result, Bloomberg reports.



    Conservatives love (none / 0) (#58)
    by MKS on Tue Oct 13, 2020 at 06:27:25 PM EST
    the game aspect of this.  Who is winning?

    About overturning Roe or the Affordable Care Act, not so much.


    What will happen 3 November 2020 (none / 0) (#62)
    by ragebot on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 12:19:44 PM EST
    Endless law suits will be filed that will drag out for who knows how long.

    Nope (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 12:44:11 PM EST
    That is the wish of all conservatives because they want an authoritarian dictatorship but there is going to be a winner and those that have seen the inside polling are projecting an early announcement.

    Anyway you can tell from the GOP and their behavior that they know it's all over. Confident people don't put someone like ACB on the court, someone who doesn't even know the 5 freedoms guaranteed in the constitution. She's gonna cut a lot of ads to use against GOP senators. Thanks for all the help conservatives! We will be sure to not thank you after 11/3.


    "To petition (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 01:52:11 PM EST
    the government", got away from her. But, then, how is a federal appellate judge to remember that.?  

    When  Senator Kennedy (R. LA) comes off the smarter of the two in the understanding of climate science, we may have a problem.

    Senator Whitehouse was able to remind that Brett Kavanagh was under an ethics investigation while being considered for confirmation, but escaped it after being confirmed to the Supreme Court.  Judge Barrett noted that she was not under an ethics investigation which, I guess, is a good thing for a Trump nominee.


    Thank heavens for small favors. (none / 0) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 02:10:15 PM EST
    I'd think that in the hierarchy of legal qualifications for an appellate judge, "not under an ethics investigation" is a rather low bar to clear.

    Is it me (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 03:51:49 PM EST
    or is her voice really annoying.

    Yes, the (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by KeysDan on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 04:32:01 PM EST
    high pitched Valley Girl voice is grating, but, still, I find this aspect of the judge to be her best attribute.

    I would rather listen to Gilbert Gottfried (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 04:55:29 PM EST
    It's not you. (none / 0) (#76)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:54:38 AM EST
    My younger sister likewise still has that nasally adolescent girl voice that makes one long to watch pantomime. Love her dearly but oh Lord, listening to her is sometimes like hearing a car engine with a loose fan belt.

    WaPo (none / 0) (#74)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 08:05:23 PM EST
    With less than three weeks to go before Nov. 3, more than 14 million Americans have already voted in the fall election, reflecting an extraordinary level of participation despite barriers erected by the coronavirus pandemic -- and setting a trajectory that could result in the majority of voters casting ballots before Election Day for the first time in U.S. history," the Washington Post reports.

    "The picture is so stark that election officials around the country are reporting record early turnout, much of it in person, meaning that more results could be available on election night than previously thought."

    "So far, much of the early voting appears to be driven by heightened enthusiasm among Democrats. Of the roughly 3.5 million voters who have cast ballots in six states that provide partisan breakdowns, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans by roughly 2 to 1, according to a Washington Post analysis of data in Florida, Iowa, Maine, Kentucky, North Carolina and Pennsylvania."



    Further, with 20 days to go, ... (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 04:28:52 AM EST
    ... the Biden campaign has an astonishing $400 million cash on hand, while the Trump campaign is pulling its ads in some Midwest states in what appears to be a last-ditch effort to hold the line in Florida and Texas. So, expect a nationwide Biden blitz from Maine and Florida to Hawaii and Alaska, with special emphasis in those states with vulnerable GOP senators.

    Further, Colorado's early turnout is now over 293,000 voters, which is amazing in and of itself. But what's truly stunning is the breakdown in returned ballots:

    • 46% Democratic
    • 33% Undeclared / Independent
    • 19% Republican.
    Obviously, this disparity will shrink to some degree over the next three weeks. But in an all-mail state like Colorado where every registered voter has already received a ballot, it may also be indicative of a surprising (and for Republicans, alarming) drop-off of enthusiasm within the state's normally robust GOP electorate.

    We may be witnessing a historic political collapse, though we likely won't know that for sure until Nov. 3 at least.



    I voted by mail last week (none / 0) (#83)
    by MKS on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 01:38:56 PM EST
    And, according the County website, my vote has already been counted.

    In California, you can actually track online your ballot--when it was mailed to you, when you mailed it back, and when it was counted.


    I voted around noon today, by (none / 0) (#85)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:08:25 PM EST
    submitting my completed and sealed "mail-in" ballot and inserting into the official county drop box (one of two in our Township, a drive of no more than two miles), under the watchful eye of a county deputy sheriff. There was a steady stream of folks walking up to do the same, although not what I would call a "line." In compliance with PA law, however, it cannot be counted until 7 a.m. on Election Day, at the earliest. At most it can be "pre-canvassed," which means, (a) name, address and possibly signature on the outer envelope verified against the voter list; (b) removed from the two envelopes that enclose it (the inner security envelope, of course, is blank for anonymity); and (c) unfolded and flattened to be ready for the scanner.

    News (none / 0) (#109)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 02:35:21 PM EST
    A Cleveland company that agreed to print absentee ballots for dozens of counties in Ohio and Pennsylvania is 10 days late in getting them to voters, the New York Times reports.

    Here's the kicker: The company's owners are Trump supporters and flew a Trump flag at their headquarters.

    Said CEO Richard Gebbie: "We fly a flag because my brother and I own the company and we support President Trump."



    I understand why NBC did it (none / 0) (#71)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 06:17:39 PM EST
    NBC is getting lots of grief about its Trump town hall

    I know Joe, ok, I HOPE Joe won't say anything I can't hear later.

    I will be watching His Excellency.

    Jimmy Kimmel said it better (none / 0) (#79)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 08:58:24 AM EST
    "if there's a show on the US Constitution on one channel and a guy getting hit in the nuts with a shovel on the other, I'm going with the guy getting hit in the nuts every time."

    No one can turn away from a train wreck. Orange doofus will win the ratings because everyone will want to watch the train wreck.


    Just one more example (none / 0) (#81)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 12:16:37 PM EST
    538 Now Has Democrats Favored to Win Senate (none / 0) (#72)
    by RickyJim on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 06:25:30 PM EST
    And their (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Oct 14, 2020 at 07:57:13 PM EST
    stunt with Coney Barrett is probably going to deliver more seats than we thought. It seems to have caused the GOP to crater here in GA.

    Look to where the GOP is now playing defense. (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 02:17:29 PM EST
    David Perdue in Georgia. Kelly Loeffler in Georgia again (special election). Lindsey Graham in South Carolina. Cindy Hyde-Smith in Mississippi. John Cornyn in Texas. Joni Ernst in Iowa. With Pat Roberts' retirement, they're struggling to retain a now open seat in Kansas.

    At this point, Republicans can pretty much write off Martha McSally in Arizona, Corey Gardner in Colorado and the always terribly concerned Susan Collins in Maine. Even Dan Sullivan is stumbling badly in Alaska.

    And if the full extent of American voters' wrath translates into a Blue Tsunami in these next few weeks and the Democrats run the proverbial table, I wouldn't even count out Amy McGrath's chances to pull off a shocker against "Moscow Mitch" McConnell in Kentucky.

    These were all once considered safe or fairly safe Senate seats for the Republicans. Trump's disturbing behavior and incompetence, coupled with his Senate allies' enablement of the same, have put every single one of those seats into play.

    The GOP's political instability is not just limited to Washington. We're also seeing some initial indications that voter anger with the Republican slate is now permeating down to state and local races as well. If so, they are staring at a Hooveresque-scale electoral rebuke and debacle.



    Burn the lifeboats (none / 0) (#82)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 01:31:33 PM EST
    Sen. Ben Sasse (R-NE), in a private call with constituents, excoriated President Trump, saying he had mishandled the coronavirus response, "kisses dictators' butts," "sells out our allies," spends "like a drunken sailor," mistreats women, and trash-talks evangelicals behind their backs, the Washington Examiner reports.

    He added that Trump has "flirted with white supremacists" and his family "treated the presidency like a business opportunity."

    All of which, of course, can be overlooked, (none / 0) (#86)
    by Peter G on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 03:10:39 PM EST
    because ... control for the foreseeable future of the Supreme Court and the lower federal courts.

    Sen Whitehouse yesterday (5.00 / 3) (#90)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 04:17:57 PM EST
    ".....once the rule of "because we can" has been established ....don't think that when the shoe is on the other foot you can come to us with any credibility and say, "I know you can do that but you shouldn't"

    Could someone please (5.00 / 4) (#93)
    by MO Blue on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 05:19:36 PM EST
    explain to me why in the holy h€ll Diane Feinstein praised Lindsey Graham's handling of the Barrett's Hearing and topped it off by giving him a hug. Unless she had an active case of Covid and wanted to share it with Lindsey, her actions were inexcusable and she should be removed from her committees due to her failing mental capacities.

    And, Lindseybelle (5.00 / 3) (#95)
    by KeysDan on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 06:06:25 PM EST
    openly violated Committee rules to schedule voting, over the objection of Senator Durbin.  At least two minority members are required for action, and. Durban was the only minority member present.

    So much for.Senator Feinstein's accolade for fairness and best set of hearings in her experience.  She has not voted for a Republican judicial nominee and will surely vote against Judge Barrett.  But, attemptIng to recover an imaginary civility shows she has been in a Rip van Winkle coma.  While Jamie Harrison will never forgive her, I will soften my view somewhat if she supports Court reform including SC expansion.


    For some reason (5.00 / 3) (#97)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 06:32:51 PM EST
    I doubt she will.  

    Seriously (none / 0) (#94)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 05:42:27 PM EST
    I was also starting to think she may have passed her sell by date.  This is not the first weird/dumb thing she has done lately

    Feinstein needs to retire. (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by Chuck0 on Thu Oct 15, 2020 at 08:05:11 PM EST
    I haven't been a fan for many years.

    Yes (5.00 / 3) (#103)
    by MO Blue on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 11:34:14 AM EST
    Tomorrow would be a good day for her to announce her retirement.

    so would today. (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by leap on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 11:41:47 AM EST

    IT was a retweet (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 07:18:28 AM EST
    I do lots of retweets.  I just put it out there and people can decide.

    Donald Trump Tweets Satirical 'Babylon Bee' Article Saying Twitter Was Down to Protect Biden

    Wow, this has never been done in history. This includes his really bad interview last night. Why is Twitter doing this. Bringing more attention to Sleepy Joe

    Times call for an end (none / 0) (#102)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 09:20:38 AM EST
    to our long national nightmare.  

    it's pretty good

    even if it is preaching to the choir

    Thanks for the link. (none / 0) (#111)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 03:56:25 PM EST
    Excellent indictment of the worst president in modern history. I like that they never refer to him as "President" only Mr. He deserves none of the respect normally afforded the office. He has tarnished it so badly.

    Mitts has more both sides (none / 0) (#105)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 12:02:33 PM EST
    "The president's unwillingness to denounce an absurd and dangerous conspiracy theory last night continues an alarming pattern: politicians and parties refuse to forcefully and convincingly repudiate groups like antifa, white supremacists and conspiracy peddlers."

    Translated into Truthese: (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 02:35:27 PM EST
    "I am troubled by our present politics, which no longer accord to me the privilege of saying one thing while doing another. How I long for those days of yore enjoyed by my father and his contemporaries, when pompous white men who were my current age could play the part of elder statesmen who sanctimoniously reminded everyone ad nauseum on the need for civility and mutual respect. You all have me so upset, I'm likely to overdose on buttermilk. So, just stop it."

    Democrats are clearly favored to win the House (none / 0) (#106)
    by RickyJim on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 12:52:21 PM EST
    According to 538. The "clearly favored" means they think it even more likely than winning the Presidency and Senate.  However, that page has something disturbing for those of us who hope for a sweep: If you look at the box labeled "Forecasting each House seat", it appears that Democrats will have a majority in at most 17 states.  This is quite ominous if the Presidency is decided in the House where each state will have one vote.

    You'd stand a much better chance ... (none / 0) (#108)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Oct 16, 2020 at 02:20:47 PM EST
    RickyJim: "If you look at the box labeled "Forecasting each House seat", it appears that Democrats will have a majority in at most 17 states. This is quite ominous if the Presidency is decided in the House where each state will have one vote."

    ... of being struck by lightning. Absent any systemic right-wing interference at polling places, ballot boxes and / or the clerk's offices when the votes are counted, this presidential election is likely not going to be a very close contest at all.



    Have You Read Barton Gellman's Article (none / 0) (#113)
    by RickyJim on Sun Oct 18, 2020 at 01:46:42 PM EST
    in the Atlantic? It is compendium of how Trump and his Republican enablers are, right now, conspiring to undermine the election results. Several Democratic Senators, including Kamala Harris, brought up some of the possibilities during the Barrett confirmation hearings.

    I agree, that Atlantic article is (none / 0) (#114)
    by Peter G on Sun Oct 18, 2020 at 06:34:21 PM EST
    quite terrifying. Worst case scenario piled on worst case scenario, but still, none of it unrealistic. Sad to say, the Pennsylvania Republican party lawyer/strategist/operative quoted in the article was a student of mine, when I was a law professor many years ago. Epic fail?

    I'm so sorry, Peter (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by Zorba on Sun Oct 18, 2020 at 09:28:44 PM EST
    But it's not your fault.  At the end of the day, you are not responsible for what your student did in subsequent years, and you weren't his only law professor, either.  Don't feel at all guilty for his (her?) failures.

    I think they have been planning this (none / 0) (#115)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 18, 2020 at 09:21:25 PM EST
    For years.  Knowing they probably could not win they were going to steal the election.  

    I think the virus flipped the game table.  One thing they couldn't plan for.  Still Trump was so confident in the plan he never really thought he had to try to win.  He thought it was in the bag so he could be himself.  He just needed to get past this virus thing.  

    He only had to get close and the stuff in the Atlantic would get him over the line.   He's is not going to get close.  He is only now realizing it's not going to work

    I still think it's a dangerous time but the plan is not going to work.

    He's making jokes about losing to a terrible candidate.  I actually think this might be a good thing.  I'm sure it was not his intent but he is putting the idea out there in the minds of his fans that he could lose.  He's doing it at rallies over and over.

    But he has not completely framed it yet.  He's going to lose to a terrible candidate and he's going to lose by the biggest margin ever.  


    And Trump is not the only one (none / 0) (#117)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Oct 18, 2020 at 09:31:55 PM EST
    talking about losing.

    Steve Bannon told The Australian that if President Trump loses re-election in 2020, he'll run again in 2024.

    Said Bannon: "I'll make this prediction right now: If for any reason the election is stolen from, or in some sort of way Joe Biden is declared the winner, Trump will announce he's going to run for re-election in 2024. You're not going to see the end of Donald Trump."


    Not something Bannon would have said a few months ago.  And also good.  They need to hear he is losing.


    His rallies (none / 0) (#118)
    by KeysDan on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 06:43:17 AM EST
    have a new woman to "lock up"---Michigan Governor Whitmer.  Inciting more like those militia morons attempting to kidnap the governor in their PT Cruiser, an unlikely get-a-way car.  And, it seems to show his "go to " lock her up woman, Hillary, like  much of his standard bile, has gone stale.  And, when that is all you've got, it is not a good thing.

    I agree. (none / 0) (#121)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:30:06 AM EST
    I think in 1996 they were shocked into the realization that they could get beat and get beat soundly. That is when they started hatching their plans. They were ready for 2000 but we were not. they have been attempting to pull this crap every election since then.

    Yes, that too (none / 0) (#123)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:40:19 AM EST
    but I was really thinking of the Trump era.  That was a surprise to everyone including Trump,  but they really really understood that it would not happen again.  That in 4 years they were going to have to take everything they learned since 1996 and take it to the next level.

    Practically the first words from Trump on this election was that it would be stolen if he lost.  That would have been the emails of 2020.  And I think it would have worked if Trump had not so spectacularly botched the response to the virus.

    It's often said Trump is not running against Biden he is running against the pandemic.  I think that's right.  It is something nothing in his life has prepared him for.  

    His invented reality, so popular with some, is coming smack up against actual reality.  


    Biggest margin ever? Not likely. (none / 0) (#127)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 11:39:57 AM EST
    Johnson over Goldwater (1964) was 61.1 to 38.5 (popular) and 486-52 (electoral college). Nixon over McGovern (1972) was 60.7 to 37.5 (popular) and 520-17 (electoral coll.). In 1820, James Monroe won as a Democratic-Republican (Jeffersonian) with the Federalists not even running a candidate. Electoral College margin was 231-1 (one elector voted for John Quincy Adams, a Federalist, despite Monroe winning the popular vote in every state). I will settle for a landslide. Doesn't have to be the biggest ever.

    We should say it is (none / 0) (#128)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 11:59:45 AM EST
    the biggest margin ever.  He would hate that

    Oh, yes, absolutely. And it probably will be (none / 0) (#130)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 12:38:44 PM EST
    in the differential of raw number of total popular votes, given today's larger electorate and (hopfully) a high turnout.

    I should also have included (none / 0) (#129)
    by Peter G on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 12:36:43 PM EST
    F.D.R. over Landon, 1936. Popular, 60.8 to 36.5; E.C., 523-8.

    The guy may have been smart enough ... (none / 0) (#134)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Oct 20, 2020 at 07:57:11 PM EST
    ... to get into law school, Peter - but you can't fix sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity, I don't care how good a professor you are.

    More Horror Scenarios (none / 0) (#131)
    by RickyJim on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 12:51:17 PM EST
    This time in a new Atlantic article written by Lawrence Lessig.   I think it emphasises how important a Democratic majority in the Senate on Jan 6 could be to prevent a Trump second term.

    How much (none / 0) (#120)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:08:20 AM EST
    You may not see this if you stay in your information bubble but there are many people, many, who absolutely believe the virus is a democratic plot to steal the election.  That it's not real and it will disappear, I guess much like the migrant caravans in 2018, after the election.  Which I assume they think Trump will win so that he can continue his noble fight against evil cannibal pedophile democrats.

    On numerous occasions recently, I've heard comments that indicate some folks believe coronavirus will disappear after the November elections in which the next president of the United States will be chosen.

    I've heard and read such comments from seemingly intelligent people who normally express rational, fact-based thoughts; but for some really odd reasons, logic does not appear to be part of the thought processes on this topic. It's all about politics!

    As experts say we are heading for a viral train wreck at almost exactly the same time.

    How much will is svck for these people who after Nov 3rd will learn Trump did not win and the cannibal pedophiles swept the nation in a historic wave

    AND not only is the virus not gone but they have it having contracted it at one of Cheetos mouth breather rallies.

    A lot I hope.

    I hear from some Union Trumpers... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by kdog on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:59:08 AM EST
    not that the virus is hoax, they ain't that crazy only half-crazy, but that it is being overblown for political gain by the Dems and mainstream media.

    While our Governor just gave the green light for movie theaters to reopen outside of NYC and select hotter spots.  And my girlfriend's kid's school has been open for business since first day with no incident (yet...fingers crossed). I don't think he'd sign off on any of that if he was trying to use the virus to hurt Trump and his bootlickers.  

    Fingers crossed limited capacity indoor live music won't be far behind movies...I got that junkie itch to rock out like you wouldn't believe. I'll rock my mask, sign a waiver, take my temperature rectally whatever it takes to feel completely human again!!!  


    I think "overblown" is also (none / 0) (#126)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 11:24:12 AM EST
    due for a rude awakening.  Just saw on CNN that roughly half the country "think the worst is behind us".  It isn't.  CNN was very clear about that.  

    What they, almost everyone who would know, say is that the worst is definitely ahead of us.  

    We are going in the wrong direction at the wrong time.  Been reading things like 100,000 infections a day and record breaking numbers of dead in the next month.

    It's not just us.  Many places on the world are seeing it.


    The irony (none / 0) (#122)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:32:48 AM EST
    is there is some validity to the thought that it will go away and it's a media creation. Remember Ebola and how the media pushed that until the election in 2014 and then poof no one heard one word about it after? The thing is they don't realize that this is a different situation with thousands dying but then they think that is a made up number.

    People like Franklin Graham are desperately screeching at evangelicals to vote for Trump. Sorry Franklin but White Evangelicals are not enough to win an election.


    I know white evangelicals (none / 0) (#124)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 10:43:46 AM EST
    Who are a lot more afraid of herd immunity than they are of the disapproval of Franklin.

    And by the way (none / 0) (#132)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 12:58:55 PM EST
    Herd immunity is something they absolutely understand.  Thank you Dr Atlas.

    LOL (none / 0) (#133)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Oct 19, 2020 at 02:27:30 PM EST
    Maybe that is why Graham is screeching at the top of his lungs.