#Lyin'Trump makes "... one falsehood every 169 words ... or 1.16 falsehoods every minute ..." Geez, we don't want him in the presidency!

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  What's the job of a salesman, if it isn't to talk you up and talk you up and talk you up and talk you up, till you eventually buy whatever they're selling? If this guy doesn't lie, he can't speak, basically, he's trying to control the narrative, once he loses control of that he has nothing...
*  It would have been so much easier to just say how many times Trump told the truth. Like this......  In his last speech, Donald Trump told the truth three..... well, possibly two, err, we know for a fact Donald told us the trurh at least once when he told us his name. But we are going to have to fact check that to be certain........
    *  The rump told the truth when he said he is a unifier. He has single-handedly unified all the hateful, fearful, racist, xenophobic, nativist people in America. They have waited a long time for someone to lift their rock so they could slither from underneath it.
*  Here it is, folks. Is this really the guy you want, a guy who can't tell the truth because he doesn't know what the truth is??
*  So you're saying Donald doesn't know he's lying?
*   Yes, he's fact-checked—after he says what he says and the audience is no longer paying attention.  The only solution is to not cover him live.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Donald Trump Made Up Stuff 71 Times In An Hour

And that’s counting the commercial breaks.

By Dana Liebelson, Jennifer Bendery, and Sam Stein, May 31, 2016

Critics of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign often complain about the way the media has reported on his candidacy. It is not just the incessant coverage that riles them. It’s the perceived lack of fact-checking.

Trump is known for making outlandish and dubious claims with little connection to the truth. The press corps, these critics argue, allows him to float along in a perpetual state of unreality.

The truth is, Trump is routinely fact-checked. It’s just that he makes so many statements in such a rapid and continuous fashion that it becomes virtually impossible to keep up.

On Wednesday, The Huffington Post assigned five and a half reporters to look into a roughly 12,000-word transcript of Trump’s town hall event on CNN the night before. It took us hours, but in all, we found 71 separate instances in which Trump made a claim that was inaccurate, misleading or deeply questionable. That’s basically one falsehood every 169 words (counting the words uttered by moderator Anderson Cooper), or 1.16 falsehoods every minute (the town hall lasted an hour, including commercial breaks).

Below are our findings:

[Major snippage: 71 claims (lies) and rebuttals]

The Trump campaign did not respond to HuffPost’s request to discuss this list.
...................................................................................................................................................................

"The grievances that innovation leaders have with Trump are almost too many to list." And they're all seriously negative!

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS:
*  but you still have NO idea what the man is about!  The moment he doesn't get his way or someone says something negative about him, what is he going to do?!  EVERYTHING is about HIM!! Listen to him for God's sake!! LISTEN!! He is saying nothing! All he does is criticize EVERYBODY!! 
*  ... Trump has no regard for the truth.  He has said that the positions he has taken in the primary elections are not actual proposals that he intends to implement, they are just proposals that he may change later.  In other words, he will say whatever he needs to say to get elected.   We have no idea what he truly will do if he were president.  If you value honesty, you can't possibly support Trump.  
*  Yet Hillary is quite predictable -- she would govern as a moderate Democrat.  Trump, however, is a corporate shill masquerading as a populist -- he already told Paul Ryan he'd cut Social Security, but can't tell the masses because then they wouldn't vote for him.
*  Donald Trump has denigrated women, POWs, Hispanics, Muslims, the disabled and others. He is all over all issues - such as the minimum wage which ought to be a big deal to people in the service sector. Trump will roll back ObamaCare but won't tell us what he will replace it with. He has a plan to defeat ISIS but won't tell us what it is. He's going to build a wall with Mexico but won't tell us how but that Mexico will pay for it. The list goes on and on and on.  Donald Trump is a racist, misogynist, charlatan and those are his good points . Don't be a chump, don't vote for Trump.
*  "“Maybe he just acted crazy to clear the primary field. But to be convinced of that, I need to see the craziness stop.” Good lord, people, don't you freaking get it? This is exactly who he is! His fascist craziness is not only not going to stop, its only going to get worse. Get a grip!
*   “Maybe he just acted crazy to clear the primary field. But to be convinced of that, I need to see the craziness stop.”  ----------------------  Unfortunately that is not the case. It is rather clear if you look back on 43 years of his public record; statements, feuds, multiple personalities, frivolous revenge lawsuits, routinely cheating contractors, dealings with the mob, charges by the DOJ for violations of the Fair Housing Act, charges by the DOJ for FTC violations, charges by the both NY state and NYC for harassing tenants, etc..  Trump's thin-skinned behavior and antics, are clearly not an act. He is not suited to hold the highest office in the land.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Trump candidacy unites Silicon Valley — in horror
Among many Silicon Valley luminaries, the distaste for Donald Trump is palpable, particularly for his ideas on trade and immigration and his views of the innovation economy.
By Evan Halper, May 30, 2016

In a place normally preoccupied with drafting code and dazzling investors, suddenly everyone in Silicon Valley has an opinion about the presidential election. And it tends to be the same opinion.

The innovation economy has a serious distaste for Donald Trump. The masters of this world complain that his ignorance about their work and its relationship to the global economy is horrifying. Rank-and-file programmers are quick to call him a clown, or worse.

The unity is notable in an environment where groupthink is frowned upon and nobody ever seems to color inside ideological lines.

Trump has practically written a playbook on how not to court this well-heeled group that other politicians seem desperate to shower with affection.

Ambitious startup chief executives who swore off talking politics for fear of offending investors are enlisting in campaigns to discredit Trump. Longtime valley Republican stalwarts who have voted for every GOP nominee for decades say they can’t do it this year. The libertarian-minded innovators who just want to get government out of their way have less faith in Trump than they do in even Hillary Clinton, the Democrat with big plans to grow the bureaucracy.

“At least Clinton is not going to go in and burn the place down,” said Reed Galen, a GOP consultant who advises tech companies. “But Trump comes in, and God knows what happens.”

The grievances that innovation leaders have with Trump are almost too many to list. They are baffled by an immigration policy that they warn would be disastrous for their workforce. Trump’s trade agenda, they say, threatens to tear apart global business relationships crucial to tech-industry success. The candidate’s threat to boycott Apple as it tussled with law enforcement over encryption technology will not soon be forgotten.

Just last week, Trump drew yet more chortles with his suggestion that the tech sector was a financial house of cards poised for collapse.

“He has pushed me over the edge,” said Vivek Wadhwa, a highly respected technology entrepreneur and academic who has always avoided engaging in politics, save for the time he spent $500 to dine with another prominent Indian American, former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. (Wadhwa said the event was a waste of time.) “It was unimaginable for me to say this even two weeks ago, but I am going to become very vocal and campaign against him. I feel too strongly not to get involved.”

Support and backlash

When it was revealed this month that one of the valley’s most successful entrepreneurs, Peter Thiel, had signed on as a California delegate for Trump before the state’s June 7 primary, the backlash against him was brutal. The buzz in the valley was that Thiel had gone off the rails.

“I’m utterly ashamed we have him as an investor,” wrote Paul Carr, the editorial director of the tech news site Pando. The headline called Thiel a jerk, only in coarser language.

The usual valley liberals are, of course, piling on against Trump. But the uneasiness of many conservative free-marketeers in the tech world has touched off speculation about which of them are primed to start writing checks for Clinton.

Among those being courted by Democrats is venture-capitalist Marc Andreessen, who spent $100,000 trying to help elect Mitt Romney in 2012. He made clear where he is headed with his tweet this month of “#ImWithHer,” a Clinton slogan. He mocks Trump persistently on social media.

Other past rainmakers for the Republican Party find themselves paralyzed.

From the corner conference room in his 23rd-floor office, with its sweeping views of San Francisco Bay, high-stakes tech investor and longtime GOP activist Alex Slusky talked about how Florida Sen. Marco Rubio sat in that very room for a tutorial on the innovation economy. He talks about how former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush was also enamored with the sector’s inner workings, as was Ohio Gov. John Kasich and, of course, Rand Paul, the Kentucky senator who made tech a central focus of his campaign.

Trump?

“He hasn’t done anything to reach out,” said Slusky, who has voted for every Republican presidential nominee since he organized his high school’s Ronald Reagan re-election effort.

Slusky foresees leaving the top of his ballot blank this year. “None of us have even met him,” he said. “The majority of active Silicon Valley Republicans I know are not supporting Trump today.”

Trump’s tough talk and big promises are not comforting to Slusky. “His wall to Mexico? We have to get products over that wall,” Slusky said. “Maybe he just acted crazy to clear the primary field. But to be convinced of that, I need to see the craziness stop.”

Slusky himself immigrated to America from Ukraine. He figures about half the chief executives of the tech companies he invests in are also immigrants — not because he seeks them out, but because that’s just how tech is. It’s not a hospitable world for anti-immigrant nationalism.

“I am not sure we have ever had a moment here where as many people have wanted to be a part of the political process,” said Todd Schulte, president of FWD.us, a bipartisan organization founded by Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and other tech leaders that pushes to liberalize immigration laws and is leading valley opposition to Trump.

Global orientation

Among those who have been drawn into the fight is Branko Cerny, a founder of a startup that helps busy people organize their lives.

The Prague native’s success at raising money for his business earned him a speaking spot onstage at the Startup Conference, a tech networking event last week in Redwood City. Typical of Silicon Valley, most of the people there were either born abroad or lived abroad at some point in their lives.

Cerny said he had been invited to “a number of focus groups hosted by high-net-worth individuals in Silicon Valley” who are strategizing against Trump, though he acknowledged that the voters drawn to Trump are not especially open to hearing counterarguments from ultrawealthy Silicon Valley elites.

“There is a lot of talk about how can we do more harm than good if we get involved,” he said. “A lot of really smart people are out of ideas for how to prevent that.”
...................................................................................................................................................................

"One fundamental thing separates Trump’s fans and critics: Whether they have taken the time to apply even the slightest scrutiny to what he says and does."

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS:
*  Trump fans want to burn it down. They aren't patriots, they are anarchists.
*  We have the national debt we do, because your guy GW Bush started a couple of wars after cutting government revenue.  I know that that is terribly complicated for you to figure out, but thems the facts.  Middle class wage re distribution to the wealthy was caused by trade deals, destroying unions, and cutting programs that helped the middle class.  It's such a shame that Republicans are too foolish to examine what their leaders are telling them.  Hell, you lot are even pissed at you own leaders because they've been screwing you over.  Face it, you've just learned to hate Dems because everyone in your area listens to Limbaugh or Hannity or Fox News, or some other outlet that ten minutes of research would tell you are lying to you.  But you like most of the lies because they disadvantage black folks and minorities. The lies you are pissed about are the one where your team has failed to target minorities enough to please you. Like gays, illegals, and women.  Stop being a hater and all your time won't be consumed with frustration and hate.  {shrugs}
*  Can a Trump supporter here please explain why Trump on the one hand says he likes military people who "aren't captured," and on the other speaks at a rally in support of POWs?
   *  you live in disneyland... do you know any....any...politician that does not talk out of both sides of their ...lying mouths... why should donald be any different...?
*  ... Embrace the dark side, I don't give a shit. Trump is no angel. He is a belligerent, brayingass reality tv star scumbag with absolutely zero foreign policy experience.
*   Trump was named liar of the year, but he's your hero. Cute.
...................................................................................................................................................................
The Trump 'disruption' con
By Juan Williams, May 30, 2016

For the last few weeks, I have been traveling from Los Angeles to Seattle to Dallas and along the east coast, giving speeches and doing interviews about my new book, “We the People.”

Everywhere I go people want to talk presidential politics. And that is how I’ve heard time and again why Donald Trump’s biggest fans love him:

He is the Great Disruptor!  

He disrupts Washington politics, a Congress they loathe and the Republican leaders by whom they feel betrayed. He is not afraid to call out President Obama and the self-important talking heads on cable news.

Interwoven at the core of their discontent: political correctness; the role of big money in controlling politicians; gridlock-inducing dogma; and corrupt, special interest groups looking out only for themselves.

It’s hard to argue with them on these points. I agree with Trump supporters on the need for disruption of all of those things. But I’m left with a question: Why do they believe Trump will be a reliable agent of disruption?

Yes, he points out the hypocrites and liars. And, yes, he has crushed the GOP leaders who have contributed to the right-left divide that has paralyzed Washington and earned Congress a dismal 13 percent approval rating.

But what is Trump’s plan once he kicks out the bums?

He has no clear political principles to anchor him or to give his fans any reason to believe he can repair the damage.

Instead, he hurtles wildly from one position to another. Just last week, he said his infamous pledge to temporarily ban all non-citizen Muslims from entering the country was “only a suggestion.”

This equivocation must have come as a surprise to his diehard supporters. It will be one of many disappointments if he is elected.

Similarly, Trump brags about not being in debt to big political donors who control politicians. Voters say they like the fact that Trump does not need millions of dollars of dark PAC money.

But two weeks ago, he began raising money with the Republican National Committee from those selfsame big donors. And he expects to use those funds for his general election campaign as well as to pay off the money he loaned himself during the GOP primary.

And don’t forget Trump promises to appoint more Supreme Court Justices like the late Antonin Scalia. Scalia was a great conservative jurist but he took the lead in opening the floodgates for unlimited corporate political donations with the 2010 Citizens United ruling.

The same puzzling inconsistency applies to Trump’s put-downs. It is wonderfully entertaining to watch him defy the rules of civil discourse by insulting and belittling Republicans as well as Democrats and disrupt everything considered politically correct.

But he also bullies women, just last week going after New Mexico Gov. Susanna Martinez, a Hispanic Republican. And he has a history of insulting prisoners of war, immigrants and the disabled.

Where are the insults for a man threatening world peace — Russian President Vladimir Putin? Where are his put-downs for hedge fund managers who profit from sending jobs overseas? Where is his rage at self-serving bankers?

So, yes, he is defying the rules of political correctness but he is doing so by often making xenophobic and racist comments.

In the days before he died this month, former Utah Republican Sen. Bob Bennett felt the need to apologize to every Muslim he met for the hateful words of his party’s standard-bearer. Trump’s strident anti-PC rhetoric risks inspiring a backlash and a rush of people into the PC camp because the messenger is so noxious.

According to Trump, the trash-talk will stop if he actually becomes president.

'You're going to be so bored, you're going to say this is the most boring human being I've ever interviewed,' Trump told Chris Wallace on “Fox News Sunday” last month. “'I think if I act very presidential I'll be dull, but that will be fine.”

“Trump is not a serious man, which is part of his appeal in a country that has grown increasingly unserious,” wrote Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal last summer. “He’s a showman in a country that likes to watch shows — a country that believes all politics is showbiz now, and all politicians are entertainers of varying degrees of competence. At least Mr. Trump is honest about it. He capitalizes on the fact that no one in America trusts politicians anymore.”

Once the show of a disruption is over, the regularly scheduled programming will resume.

“It’s as improbable as it is entertaining,” my friend and Fox News colleague Bret Baier observed last month in a special called “Donald Trump: The Disruptor.”

“He’s changed the face of American politics and somehow connected with the public in a way that few politicians ever had,” Baier said. “A businessman who was all but able to take over a party with its establishment in open war against him. While he is popular with his base, polls show him consistently to be the candidate with the highest negatives.”

Oh, yes, the negatives.

One fundamental thing separates Trump’s fans and critics: Whether they have taken the time to apply even the slightest scrutiny to what he says and does.
...................................................................................................................................................................

If #Lyin'Donald/#TruthlessTrump hadn't attacked the Mexican people, he wouldn't have to worry about anyone's ethnicity, especially a judge!

...................................................................................................................................................................
Faced with fraud case, Trump brings up judge's 'Mexican' heritage
By David Wright, May 30, 2016

A spokeswoman for Donald Trump on Monday continued a line of criticism launched by Trump about a California judge who is overseeing a fraud case against him. She also suggested that the judge's Hispanic heritage and membership in a Latino lawyers association would affect his ability to judge the case.

The criticism comes days after Trump himself said at a rally that U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel "happens to be, we believe, Mexican," criticizing him for scheduling a trial for the suit against Trump University in November.

Appearing on CNN's "New Day," spokeswoman Katrina Pierson criticized Curiel for being a member of the La Raza Lawyer's Association, which is a leading Latino lawyers group in California. Curiel is a member of the organization's San Diego chapter.

"I think what's really interesting about this particular judge -- as Mr. Trump refers to him as a 'Trump hater' -- is he even mentions on his judicial questionnaire that he was a La Raza Lawyers Association member," Pierson said, apparently referring to the questionnaire Curiel filled out when his confirmation was being considered by the Senate. "This is an organization that has been out there organizing anti-Trump protesters with the Mexican flags -- they are pushing it. The signs have been very apparent. And so Mr. Trump is just stating the obvious."

CNN has reached out to the La Raza Lawyers Association's national office and the San Diego chapter, but calls were not immediately returned.

"New Day" host Alisyn Camerota replied that Curiel, contrary to Trump's assertion, is U.S.-born and pushed back on making an issue of his ethnicity. "Why's (Trump) saying he's Mexican? What's the point?"

After arguing that Trump had only said that "we believe" Curiel is Mexican, Pierson continued to try to link the judge to anti-Trump protesters.

"Well, it's because of what we see outside of these rallies, these anti-Trump rallies, these criminal rallies, these criminal protesters out there defacing property and attacking police officers. They're doing so under the guise of an anti-Trump protest, with their Mexican flags, and La Raza and this judge is connected to that," Pierson said.

Efforts to reach Curiel on Monday were not immediately successful.

Trump ripped Curiel on Friday after the judge ruled parts of internal documents, including "playbooks" regarding running the enterprise, should be released as part of a lawsuit against Trump University, which operated from 2005 to 2010.

The playbooks, which include ones from 2009 and 2010, detail how the venture worked, how Trump University events were run and how to sell programs to customers. Curiel wrote that there is public interest in the case as Trump has become "the front-runner in the Republican nomination in the 2016 presidential race, and has placed the integrity of these court proceedings at issue."

Trump on Friday argued there was no need to schedule a trial for the Trump University fraud suit, while noting Curiel's heritage.

"The trial is going to take place sometime in November. There should be no trial. This should have been dismissed on summary judgment easily, everybody says it. But I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump, a hater. He's a hater," Trump said.

Trump added, "The judge, who happens to be, we believe, Mexican, which is great. I think that's fine."
...................................................................................................................................................................

Cole's "takeaway: No, Congressman X does not have it right. This person is seeing things through a very narrow, very cynical lens." No, Cole, YOU don't have it right.

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  Mr. Cole: [P]eople are not that easily manipulated."  Mr. Trump: "Yes I can."
*  Absolutely Correct....Fact spinners who make millions of dollars by dreaming up and researching FALSE information to be used by media people like Fox pundits actually control Congress indirectly!
*  Now whose side would I take: A congressman X who can tell the truth now that he is out or a Republican from Oklahoma where they think they can through [i.e. throw] doctors in jail for performing an abortion and where God will take care of their economy?
*  The house works very hard wasting money. Fifty times they voted to stop Obama care. The Benghazi committee blew millions. Denying climate change is a way to keep the Koch brothers happy.
*  Congressman X is right on the money, Mr. Cole is just another corrupt congressman. How can anybody ask an opinion on Congressman X's book about corruption in congress, to a member of congress? Are americans THAT stupid?
*   If you want "the system" changed, look in the mirror. Are you among the 20-or so percent who vote in the primaries?
*  Well, DUH! They finally GOT it! Can we dare believe the RNC and DNC [politically] old *arts get it, too? We can thank the Congressional blowhards and buffoons in blue suits who have been catatonic for the last many years for the pathological lunatic with the bird's nest on his head, and the arrogant crook in the silk brocade Nehru Jackets that we're now the laughingstock of the world, too! Oh yeah, the 4-4-Count Supreme Court: thanks, Congress! You've ground all three branches of government to a screeching halt! CONGRESS now represents everything hard-working, decent, community-loving Americans D E T E S T. Don't doubt that for a nanosecond!  
...................................................................................................................................................................
Congress is as terrible as it seems, according to someone who would know
By Amber Phillips, May 30, 2016

Greedy. Self-obsessed. Jaded. Power-obsessed. Influenced by no one — except, of course, the cash-carrying lobbyists and super PACs.

That's how Congressman X, the anonymous lawmaker who allegedly spilled all to magazine writer Robert Atkinson, describes his job and colleagues in a new book, "The Confessions of Congressman X: A disturbing and shockingly frank tell-all of vanity, greed and deceit."

As you can probably tell from the title, the book is overwhelmingly cynical about Congress's ability to effect any real change for real people. Instead, it portrays a shadowy world where constituents take a back seat to lobbyists and power.

As much as this guy (and Congressman X does seem to be a guy; my best guess is that he's a moderate Democrat with some seniority) appears to hate Congress, polls suggest Americans agree with him.

Seventy-eight percent of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, according to the latest Gallup poll, from early May. (That's actually an improvement from the 86 percent disapproval rating in November, but you get my point.)

So is Congressman X right? Has an irreparably dysfunctional Congress lost all sense of moral decency? The Fix talked to a not-anonymous congressman, Rep. Tom Cole, an Oklahoma Republican who has been in Congress more than a decade, to get his take.

In between doing laundry and mopping, Cole chatted with us by phone this Memorial Day weekend as we ran by him some of Congressman X's more provocative statements about the way Congress works.

To summarize his takeaway: No, Congressman X does not have it right. This person is seeing things through a very narrow, very cynical lens. Cole's longer answer is below in response to snippets from the book. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

CONGRESSMAN X: “You know why I want to keep my seat? I like the power and recognition. The opportunity to be at the center of things. To make my mark on history and mold the society in which I live.”

COLE: You don't have that much power as an individual congressman. You're not like a governor, you're not like the president of the United States. You're one of 435. You're one-half of one-third of the federal government. Congressmen are mostly pretty obscure, and they're not nearly as powerful.

The one thing I would agree with what Congressman X talked about is you do get a unique privilege to be at the center of things. You need to recognize you're usually in the Greek chorus — you're not the star on the stage — but in the entire history of the country, only about 123,000 people have been in the House of all the hundreds of millions of Americans.

CONGRESSMAN X: “How ironic that most of us in Congress run against Congress and the culture of corruption we perpetuate. ... Insincerity from the heart. It’s just another component of politics as usual."

COLE: Depends on what kind of corruption we're talking about. If he's talking about bribes, well, since I've been in office, there have certainly been some people go to jail. But you're really stupid if you engage in corruption in Congress. There are over 200 FBI agents at the [Justice Department's] Public Integrity Section, which focuses solely on Congress.

If he's talking about money in politics, people usually contribute to people they already know see the world in the same way. It's no big surprise that a Republican representing a conservative military district would be getting a lot of contributions from defense contractors, or a person that represents an oil and gas district would be getting contributions from an oil and gas contractor. You're probably respecting their interests already, because it's also in the interest of the constituents you represent, and it's what you believe in.

Plus, you've got to reach an electorate of, say, 700,000 people, and most Americans don't like taxpayer-funded elections. Running for office is about building support and attracting people to your side and persuading them.

CONGRESSMAN X: “I flatter constituents with birthday greetings on gold-embossed congressional stationary. ... It’s all a crock, but happy people mean more votes at the polls. And that’s what it’s all about.”

COLE: Somebody asked me once: What do you do the most of? Listen. That's what you do at a hearing. That's what you do when constituents or an advocacy group comes to your office. That's what you do at a town hall. You spend more time listening than talking or doing anything else. And you learn a lot. I'm amazed at the number of things I now know are going on around me in my district I had no earthly idea about when I first ran.

CONGRESSMAN X: “The average man on the street actually thinks he influences how I vote. Unless it’s a hot-button issue, his thoughts are generally meaningless. I’ll politely listen, but I follow the money.”

COLE: People are not naive. They're not that easily manipulated. They generally pick phonies out and get rid of them. And you just don't last very long if you don't really care about your constituents, and they don't believe you care, and you don't work on their behalf. You should — they've given you an amazing privilege. I'm a very lucky guy to get to do the job I get to do, and when you cease feeling that way, then it's really time to quit. There will be a line of people happy to take your job.

CONGRESSMAN X: “There’s a rising resentment and loss of faith between the American people and their government. They don’t believe we really understand their problems. ... America’s on an irreversible decline, and no one in Washington seems to care.”


COLE: It's sad that this cynicism is there, but it is. Let me offer two conflicting views. First, let's talk about this Congress (the one that started January 2015, the 114th). It's actually been a pretty productive Congress. This is the first Congress since 2001 where both the House and Senate agreed on a budget and lived by it. The first time since 2001 or 2002 since we overhauled education. … I could go on. (Editor's note: He does.)

It's true it gets harder and harder to work across the aisle. But that really reflects the reality outside Congress. The last couple of years, the most conservative Democrat is more liberal than the most liberal Republican, and vice versa. So, you think, where does that come from?

We're still in an era where two different Americas show up at the polls: The America that shows up in 2008 and elects the president and gives him huge majorities in Congress. Then two years later, an America shows up that strips him of his House majority and creates the largest, most conservative Republican majority since the Second World War.

The next America comes back in 2012 and reelects Obama, then in '14 takes away his control of the Senate and adds to the Republican House majority.

So if you're on the outside looking in, you think, Why can't you get anything done? But if you're on the inside looking out, it's, Why can't you guys make up your mind?
...................................................................................................................................................................

"... whether Sen. Hatch is a time traveler, or simply a mendacious liar ..." Hatch is a Republican, so the second one is correct.

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  I blame Hatch for doing a write up on a meeting that hadn't occurred yet.
*  Rather lame excuse. Hatch has been a professional career politician long enough to have a staff that knows how best to cover his butt at all times. If this -oopsie! - slipped out ahead of time there's still no excuse for creating a statement/letter on the meeting before the meeting. Canned letters are very easy to crank out after the fact. And blaming the newspaper for not editing? You probably expect all news to present all sides for you.
*  Hatch doesn't admit making mistakes. Apparently Republicans consider that a weakness.
*  Horrin was just demonstrating the integrity of our republican elected public servants:  NONE.  but because he is a mormon and a republican, he's allowed such transgressions.  how can anyone find this OK?
*  Yes, it would be embarrassing for your average person. But for Hatch and the likes, it's called "business as usual".
*   Why would you ever trust a GOP senator?  There are a slim few worth crap. Flake, one of the Nebraska guys, and that's about it.  Long gone are the days of Bob Dole and Howard Baker.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Letter: A fabricated story from a U.S. senator
By Jason Tiscione, May 30, 2016

On May 26, the Deseret News published an op-ed by Sen. Orrin Hatch: "My Meeting With Supreme Court Nominee Eric Garland." He described meeting with Garland, and how it hadn't changed his stance on blocking nomination hearings.

Strangely, his op-ed appeared on the newspaper's website at midnight, at least six hours before this supposed meeting could have happened.

Perhaps it remains to be seen whether Sen. Hatch is a time traveler, or simply a mendacious liar with a seat in the Senate Judiciary Committee, but any newspaper with journalistic integrity would have noted such a laughable inconsistency.

Instead, the Deseret News quietly scrubbed the article — but not before screenshots were obtained and reported on by national news outlets. Its URL displayed, "Oops, the page you are looking for cannot be found," until the column suddenly reappeared, with the time of publication altered from midnight to 5:10 p.m. along with an editor's note: "A draft of this op-ed was erroneously published on DeseretNews.com prior to final revisions and edits from Sen. Hatch. We apologize to Sen. Hatch and our readers for this error."

Conveniently left out of this half-hearted apology was any acknowledgment that the Deseret News published a fabricated story written by a sitting U.S. senator.

Jason Tiscione
Salt Lake City
...................................................................................................................................................................

Ann Richards' description of Bush I fits #Lyin'Donald, too: "... Mr. Trump is a clear case of someone born on third base who imagines that he hit a triple ..."

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  "Will voters ever recognize the truth?" (Krugman)  That, Professor Krugman is the Operative Question! Don Juan Trump is a Megalomaniacal, Sociopathic, vile and disgusting male chauvinist, DELUSIONAL "operator" - a walking Case Study in Psychopathology.  The man is normalizing nastiness. He is Trolling for the presidency. And every step of his sordid campaign is one more nail in this Republic's coffin. His Exaltation of Ignorance and Bullying is the stuff of Dictators.  But why is this so clear to many of us, while legions of voters seem thrilled at his dangerous words and antics?  I suspect it's a kind of Mass Delusion, a type of mass hypnosis, where a tyrannical bullying lunatic has managed to transfer his own Madness into vulnerable members of society.  To my mind, as a retired clinical psychologist, this is the greatest crisis in the history of this nation. It's like a 10-Alarm Fire. It's 9/11 from Within. We are poised on a precipice. From which, if voters do not wake up to the Urgency of our moment, we may witness a Delusional Sociopathic death wish become a presidential nightmare.
*  Being a successful business man is about beating the competition - key word, competition. Being a successful political leader is about co-operation with others and coming to agreements beneficial to all. Key word - co-operation. There are grey areas of course. Trump's vision of success is the business man's vision - beating others, same as Kruschev, Putin, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin. Not about co-operation to better the lives of humankind. He has all but pounded his shoe on the desk and shouted "we will bury you!" Even Nixon knew better. He will "lead" us all to disaster.
*  While real estate development can be hard work, it is far from rocket science. The world is chock full of rich real estate investors, they are a dime a dozen. Success in that field is simply nothing special. Outside of leveraging his pompous personality on "The Apprentice", Trump has failed miserably in virtually every other major venture he has attempted. His operating style has now become crystal clear. Tell them anything they want to hear to get what you want. Say anything you need to in order to obliterate your competition. Morals and ethics are for losers, a concept not unfamiliar to today's Republican Party.
*  ... I am sick to death of Donald Trump. What he says is not that interesting, kind, profound, enduring, or enlightened. If the media has just ignored him or given any other viable candidate the same amount of coverage we would not be in this mess. I for one have stopped watching any political news. There are issues in our everyday world that are virtually ignored because of this. Flint Michigan almost did not make it. The NY Times barely covered it. What else are you all missing? Give Trump a rest or at least highlight the everyday issues the POTUS has to/or should deal with.
*  Excellent dissection of how Mr. Trump performs his magic act during almost any interview: http://politi.co/1TELjM1  Must reading for journalists.
*   Sorry, but I just think Trump is clinically ill. He is THE poster child for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. We have not had a person in the White House with a true need for a psychiatrist since Grant with his alcoholism or Lincoln with his depression. People who say that "Hillary is just as bad" don't have a clue how dangerous this deranged individual can be to the nation. Many of the Republicans in leadership roles are not supporting him, and it is not always because of a policy disagreement. They know him and are flat scared to put him in the driver's seat. As Jeb Bush said, "The man needs therapy."
...................................................................................................................................................................
Trump’s Delusions of Competence
By Paul Krugman, May 27, 2016

In general, you shouldn’t pay much attention to polls at this point, especially with Republicans unifying around Donald Trump while Bernie Sanders hasn’t conceded the inevitable. Still, I was struck by several recent polls showing Mr. Trump favored over Hillary Clinton on the question of who can best manage the economy.

This is pretty remarkable given the incoherence and wild irresponsibility of Mr. Trump’s policy pronouncements. Granted, most voters probably don’t know anything about that, in part thanks to substance-free news coverage. But if voters don’t know anything about Mr. Trump’s policies, why their favorable impression of his economic management skills?

The answer, I suspect, is that voters see Mr. Trump as a hugely successful businessman, and they believe that business success translates into economic expertise. They are, however, probably wrong about the first, and definitely wrong about the second: Even genuinely brilliant businesspeople are often clueless about economic policy.

An aside: In part this is surely a partisan thing. Over the years, polls have generally, although not universally, shown Republicans trusted over Democrats to manage the economy, even though the economy has consistently performed better under Democratic presidents. But Republicans are much better at promoting legends — for example, by constantly hyping economic and jobs growth under Ronald Reagan, even though the Reagan record was easily surpassed under Bill Clinton.

Back to Mr. Trump: One of the many peculiar things about his run for the White House is that it rests heavily on his claims of being a masterful businessman, yet it’s far from clear how good he really is at the “art of the deal.” Independent estimates suggest that he’s much less wealthy than he says he is, and probably has much lower income than he claims to have, too. But since he has broken with all precedents by refusing to release his tax returns, it’s impossible to resolve such disputes. (And maybe that’s why he won’t release those returns.)

Remember, too, that Mr. Trump is a clear case of someone born on third base who imagines that he hit a triple: He inherited a fortune, and it’s far from clear that he has expanded that fortune any more than he would have if he had simply parked the money in an index fund.

But leave questions about whether Mr. Trump is the business genius he claims to be on one side. Does business success carry with it the knowledge and instincts needed to make good economic policy? No, it doesn’t.

True, the historical record isn’t much of a guide, since only one modern president had a previous successful career in business. And maybe Herbert Hoover was an outlier.

But while we haven’t had many business leaders in the White House, we do know what kind of advice prominent businessmen give on economic policy. And it’s often startlingly bad, for two reasons. One is that wealthy, powerful people sometimes don’t know what they don’t know — and who’s going to tell them? The other is that a country is nothing like a corporation, and running a national economy is nothing like running a business.

Here’s a specific, and relevant, example of the difference. Last fall, the now-presumed Republican nominee declared: “Our wages are too high. We have to compete with other countries.” Then, as has happened often in this campaign, Mr. Trump denied that he had said what he had, in fact, said — straight talker, my toupee. But never mind.

The truth is that wage cuts are the last thing America needs right now: We sell most of what we produce to ourselves, and wage cuts would hurt domestic sales by reducing purchasing power and increasing the burden of private-sector debt. Lower wages probably wouldn’t even help the fraction of the U.S. economy that competes internationally, since they would normally lead to a stronger dollar, negating any competitive advantage.

The point, however, is that these feedback effects from wage cuts aren’t the sort of things even very smart business leaders need to take into account to run their companies. Businesses sell stuff to other people; they don’t need to worry about the effect of their cost-cutting measures on demand for their products. Managing national economic policy, on the other hand, is all about the feedback.

I’m not saying that business success is inherently disqualifying when it comes to policy making. A tycoon who has enough humility to realize that he doesn’t already know all the answers, and is willing to listen to other people even when they contradict him, could do fine as an economic manager. But does this describe anyone currently running for president?

The truth is that the idea that Donald Trump, of all people, knows how to run the U.S. economy is ludicrous. But will voters ever recognize that truth?
...................................................................................................................................................................

"'... his targets were linked by just one thing: Trump felt they had all done him wrong.'" Let's hope that the FSM keeps this little man out of the WH.

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS:
*  I think at worst, Hillary would make a mediocre to below average president, I doubt much worse than that. By contrast, the worst Trump could do as president could be apocalyptic. Making Trump president would be like using your life savings to buy lottery tickets. The payoff could be big but the odds are that you are headed towards disaster.
   *  I actually think she'll be a pretty good president. She knows policy and governance cold and she's worked hard for decades to address our domestic and international issues. She'll be a better president than she has been a candidate.
*  For once I agree with Cruz. The Trump Tower is a gigantic compensation.
*  You can just imagine what kind of president he would be, trying to attack anyone who disagrees with him. Of course, that's what his 'authoritarian' Republican followers want. How did Republicans fail to notice that their party had become filled with people like this? After all, they recruited them by pandering to their ignorance and bigotry. Now they've got Trump, and there's no going back to the pretense that this is a party of decent people.
*  I think Kristol set out to rattle Trump's cage and it worked. Just wait until his next rally -- a floor show on Kristol's supposed 3rd party candidate. And another one on Sunday's NYT drawing of Trump in a lip lock with Putin. Keep Trump busy responding to c**p, because he will.
*   ... Small is the perfect description for his brain and anything that comes out of it! He appears to either be Bipolar or has ADD and is VERY insecure about being liked- to the point that his entire life is built around "Like me or else!" He is immature based on the fact that it is intolerable if he is NOT liked....He actually believes that his hateful spiteful and vengeful conduct is a normal reaction to what people say about him.... Grace, diplomacy and dignity were not traits taught to him as a young man ...Same seems to go of many of his followers!!
...................................................................................................................................................................
Trump never misses a chance to look small
By Jennifer Rubin, May 30, 2016

Donald Trump can never get enough love. He can win the nomination, achieve widespread applause for the effort, bring the GOP establishment to its knees, and yet, it’s not enough. He continues to rail and insult the few holdouts, infuriated that they will not bow to kiss the ring.

The Post reports, “During his first big campaign swing since locking up the Republican presidential nomination, Trump went after an odd and seemingly random group of people — Democrats and Republicans, famous and obscure. There seemed little to gain politically from the attacks, and his targets were linked by just one thing: Trump felt they had all done him wrong.”

Then on Sunday, a leader in the search for an independent candidate, Weekly Standard Editor Bill Kristol tweeted, “Just a heads up over this holiday weekend: There will be an independent candidate — an impressive one, with a strong team and a real chance.” Neither Kristol nor others involved in the search are saying who that is and when the actual announcement is coming, but the prospect of a challenge so rattled and angered Trump that he took to Twitter to attack Kristol as — you guessed it — a “loser” and a “dummy.”

Displaying his  authoritarian instincts and intolerance of dissent, Trump insisted that the GOP “[c]an’t allow lightweights to set up a spoiler Indie candidate.” How would he suggest the GOP stop such an effort — lock up Kristol and the potential candidates? Sue them to prevent exercising their constitutional rights to organize and vote for someone of their choice?

Trump’s abject inability to tolerate criticism is the telltale sign of a narcissistic personality. Combined with his lack of understanding or interest in our democratic system and values, he often resorts to stunning proposals as to how to achieve his aims. He’ll order the military to commit war crimes — and they will obey because he says so. He will “open up” (don’t even ask what that means) libel laws to take down journalists who criticize him “unfairly” (i.e., at all).

Trump is far more dangerous than Hillary Clinton in this regard. Clinton may arrogantly defy rules to insulate herself from criticism and evade persnickety conflict-of-interest rules to get rich, but she does not demand critics embrace her nor does she seek to obliterate her foes. To the contrary, her errors stem from  excessive paranoia and a sense of victimhood built up over decades. She imagines her foes are far more powerful than they are. Trump, on the other hand, can never tolerate dissent; his ego allows for no dissenters or no-shows. (He attacked Gov. Susana Martinez merely for not showing up to a rally in New Mexico.)

The Post’s Jenna Johnson writes: “Why go after the GOP’s only two female minority governors — Martinez and South Carolina’s Nikki Haley — when there are many other elected Republicans who have not endorsed him? What does he gain from smearing a former employee and a federal judge whom most of his supporters have never heard of? Why comment on Clinton’s voice and appearance instead of her record?”

The answer was supplied by Sen. Ted Cruz.(R-Tex.) on the eve of the Indiana primary. “Bullies don’t come from strength, bullies come from weakness. Bullies come from a deep, yawning cavern of insecurity. There is a reason Donald builds giant buildings and puts his name on them everywhere he goes.” That’s exactly right and a frightful diagnosis for a man who seeks the presidency and the awesome powers of the federal government.
...................................................................................................................................................................

For those who gave their all, we honor you.

....................................................................................................

Gee, Mary, who would have thought you would ever desert the GOP?

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  Let's see. She has supported Dole, both Bushes, McCain, and Romney. The list of the out-of-touch and losers continues to grow.
*  We've been here before, Mary Matalin's just jaded with Romney losing and Trump, the wacko,ascending in the GOP. Having listened to her rhetoric over the years, a never Hilary she could have said about any Democrat. The fact is the two candidates are flawed, everyone knows it and we are going to choose between them. Even in the past when it was someone we really liked they disappointed too in some way. Get over it and pick the least objectionable which is what 21st century elections are all about. The problem with Libertarians is like the Tea Party they are too ideological to be practical enough to run anything. I think its good Matalin has found a hobby in her old age.
*  Not at all, Mary Matalin is a disenchanted GOP operative and apparently got pushed out along with the Republican establishment this cycle. For her sour grapes, the two party system is falling apart which, of course, it is not. We don't have the best choices, but it will be one of the two in the end.
*  ... The Democratic Party was far more split before the 2008 Convention, and came together. By August, I expect they will do that again. Bernie was never expected to win, or even do this well. Once it becomes official that he hasn't won, life will go on largely as before.
*  Trump is an unhinged quack, there are not enough poorly educated trailer trash supporters of Trump to make a Trump presidency a reality, the right owns that mentally ill moron.
*   Is stopping the 2 party system important to you? If so check out No More 2 Party System
...................................................................................................................................................................
Mary Matalin: '2-party system is ready to fall'
By Kristen East, May 29, 2016

Longtime Republican strategist Mary Matalin — who registered as a Libertarian earlier this month — said this weekend that “the two-party system is ready to fall."

Her comment came as she wrote in National Review that she is supporting Austin Petersen for the Libertarian Party’s nomination. She wrote that she believes he is “the man who can lead independents, Libertarians, and disaffected members of the two major parties to victory.”

The Libertarian Party held its national convention this weekend in Orlando, Florida, and former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson secured the party's nomination.

Writing before Johnson was nominated, Matalin said the time is ripe “for a new majority political party to rise.”

“For many Americans — as is evidenced by its exponential recent growth — that common-sense alternative is the Libertarian Party," she wrote.

Earlier this month, when Matalin switched her party registration, she said she was “a never Hillary” and “a provisional Trump.”
...................................................................................................................................................................

Should Louie be allowed on the spaceship? Oh, he** no!

...................................................................................................................................................................
Congressman Says Matt Damon Movie Proves Anti-Gay Discrimination Is Justified
By Judd Legum, May 29, 2016

There have been a lot of justifications for continued discrimination against LGBT people.

Preserving marriage. Religious freedom. Preservation of traditional families.

But in a speech on the House floor this week, Congressman Louis Gohmert took things to the next level. Gohmert argued that we need to discriminate against LGBT people now or the future of humanity is in danger.

How? It’s really quite simple. At some point, a giant asteroid may start barreling toward earth, putting the future of humanity in doubt. We will then need to prepare a special spaceship and send a group of people to colonize Mars.

In case you think this is far-fetched, Gohmert notes this is not a dissimilar scenario from a recent Matt Damon flick, The Martian.

Gohmert postulates that we would only be able to send about 40 people. It’s unclear how he arrives at that number but it seems reasonable. If we can’t discriminate against LGBT people, Gohmert reminds us, all of the people on the special spaceship might end up being same-sex couples.

What will happen to humanity when everyone on Mars is gay? Gohmert is sketchy on the details. But here’s the video, via Right Wing Watch:


...................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................
Our Nation's Most Batsh*t Congressman Is Worried About Gay Spaceships
By Jack Holmes, May 27, 2016

[See video above.]

When the U.S. House of Representatives allows "general speeches," you can expect fireworks. It's a chance for our elected representatives to raise issues important to them that might not normally come up, often because they are insane. Step right up Louie Gohmert, crowned "Padishah Emperor for Life of the Crazy People" by Esquire's Charles P. Pierce, who has some thoughts on same-sex couples and the space colonies of the future.

(Yes, really.)

After taking shots at trans and gay people—including the implication that the old DSM classification of homosexuality as a mental disorder is accurate—Gohmert embarked on a fun little hypothetical where the Earth becomes uninhabitable. (Due to, say, climate change, perhaps? Of course not. Gohmert thinks that's a hoax, but one which might also make more plants grow.) There is a spaceship in this scenario, and it's bound for a colony on another planet, and Gohmert is just asking whether we should let gay people on, OK?

"You're wanting to save humankind for posterity, basically a modern-day Noah. You have the opportunity to be a modern day Noah, you can preserve life. How many same sex couples would you take from the animal kingdom and from humans to put on the spacecraft to perpetuate humanity and the wildlife kingdom?"

Maybe it's time to ask if Louie should be allowed on the spaceship.
...................................................................................................................................................................

"... Trump has taken positions that should concern investors." Since in one way or another we all are investors, then we should be very concerned.

...................................................................................................................................................................
What Are the Odds Donald Trump Will Actually Become President?
By Frank Holmes, May 19, 2016

Sixteen. That’s the number of Republican presidential candidates who ended their campaigns since last summer, leaving only businessman Donald J. Trump as the presumptive GOP nominee. Love him or hate him, it’s time to come to terms with the reality that Trump’s name will likely be appearing on the ballot in November.

As a money manager, I’ve always said that it’s the policies and not the party that matter. So it is with Trump. Many of his proposed policies certainly bode well for the market, including lowering taxes and scrapping needless regulations that slow business growth. Like his former rival for the GOP nomination, Ted Cruz, he has expressed support for a return to the gold standard and reportedly owns between $100,000 and $200,000 in gold bullion. In 2011, he even accepted a 32-ounce bar of gold as a deposit from a Trump Tower tenant.

However, as I told Kitco last week, I believe investors’ fears of a socialist Bernie Sanders presidency, not to mention negative interest rates, have driven a lot of gold’s recent momentum, more so than the idea of a Trump presidency.

At the same time, Trump has taken positions that should concern investors. Besides exhibiting a volatile temperament and leadership style, he’s been a harsh critic of free trade agreements and has made clear his opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which aims to eliminate up to 18,000 tariffs among 12 participating countries. Andy Laperriere, head of policy research at Cornerstone Macro, believes Trump’s trade agenda could even pose some risks to American multinationals, especially those dealing with Mexico and China, and the U.S. dollar.

Plus, there’s the troubling comment he made last week on CNBC, proclaiming himself “the king of debt,” before adding: “I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal. And if the economy was good, it was good. So therefore you can’t lose.”

So What Are The Odds, Really?

The cards are markedly stacked against Trump when it comes to winning in November. Most national polls show Hillary Clinton beating him in the general election, even though she is nearly as unfavorable to registered voters, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal survey. Renaissance Macro Research calls Trump’s “net negatives prohibitively high.” And as I shared with you way back in August of last year, Moody’s Analytics forecasts a win for the Democratic nominee, whether that’s Clinton or someone else. Since 1980, Moody’s sophisticated election model has accurately predicted the outcome of every single contest, and in 2012 it even nailed the Electoral College vote.



Trump still has quite a lot of support in the financial industry. A Financial Advisor poll found that a little over 50 percent of respondents say Trump will win the White House, while nearly 37 percent say Clinton. Doubleline Capital founder Jeff Gundlach also believes Trump will be the victor, arguing that in the short term, this would be positive for the U.S. economy. The New York billionaire, Gundlach points out, has promised to build up the military and initiate an infrastructure program.

Whomever voters end up electing in November, there will be winners and losers. Again, what’s important to look at are the policies because they’re precursors to change. We’ll be watching the events as they unfold closely and adjusting our allocations accordingly.
...................................................................................................................................................................

"'... there are constraints in this country,' he continued. 'You don’t get to do anything you want to.'" Oh, really, Mitch? Can we quote you the next time you do something stupid?

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS:
*  'Mitch McConnell on Trump: Our system will protect against 'big mistakes''  Like our system saved US from his Republican Presidential nomination?  Why should America risk Trump's CLEARLY expected 'big mistakes' at all?
*  It almost did not survive Baby Bush and the DarkLord VP.
*  Still waiting on the Americans in Kentucky to correct the problem with this RINO.
*  This flies in the face of logic when you consider that the"system" did not protect us from Boehner or McConnell.
*  Here is the biggest mistake that McConnell always makes. They do not have a system. They never had a system and they will never have a system. They do not know how to establish a system. Besides if Trump wins he will be smart enough to through McConnell out.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Mitch McConnell on Trump: Our system will protect against 'big mistakes'
By Allegra Kirkland, May 27, 2016

Apparently trying to reassure those worried about GOP nominee Donald Trump’s take-no-prisoners approach to politics, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is issuing a reminder that all commanders-in-chief face systemic and institutional “constraints” that will prevent "big mistakes."

“Well, one thing I’m pretty calm about is that this is nowhere near the most divisive period in American history,” McConnell said in a preview of an upcoming CBS “Sunday Morning” interview. "But what protects us in this country against big mistakes being made is the structure, the Constitution, the institutions."

“No matter how unusual a personality may be who gets elected to office, there are constraints in this country,” he continued. “You don’t get to do anything you want to.” 

Trump’s proposals to build a southern border wall that Mexico would pay for, temporarily ban Muslim immigrants, and forcibly deport 11 million undocumented immigrants are among his more extreme policy positions. 

McConnell endorsed Trump in early May after his win in Indiana effectively cleared the Republican field, though other Republican leaders, including House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) have withheld their endorsements for now.
...................................................................................................................................................................

Wow, even worse than Sarah!

...................................................................................

"... Trump has so far proved unable and unwilling to rally the entire party around his candidacy."

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  The only good economic times we've had in the last 30 years have been under Democratic presidents.  Fingers crossed, Trump runs his campaign into the ground rather than the entire nation.
*  And this joke of a man thinks he should be the leader of the free world? He can't even manage his own campaign!
*  4 NO TRUMP. He's a bridge to nowhere
*  He does not know how much power the Congress has. He also is unaware of the balance of power between him and the Military (which by the way is civilian). The Military has the right to refuse to do anything illegal.  Trump's naïveté allows him to believe that he will have unlimited power. But thanks to the framers of our government, there are many power balances. That is is for our benefit. It is what makes our country the United States of America great.
*  The republican party has destroyed itself with its cowardly pandering to the bigoted narcissistic megalomaniac Donald Trump. The citizens of this country overwhelmingly elected Obama, twice. It is hard to see them ever electing such an inconsistent fool of man as Trump.
*   Trump destroys everything he comes in contact with; sowing destruction is encoded in his character defect: https://medium.com/@Elamika/the-unbearable-lightness-of-being-a-narcissist-251ec901dae7#.kdb6mctvr  We must learn about the true extent of this man's pathology before it's too late.
...................................................................................................................................................................
Trump’s campaign stumbles as it tries to go big
By Ashley Parker, May 27, 2016

A constant stream of changes and scuffles are roiling Donald Trump’s campaign team, including the abrupt dismissal this week of his national political director.

A sense of paranoia is growing among his campaign staff members, including some who have told associates they believe that their Trump Tower offices may be bugged.

And there is confusion among his donors, who want to give money to a super PAC supporting Trump but have received conflicting signals from top aides about which one to support.

On Thursday, Trump secured enough delegates to win the Republican Party for president, a remarkable achievement for a political newcomer.

But inside his campaign, the limits of the real estate mogul’s managerial style — reliant on his gut and built around his unpredictable personality — are vividly on display, according to interviews with nearly a dozen Republicans inside and outside of the operation.

Two months after assurances that the candidate would become “more presidential” and transition to a more unifying phase of his campaign, Trump continues to act as if the primary is still underway. His team has struggled to fill top positions, such as communications director, and Trump has made it clear he still sees himself as his own chief adviser.

This week, Trump fired Rick Wiley, his national political director, after Wiley clashed with campaign officials in three states. And while fights among aides are not unusual, the daily leaks of damaging information from within his campaign are prompting worry among Republican officials.

Republican strategists were hoping that by now Trump would be making inroads among mainstream Republican voters and conservative groups seeking to avoid the election of Hillary Clinton at all costs.

“Candidate Trump needs to better understand that he is now the titular head of the GOP,” said Scott W. Reed, senior political strategist for the US Chamber of Commerce. “His words and actions will have an impact on the over 6,000 GOP candidates running for office — from federal races down to the courthouse.”

Reed has said that while there are many unknowns about Trump, the knowns about Clinton could be a powerful motivations for Republican voters.

Trump, who lent his campaign money during the primaries, has begun fund-raising for the general election, and there are signs that high-dollar donors are willing to help, especially by donating to a super PAC supporting him.

But there are several such groups, and the campaign has yet to unofficially sanction one, leaving some donors confused about which super PAC, if any, they should support. Two super PACs have said they are the premier group supporting the presumptive nominee, neither of which Trump has given his blessing.

Despite his and his aides’ talk of unification, Trump has so far proved unable and unwilling to rally the entire party around his candidacy.

On Tuesday, he attacked Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico — a Hispanic rising star and head of the Republican Governors Association — in her home state, saying she was “not doing the job.”

And he hit Mitt Romney, the 2012 Republican nominee, calling him a “choker” and mocking his gait, saying he walked “like a penguin.”

Asked for comment about his management style, and the current state of his campaign, Trump declined.

So far, Trump has shown little inclination to adjust to a political world. His penchant for setting up competition and infusing tension between his subordinates has carried over from his real estate company.

“He certainly does love playing people against each other, but in my experience he knew how to make me reach my potential,” said Sam Nunberg, who was fired from the campaign in 2015 after a series of clashes with the campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski.

But, as was the case with Wiley’s dismissal, Trump is reliant on information he garners himself and can be swayed by the last person he talked to.

The combat within the Trump campaign has undermined the daily messages the team seeks to promote. On Wednesday, Trump met with dozens of female CEOs and entrepreneurs before his afternoon rally in California, a meeting that was never publicized. Instead, the campaign sent out a message announcing Wiley’s dismissal.

The shake-up also hindered the campaign from pouncing on the tough day his likely Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, was having, after a State Department inspector general strongly criticized her use of a private e-mail server when she was secretary of state.

To complement its lean operation, the Trump campaign has begun relying on the Republican National Committee for everything from opposition research to communications help and voter data.

On Thursday, Trump expressed confidence that the RNC could take over for what he hasn’t done himself. Yet officials in important battleground states have complained for weeks that the Republican committee has not delivered the promised resources for field organizations.

Trump has also been dismissive of data analytics, suggesting in interviews that his showmanship and rallies will continue to be effective.

Reed stressed that Trump needs to grow — and fast. “Trump is the King Kong of the GOP, and when he steps, the world rattles,” Reed said. “Trump needs to better fully appreciate and understand this new role.”
...................................................................................................................................................................

"That Trump’s policy statements don’t exactly demonstrate the keenest grasp of substantive issues is not surprising."

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  Trump had Hillary at his wedding to one of his wives and it is only fitting that My Damn President returns the favor by inviting him and his current concubine to her inaguration.
*  The average voters have never been really interested in debates about policy details, not in America and not anywhere else, and it is no different this election season.  What is different is the enthusiastic embrace of a man who wears his thuggery like a badge of honor and openly uses sadism to appeal to his followers: https://medium.com/@Elamika/the-unbearable-lightness-of-being-a-narcissist-251ec901dae7#.hnl5kwmwh  His destructive drive makes him wildly popular with a certain segment of the American public -- the spite voters. They want a sadistic thug who would kick a**, no matter whose -- any target is good for the collective rage, though the more alien looking, the better. Slippery Don, whose lack of conscience is his most noticeable and, um, endearing trait, fits the role perfectly.  So it is not exactly as though "nothing matters" -- revenge still does, more so than ever, in fact.
*  Dover, I've yet to see you react to any criticism of Trump with anything other than..."but, but Hillary!....."  That's proof there's literally nothing TO vote FOR Trump.  What policy of his has won your support?  Is it the wall he's now saying he understands can't really be built?  Is it his ban on Muslims entering the country he's now said was "just a suggestion"?  I know you're very anti gun control. Do you believe Trump's sudden reversal on gun control?  How could it be meaningful when he's got so many pro gun control comments in his past?  His pro-life position?  He's been completely contradictory on that position in the last few years.
*  Trump is the manifestation of hatred that lives inside all of us. We hate it when someone cuts us off. We get really worked up when we have to wait in a line. Any Line. The idea that we actually have to interact with other people and they will get in your ways stokes the fire of hatred until it rages. Trump is the bonfire. Everyone enjoys sitting by the fire. Perhaps the Donald can provide us some marshmallows to toast?
   *  ... I'm sure the Donald would be willing to SELL you some marshmallows to toast (at the right price).
...................................................................................................................................................................
Welcome to the ‘nothing matters’ election
By Michael A. Cohen, May 27, 2016

Donald Trump gave a major policy speech on energy Thursday, and it was as incoherent as one might expect from a candidate who is not exactly a policy wonk.

Trump offered few thoughts on climate change, which he implied was a “phony issue.” He said the Paris climate agreement would allow foreign bureaucrats to control how much energy Americans use (not true) and that he would “cancel” the deal (he can’t actually do that). He said he would save the coal industry and restore jobs for coal workers, which not even people who work in the coal industry believe is possible. He said Hillary Clinton had “declared war on the American worker” and that Barack Obama’s “stated intent is to eliminate oil and natural gas production in America” (Obama has stated no such thing). He also used the phrase “very, very pure, sweet, beautiful oil,” which should give you some sense of where his energy policy preferences lie.

That Trump’s policy statements don’t exactly demonstrate the keenest grasp of substantive issues is not surprising. After all, his top campaign strategist, Paul Manafort, said recently that Trump saw his role as president to be more as a chairman of the board than CEO or COO. Manafort also said Trump would looking for an experienced vice president who could “do the part of the job he doesn’t want to do.” Welcome to the nothing matters election.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Trump has shown repeatedly that he knows virtually nothing about the issues that he would actually confront if he becomes president. He substitutes hoary slogans like “Build the Wall” for actual policy statements, pledges to ban all Muslims, deport all illegal immigrants, be “the greatest job creator God ever created,” all the while making America great again. That he’s offered not a single realistic proposal for how he would do these things doesn’t seem to bother his supporters. Trump’s views on social issues — like funding Planned Parenthood and transgender bathrooms — run counter to the dominant views of Republican voters. Trump’s persona, his three divorces, his ostentatious wealth, and his vulgarity stand in sharp contrast to the GOP’s base of socially conservative, evangelical voters — and yet none of it matters. They have been among his strongest supporters.

Indeed, it’s hard even to figure why Trump — or Clinton, for that matter — bothers to give any policy speeches at all. Earlier this month, Clinton unveiled an ambitious new proposal for improving American child care. It barely caused a ripple in the vast media political apparatus whose purported job it is inform voters about the policy positions of the presidential candidates. Why talk about child care when Trump is getting in twitter fights with Elizabeth Warren?

The lack of interest in actual policy issues seems more acute this campaign year, but it’s nothing new. As Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels, two political scientists, pointed out recently in The New York Times, “decades of social-scientific evidence show that voting behavior is primarily a product of inherited partisan loyalties, social identities, and symbolic attachments. Over time, engaged citizens may construct policy preferences and ideologies that rationalize their choices, but those issues are seldom fundamental.”

This will certainly ring true to anyone who has spoken to Trump voters at campaign rallies this year (or for that matter supporters of the other candidates). Getting them to talk about policy issues that matter to them is like pulling teeth. They hem and haw; they strain to think of something and usually just mouth platitudes. It’s abundantly clear that issues are not what are driving their allegiances.

This is not just a phenomenon on the right. Bartels and Achen found that while supporters of Bernie Sanders are “more pessimistic than Mrs. Clinton’s supporters about ‘opportunity in America’ and more likely to say that economic inequality had increased,” they were less likely than Clinton’s backers to favor a higher minimum wage, more government spending on health care, or “an expansion of government services financed by higher taxes.” These, of course, are all positions held by Sanders.

Indeed, the greatest indicator of support for Sanders is not ideology, but rather being young, male, and nonwhite, and an independent rather than a registered Democrat. On the Republican side, Trump’s support has been built on a foundation of noncollege-educated, poorer GOP voters who are overwhelmingly white. As for the polls that at one point showed a large number of Republicans who would never vote for Trump — today he’s getting more than 80 percent of GOP support.

Of course, journalists have a responsibility to cover policy issues and push the candidates on the substance of their proposals . . . or the lack thereof. But that doesn’t mean that voters are carefully weighing the health care proposals of the two presumptive nominees or debating the nuances of their positions on trade or the environment or child care. After all, it’s a bit hard to compare and contrast when only one candidate has any actual proposals.

In modern American politics, partisanship and tribe don’t just count more than policy — they count for practically everything. In a polarized political environment, where the number of persuadable voters has shrunk to a tiny segment of the electorate, presidential politics has become a zero sum game of mobilizing your base, getting your voters to the polls, and spending more time pointing out why the other candidate is worse rather than why yours is better.

On a more positive note, we’ve only got about five more months of campaigning to go.
...................................................................................................................................................................