Opposition to the President Is Growing

 Michigan

Reuters reports that polling of about 88,000 US adults from August to December 2019 indicates that increasing opposition to the president continues to outpace increasing support. Reuters writes:

“NEW YORK (Reuters) - As Republican President Donald Trump seeks a second term in November, Americans’ interest in voting is growing faster in large cities dominated by Democrats than in conservative rural areas, according to an analysis of Reuters/Ipsos national opinion polls. 

If the trend lasts until Election Day on Nov. 3, it would be a reversal from the 2016 election when rural turnout outpaced voting in urban areas, helping Trump narrowly win the White House. 

The finding, based on responses from more than 88,000 U.S. adults who took the online poll from August to December 2015 or from August to December 2019, suggests that the “Blue Wave,” a swell of anti-Trump activism that followed his entry into the White House in 2017, is still rolling across the country’s largest population centers. 

Even as Trump commands rock-solid support among Republicans, voters’ interest in going to the polls appears to be growing faster among those who disapprove of Trump than among those who approve of him, according to experts who reviewed the data. 

The advantage in urban political engagement extends deep into the most competitive battleground states that Trump won by razor-thin margins four years ago, the data shows. 

In large urban areas of the upper Midwest, a region that includes swing states Michigan and Wisconsin, for example, the number of people who said they were “certain” to vote in the upcoming presidential election rose by 10 percentage points to 67% compared with survey responses from 2015.”

Of course, that is now. The election is still about 8 months off. Everything could change between now and then. A red tidal wave could sweep across the land and re-elect the president.

Also Michigan

Buying´ power *or is it* buying power´ (note accent marks)

Several prominent news organizations have reported that Michael Bloomberg has, so far, flooded the airwaves with some $400 million worth of campaign ads, all of which paid out of his own very deep pockets.  These ads seem to be having a tremendous effect on the populace-at-large’s voting selection, putting Bloomberg in second place in most Democratic polls.

So these questions arise:

 

- Can, indeed should, power, especially the power of the presidency, be sold to the highest bidder?

 

- Is this not shades of Citizens United* but in a singular form?

 

- Is this a further example of my Capitalism Gone Awry® complaint?

Give us your take on money in politics.

Thanks for recommending and commenting.

____________________________________________________________

*Wiki: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. 310 (2010), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning campaign finance. The Court held that the free speech clause of the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting independent expenditures for political communications by corporations, including nonprofit corporations, labor unions, and other associations.

In a majority opinion joined by four other justices, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy held that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's prohibition of all independent expenditures by corporations and unions violated the First Amendment's protection of free speech.

Book Discussion: American Oligarchs

The C-Span 2 program, After Words broadcast a discussion with author Andrea Bernstein on how the Kushners and Trumps got to where they are today. The discussion is about her 2020 book, American Oligarchs: The Kushners, the Trumps and the Marriage of Money and Power. The story is a tale of lies, corruption, deceit and stunning political and law enforcement failures. The sheer degree and blatancy of political and law enforcement corruption is hard to internalize.

This program is 1 hour long and is at this link.

Trump’s Money Laundering Trail

Yesterday, the Rachael Maddow show aired a segment on a book to be released today, Dark Towers: Deutsche Bank, Donald Trump, and an Epic Trail of Destruction, on the money laundering trail that the president left in his wake. Along with the president, the other main culprit is the corrupt behemoth Deutsche Bank. The bank had to fire one of its employees who kept telling senior management that the president was laundering money. As usual, the bank denies all wrongdoing and rejects the truth mostly as a pack of lies.

A 7 minute segment on this topic is available from MSNBC at this link. In essence, every time there is evidence of financial shenanigans, it leads to a conclusion that there really were financial shenanigans, often accompanied by felony convictions or resignations to avoid an investigation. A 2 minute segment showing an interview with the book’s author David Enrich is at this link.

This segment is well worth the 7 minutes of time. It reviews the history of many of the president’s financial sleaze and corruption episodes that are now fading from memory of at least some people like me. It is good to have one’s memory refreshed.

Buttigieg hits back: I won't 'take lectures on family values' from Rush Limbaugh

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg said Sunday he won't "take lectures on family values" from conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who suggested Americans wouldn't elect Buttigieg president because he's been "kissing his husband on stage" after debates.

'I love my husband. I'm faithful to my husband," the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor told CNN's "State of the Union.

"On stage, we usually just go for a hug. But I love him very much. And I'm not going to take lectures on family values from the likes of Rush Limbaugh."

Limbaugh on Wednesday said Democrats must be thinking of Buttigieg standing on a debate stage with Trump, "OK, how's this going to look?"

"Thirty-seven-year-old gay guy kissing his husband on stage, next to Mr Man, [President] Donald Trump," Limbaugh said. "What's going to happen here?"

The comments came a week after Trump awarded Limbaugh, who said he is battling advanced lung cancer, with the Presidential Medal of Freedom at the State of the Union address.

Buttigieg, who is vying to be the first openly gay US president, addressed the historic nature of his candidacy during an interview on "Meet the Press" last week.

"There was a moment before we went out when Chasten pulled me in and just reminded me what this means for some kid peeking around the closet door wondering if this country has a place for them," Buttigieg said. "I didn't set out to be the gay president, but certainly seeing what this means is really meaningful and really powerful."

In a radio interview with Geraldo Rivera, Trump was asked if he thinks Americans would vote for a gay man to be president.

"I think so," Trump said, adding, "I think there would be some that wouldn't. I wouldn't be among that group, to be honest with you."

Buttigieg heads into Nevada after claiming victory in the Iowa caucuses and finishing second in the New Hampshire Democratic primary to Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/newspolitics/buttigieg-hits-back-i-wont-take-lectures-on-family-values-from-rush-limbaugh/ar-BB104btq?li=AAggNb9&ocid=mailsignout

They say history repeats itself…

The gang is getting back together.  No, not what’s left of the Beatles, but Trump and some of his old associates (Hope “former model/well connected rich girl/Trump Whisperer” Hicks; Sean “the biggest crowds in history” Spicer; and Reince “I am NOT drunk!” Priebus).

MSNBC legal analyst and former 30-year federal prosecutor, Glenn Kirschner, suspects that this upcoming reunion could have something to do with John Bolton’s still pending book, now being reviewed by the White House for containing possible “classified information.”

Kirschner tweets: “Why are Hope Hicks/Sean Spicer/Reince Priebus being pulled back in the White House by Trump? Maybe Bolton’s book proves those 3 could provide incriminating info against Trump, so Trump will try to stop them from testifying, claiming executive privilege/absolute immunity?”

At first, I just suspected the old “Hope Hicks was to Trump, as Monica Lewinsky was to Clinton” logic analogy.  Now I think Kirschner is probably right.  ‘Course, the former doesn’t preclude the latter, by any means. 😉

Why do you think these individuals are being called back for "service?" 

Thanks for recommending and commenting.