Does anyone with a working brain or even a semi working one think that Gaetz isn't guilty of something? Why all this effort for this report not to come out if he did nothing wrong? It's beyond obvious, folks.
This committee spent a year on this report and god knows how much money only to throw it in the dust bin bc he's a Trump pick? Forget the moral issues, he's no more qualified to be AG than I am.
He's slimy and creepy AF to boot. These cabinet picks are an absolute joke.
Lara Trump as a Senator? If DeSantis knows what's good for him, he'll appoint her.
And Nancy Mace?! She's now in a race with MTG as Most Horrible Harlot of the House. They're nothing but attention whores.
The FACT is that the majority of voters did NOT vote for Trump.
The FACT is that only one Republican in the past NINE presidential elections, since 1992, has gotten a majority of the votes.
The past THREE winning Democratic elections, the Dems DID get a majority of votes.
In this election, the three critical states, PA, MI & WI, Trump won by only a collective 242,580 out of 153 MILLION cast nationwide.
He loses all those (which he did in 2020), he does not win.
THAT is not a "mandate" of any sort.
The FACT is that President Biden and President Obama (twice) did a LOT better than Trump's narrow win.
Did not see any GOPer's respecting their CLEAR mandates.
In FACT, President Obama not only did not get ANY "honeymoon", the day of his inauguration in 2009, Mitch McConnell met with the GOP caucus and hatched the plan that they would OPPOSE ANYTHING and EVERYTHING President Obama wanted to get done for the American people with his very clear and convincing mandate...
52.9% vs McCain's 45.7%. A huge 7.2 point win. 365 EC votes vs 173.
Trump has NO "mandate" and absolutely deserves NO honeymoon.
His clown car of dangerously incompetent cranks and charlatans for his cabinet and other critical jobs must be STRONGLY OPPOSED!!!
I don’t expect Trump to get a honeymoon either. He didn’t get one the first time. I vividly recall Warren calling for his impeachment BEFORE he was even inaugurated.
Chris conveniently passes up the single most important statistic about Trump’s win: he won based upon 230,000 votes in 3 swing states. Fact.
And you know what percentage of the votes cast *that* was? 00.15% of the roughly 150M cast. We *all* know, with the possible exception of YOU, @dutchmaga, that the Electoral College is skewed towards a very small number of voters in red states. It’s a fact that a Democrat has to win the popular vote by 3% to 5% in order to win the EC.
But by all means go on and on about the “mandate” that Trump has…
Lots of articles about Trump over-performing and/or Kamala under-performing, and the reasons why.
Don't even bring up Kamala not talking policy specifics (she did many times) when Trump was babbling nonsense about pets being eaten, Biden's circles and whatever.
Kamala lost because there are far too many voters in the US in 2024 who will never ever vote for a Black woman. If she was either White or male, or both, Trump would now be choosing assisted living facilities instead of Cabinet nominees.
Exactly. Pretty obvious at this point. It was a close election decided on the margins and the country is just too racist and misogynist to accept a female minority.
To be the first woman president Kamala needed to be outstanding (like Obama was to be the first black president.) In my view she was a good candidate but not outstanding. I did hope that she might win because Trump is so terrible, but unfortunately a lot of voters don't see him that way.
What the swings to Trump tell me: America may be ready for a Black man in the White House, or a woman, but it simply will not accept both in the same package.
It may have been comprehensive in terms of his improvement but it’s disingenuous to say it’s a comprehensive win over the Democrats. It’s a slight win. You’re failing your pledge to be non partisan calling that a broad win. That’s a MAGA talking point not a bipartisan point.
An honest appraisal is we’re so close neither party has a mandate to follow its dream and both need to compromise - Democrats slightly more. So when you report the extreme “dream following” Trump is doing with his cabinet it must be pointed out how uncooperative his picks are. He needed to have had a huge win to turn a democracy into an autocracy - more than Bush’s over Dukakis’. His picks are unfair not just destructive. Bipartisan reporting is not what you’re doing!
Sweeping and comprehensive? It was no doubt an electoral landslide, but Trump is now under 50% of the popular vote. That less than 1/2 of Americans voted for him and his policies (or concepts of plans) is proof that he has not been given a mandate by the American people (and that the winner-take-all electoral allocation is undemocratic).
Will be interesting when the policies trump ran on come to bear fruit, and those who voted for him see the results. Things like, when he repeals the ACA, and millions lose health insurance, and rural clinics and hospitals funded by the ACA close. Or when the tariffs are put in place and trump voters come to learn that the importing country (USA), not the exporting country (like China) pays the tariffs, and prices go up. Will be further interesting to see how he pins it on Obama or Hillary’s emails.
Chris - At the risk of being pedantic... The shifts that are illustrated by the chart are percentage points, not per cent. When Trump's share of the vote in Arizona goes from 49 percent to 52.2 percent, it is a "swing" of 3.2 percentage points, but it is an increase of roughly 6.4 percent. All of the stats that you presented would be even more impressive if they were actually converted to percent.
Chris: Seriously dude — Trump did better than last time. We get it. He still isn’t even going to get over 50% of the vote, and is going to win by something like 260,000 votes in 3 states. He will win by a little over 1.5%. That is not a “sweeping and comprehensive victory”. These are just facts by historical standards, not some “Democratic protestations”. You really need to stop shoving that narrative down people’s throats, because it simply isn’t true. Joe Biden won by wider margins in percentage and actually won a majority of the vote, with more Senate flips, and you media types spent 4 years telling us how slim his margin of victory was. Get a little consistency of perspective if you wouldn’t mind.
You keep priding yourself on telling us how evenhanded and fair you are, but then you have this breathless exuberance in parroting the MAGA perspective on the size and scope of his very narrow victory, when facts in historical context show they just aren’t true. I look forward to your Chis Crucial explaining how his inaugural in 2016 was really bigger than Obama’s if you squint real hard…
C’mon man. Stubbornly sticking to your pre-cooked narrative despite the facts is not a virtue.
On your points under number 1 you should add the fact that all the media has been talking about for the past 8 years is Trump, Trump, Trump. Please refer to your comments earlier on this platform regarding the media and Trump. They even covered events from Mar-a-Lago, caractherized as press-conferences while all they were, were campaigning compalining events and propaganda. Trump did not need to spend money because the media gave him free press. As I said before, media coverage "good or bad" is good fro Trump as folks basically remember the name and it becomes name recognition when you get to vote. In addition, trust in the media is at a low point in history so people may have a tendency evrything they hear but they do hear the name. I mean even at substack it is and has been all about Trump. I know the media shuns this responsibility because, as you say, it brings in $$$. My two cents.
Trump cheated in 2016 (read the Mueller report), cheated in 2020 (fake electors/attempted coup) and he didn't cheat in 2024, yeah right. He's a criminal. He won ALL the swing states AND the popular vote??? Not probable nor possible.
Recounts in a couple areas would prove it, but democrats probably won't do it because "IT WAS A SAFE AND SECURE ELECTION", yeah right.
“ think that reaffirms what we already know: The electorate — especially outside of the swing states — wanted Trump and what he was selling this time around. Or didn’t want Kamala Harris and what she was selling. Or maybe a little of both”
How about it was a serious anti-incumbent mood and Trump didn’t end up winning by that much.
The biggest story of this election is the republican overperformance among LATINOS. Big improvement over 2020. And Latinos tend not to live in swing states. We live in states like florida, texas, and California. That explains the popular vote win
Matt Gaetz deserves no breaks. That the spineless Lindsay Graham is touting him ought to be a negative.
Lara Trump in the Senate? Further proof that there is no longer a Republican Party, just the MAGAt cult.
Does anyone with a working brain or even a semi working one think that Gaetz isn't guilty of something? Why all this effort for this report not to come out if he did nothing wrong? It's beyond obvious, folks.
This committee spent a year on this report and god knows how much money only to throw it in the dust bin bc he's a Trump pick? Forget the moral issues, he's no more qualified to be AG than I am.
He's slimy and creepy AF to boot. These cabinet picks are an absolute joke.
Lara Trump as a Senator? If DeSantis knows what's good for him, he'll appoint her.
And Nancy Mace?! She's now in a race with MTG as Most Horrible Harlot of the House. They're nothing but attention whores.
Trump only won the popular vote by two percentage points. In no world is this a comprehensive win. He has no mandate, and deserves no honeymoon.
The FACT is that the majority of voters did NOT vote for Trump.
The FACT is that only one Republican in the past NINE presidential elections, since 1992, has gotten a majority of the votes.
The past THREE winning Democratic elections, the Dems DID get a majority of votes.
In this election, the three critical states, PA, MI & WI, Trump won by only a collective 242,580 out of 153 MILLION cast nationwide.
He loses all those (which he did in 2020), he does not win.
THAT is not a "mandate" of any sort.
The FACT is that President Biden and President Obama (twice) did a LOT better than Trump's narrow win.
Did not see any GOPer's respecting their CLEAR mandates.
In FACT, President Obama not only did not get ANY "honeymoon", the day of his inauguration in 2009, Mitch McConnell met with the GOP caucus and hatched the plan that they would OPPOSE ANYTHING and EVERYTHING President Obama wanted to get done for the American people with his very clear and convincing mandate...
52.9% vs McCain's 45.7%. A huge 7.2 point win. 365 EC votes vs 173.
Trump has NO "mandate" and absolutely deserves NO honeymoon.
His clown car of dangerously incompetent cranks and charlatans for his cabinet and other critical jobs must be STRONGLY OPPOSED!!!
I don’t expect Trump to get a honeymoon either. He didn’t get one the first time. I vividly recall Warren calling for his impeachment BEFORE he was even inaugurated.
Good news!
You can vote again in 4 years!
Wrong, wrong & wrong
Chris conveniently passes up the single most important statistic about Trump’s win: he won based upon 230,000 votes in 3 swing states. Fact.
And you know what percentage of the votes cast *that* was? 00.15% of the roughly 150M cast. We *all* know, with the possible exception of YOU, @dutchmaga, that the Electoral College is skewed towards a very small number of voters in red states. It’s a fact that a Democrat has to win the popular vote by 3% to 5% in order to win the EC.
But by all means go on and on about the “mandate” that Trump has…
Give me a W anytime!
Vote again in 4 years!
Enjoy the ride…..
Lots of articles about Trump over-performing and/or Kamala under-performing, and the reasons why.
Don't even bring up Kamala not talking policy specifics (she did many times) when Trump was babbling nonsense about pets being eaten, Biden's circles and whatever.
Kamala lost because there are far too many voters in the US in 2024 who will never ever vote for a Black woman. If she was either White or male, or both, Trump would now be choosing assisted living facilities instead of Cabinet nominees.
Exactly. Pretty obvious at this point. It was a close election decided on the margins and the country is just too racist and misogynist to accept a female minority.
To be the first woman president Kamala needed to be outstanding (like Obama was to be the first black president.) In my view she was a good candidate but not outstanding. I did hope that she might win because Trump is so terrible, but unfortunately a lot of voters don't see him that way.
What the swings to Trump tell me: America may be ready for a Black man in the White House, or a woman, but it simply will not accept both in the same package.
It may have been comprehensive in terms of his improvement but it’s disingenuous to say it’s a comprehensive win over the Democrats. It’s a slight win. You’re failing your pledge to be non partisan calling that a broad win. That’s a MAGA talking point not a bipartisan point.
An honest appraisal is we’re so close neither party has a mandate to follow its dream and both need to compromise - Democrats slightly more. So when you report the extreme “dream following” Trump is doing with his cabinet it must be pointed out how uncooperative his picks are. He needed to have had a huge win to turn a democracy into an autocracy - more than Bush’s over Dukakis’. His picks are unfair not just destructive. Bipartisan reporting is not what you’re doing!
Sweeping and comprehensive? It was no doubt an electoral landslide, but Trump is now under 50% of the popular vote. That less than 1/2 of Americans voted for him and his policies (or concepts of plans) is proof that he has not been given a mandate by the American people (and that the winner-take-all electoral allocation is undemocratic).
Looking at percentage shifts can be misleading if a key cause was reduced Democratic turnout.
Will be interesting when the policies trump ran on come to bear fruit, and those who voted for him see the results. Things like, when he repeals the ACA, and millions lose health insurance, and rural clinics and hospitals funded by the ACA close. Or when the tariffs are put in place and trump voters come to learn that the importing country (USA), not the exporting country (like China) pays the tariffs, and prices go up. Will be further interesting to see how he pins it on Obama or Hillary’s emails.
Chris - At the risk of being pedantic... The shifts that are illustrated by the chart are percentage points, not per cent. When Trump's share of the vote in Arizona goes from 49 percent to 52.2 percent, it is a "swing" of 3.2 percentage points, but it is an increase of roughly 6.4 percent. All of the stats that you presented would be even more impressive if they were actually converted to percent.
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Chris: Seriously dude — Trump did better than last time. We get it. He still isn’t even going to get over 50% of the vote, and is going to win by something like 260,000 votes in 3 states. He will win by a little over 1.5%. That is not a “sweeping and comprehensive victory”. These are just facts by historical standards, not some “Democratic protestations”. You really need to stop shoving that narrative down people’s throats, because it simply isn’t true. Joe Biden won by wider margins in percentage and actually won a majority of the vote, with more Senate flips, and you media types spent 4 years telling us how slim his margin of victory was. Get a little consistency of perspective if you wouldn’t mind.
You keep priding yourself on telling us how evenhanded and fair you are, but then you have this breathless exuberance in parroting the MAGA perspective on the size and scope of his very narrow victory, when facts in historical context show they just aren’t true. I look forward to your Chis Crucial explaining how his inaugural in 2016 was really bigger than Obama’s if you squint real hard…
C’mon man. Stubbornly sticking to your pre-cooked narrative despite the facts is not a virtue.
Sean Casten is an ILLINOIS Congressman, not Wisconsin. He used to be my congressman, until redistricting. Please correct, thank you.
On your points under number 1 you should add the fact that all the media has been talking about for the past 8 years is Trump, Trump, Trump. Please refer to your comments earlier on this platform regarding the media and Trump. They even covered events from Mar-a-Lago, caractherized as press-conferences while all they were, were campaigning compalining events and propaganda. Trump did not need to spend money because the media gave him free press. As I said before, media coverage "good or bad" is good fro Trump as folks basically remember the name and it becomes name recognition when you get to vote. In addition, trust in the media is at a low point in history so people may have a tendency evrything they hear but they do hear the name. I mean even at substack it is and has been all about Trump. I know the media shuns this responsibility because, as you say, it brings in $$$. My two cents.
Trump cheated in 2016 (read the Mueller report), cheated in 2020 (fake electors/attempted coup) and he didn't cheat in 2024, yeah right. He's a criminal. He won ALL the swing states AND the popular vote??? Not probable nor possible.
Recounts in a couple areas would prove it, but democrats probably won't do it because "IT WAS A SAFE AND SECURE ELECTION", yeah right.
“ think that reaffirms what we already know: The electorate — especially outside of the swing states — wanted Trump and what he was selling this time around. Or didn’t want Kamala Harris and what she was selling. Or maybe a little of both”
How about it was a serious anti-incumbent mood and Trump didn’t end up winning by that much.
The biggest story of this election is the republican overperformance among LATINOS. Big improvement over 2020. And Latinos tend not to live in swing states. We live in states like florida, texas, and California. That explains the popular vote win