EGO BOOST
HEDGEHOG REPORT SOCIAL NETWORK

Search

Bevin Leads Beshear By 6%, Trump Dominates Dems in KY

Polling has been almost been non-existent in the state of Kentucky for the upcoming gubernatorial race this year, but Gravis Marketing has given us a new one today and it shows Republican Matt Bevin with a 6% lead over Democrat Andy Beshear.

GOVERNOR – KENTUCKY (Gravis)
Matt Bevin (R-inc) 48%
Andy Beshear (D) 42%

There have only been two polls that I am aware of in this race and this the first to show Bevin in the lead. Here are the two polls on the PollWatch page for Kentucky. There were also some 2020 numbers in this poll showing Donald Trump should have no problem holding this state.

PRESIDENT – KENTUCKY (Gravis)
Donald Trump (R-inc) 57%
Joe Biden (D) 37%

Donald Trump (R-inc) 57%
Bernie Sanders (D) 35%

Donald Trump (R-inc) 60%
Elizabeth Warren (D) 28%

Donald Trump (R-inc) 60%
Pete Buttigieg (D) 28%

US SENATE – KENTUCKY (Gravis)
Mitch McConnell (R-inc) 49%
Jim Gray (D) 41%

This poll was done June 11-12 among 741 likely voters.

Posted by Dave at 9:26 pm
Filed under: General | Comments (153)

153 Responses to “Bevin Leads Beshear By 6%, Trump Dominates Dems in KY”

  1. SanDiegoCitizen says:

    1st

  2. jason says:

    THE TRUMP REPORT HAS ARRIVED!

    REJOICE!

  3. SanDiegoCitizen says:

    Not so fast;

    2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination The Hill/HarrisX

    Biden 35,
    Sanders 13,
    Warren 7,
    Buttigieg 4,
    Harris 5,
    O’Rourke 6,
    Booker 3,
    Klobuchar 1,
    Castro 2,
    Yang 0,
    Ryan 1,
    Delaney 1,
    Bennet 1,
    Gillibrand 0

  4. jason says:

    I don’t always agree with wes, but his analysis on Trump on the previous thread is pretty much spot on.

    But like a poll it is a snapshot in time, we don’t really know what the landscape will be a year from now.

  5. jason says:

    SD is really a spoilsport.

    But the good news is I am still tied with Gillibrand Yang even thought I am trailing Delaney and Ryan by a point.

  6. jason says:

    Hey, spell check, GFY.

  7. SanDiegoCitizen says:

    “@realDonaldTrump
    @FoxNews Polls are always bad for me. They were against Crooked Hillary also. Something weird going on at Fox. Our polls show us leading in all 17 Swing States. For the record, I didn’t spend 30 hours with @abcnews, but rather a tiny fraction of that. More Fake News”

    A bit of an unusual claim considered he just fired his pollster.

  8. janz says:

    Unlike Jason, I don’t 100% agree with wes’s Trump analysis on the previous thread. True, trump’s abrasive style has remained steadfastly obnoxious to his foes. But, that pattern is ingrained in him, with little hope of changes, aka *growth”.

    However, IMO, trump has grown in his leadership role as US president. Foreign entities may not necessarily like him, but I do believe they respect him much more than they did his predecessor.

    I also think he still has more public loyalty than many give him credit for. A person close to him once asked what trump attributed his success to. His succinct answer was, “I look around, see what people want, and then give it to them.” This matches efforts exerted in checking off many items included (not all) in his “promises made, promises kept” slogan, that is embedded in his 2020 campaign signage.

  9. Bitterlaw says:

    Trump picks a fight with the reporter he gave special access to so the reporter could follow him and interview him? He claims the polls show him leading but fired the pollsters? WTF

  10. Tina says:

    Manafort not going to rykers. Remember “I lie” aka Bl aka the Biden reports site attorney told us he did not care.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/paul-manafort-was-headed-to-notorious-and-dangerous-rikers-island-jail-then-ag-bill-barrs-deputy-intervened/

  11. Tina says:

    Biden did not have 200 people show up at his Iowa Rally.

    Only 85.

    Wtf, I think Her Thighness drew more, cough and all.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/joe-biden-has-85-at-big-iowa-rally-trump-has-100000-sign-up-line-starts-42-hours-early-outdoor-jumbo-screens-ordered/

  12. Tina says:

    Thank goodness there is some sanity returning to the department of unjustice.

    I am sure McCabe and Comedy, the fixers for Hillary, will provide commentary.

  13. Tina says:

    rd Retweeted

    TheLastRefuge
    @TheLastRefuge2
    ·
    2h
    ?Biden has less supporters at his campaign events, than those lined up to pee at a trump rally…??

  14. Phil says:

    Biden is 76. He may not even live long enough to make it to the election. Does this guy look to be in good shape to anyone?

  15. jason says:

    I think he looks ok for 76.

    I don’t think he looks good enough to be President at 78.

  16. SanDiegoCitizen says:

    Entering in the 2020 election season has a similar feeling as being on an airplane about to go into a tailspin. You get the feeling it is not going to turn out well no matter what happens.

  17. jason says:

    His succinct answer was, “I look around, see what people want, and then give it to them.”

    And some people don’t believe Trump is a Democrat.

    Hey Ma….

  18. Tina says:

    I agree with jason here:

    I think he looks ok for 76.

    I don’t think he looks good enough to be President at 78.

  19. Tina says:

    Who is piloting said airplane?

    Is it a paper plane made out of a jebots basement? I read that paper prices are down btw.

  20. Tina says:

    There would be some drop because of the summer heat, but not 20 percent. Trust but verify.

    Amber Athey
    @amber_athey
    · 1h
    U.S. officials project that illegal border crossings could drop up to 20% this month after Trump reached a deal with Mexico to ramp up border security.

    My latest:

    (link: https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/17/illegal-border-crossings-down-trump-mexico-tariffs/) dailycaller.com/2019/06/17/ill…

  21. Tina says:

    Body wise, face wise Biden looked ok.
    Movement wise he looked more sluggish than Hillary 2016.

    Voice wise is a disaster. He sounds ancient and slow.

  22. SanDiegoCitizen says:

    Biden looks, talks and walks like he is 76 years of age.

    Trump is animated and an excellent speaker, and can excite a crowd. Biden can put a crowd to sleep.

  23. NYCmike says:

    h/t Instapundit:

    “CHANGE: ‘Sing Hallelujah to the Lord’ has become the unofficial anthem of the anti-extradition protest movement: The presence of Christian groups have made protests look a lot less like the “organized riots” the government said it had to crack down on to bring back law and order.

    A friend on Facebook suggests that the Chinese government may have backed off for fear of empowering the churches. It occurs to me that while there are many more communists than Christians in China, there are probably more believing Christians than believing communists.

    It’s also the case that — as with the Tea Party — the powers that be are more frightened by bourgeois revolutionary movements than by those of the extreme left or right. And, like the Tea Party, the Hong Kong protesters leave things cleaner than they found them. You can see why the authorities are worried. What if they did that to government? Same worries that united the GOP and Dem establishments — and the press — against the Tea Party here.”

  24. Bitterlaw says:

    The consensus seems to be that the polls can’t really tell us much about what will happen in 2020. If that is true, what should we discuss?

    Llamas and alpacas – forbidden love

    Walt is so old jokes

    Cash Cow – Does she type ordictate her posts?

  25. Wes says:

    The Tea Party had broad support at its inception. It became a bete noire because its members, often infiltrated by Paulbots, overreached and counterproductively began backing unelectable candidates. Support for the Tea Party utterly collapsed in 2014 when no candidate aligned with it won a nomination for a competitive race as Republicans swept aside Tea Partiers for capable candidates.

  26. jason says:

    I actually attended one of the early Tea Party rallies in Houston.

    It was originally an economic movement, it was about taxes and spending. There weren’t any Paulbots at the rally that I could see.

    Unfortunately, they let it be co-opted by Ron Paul and other morons, and gave the MSM the opportunity to tag it as racist, extreme, etc. As wes says, the Tea Party should have remained a party of ideas, not candidates. Once it started supporting a bunch of kooks, it was doomed.

  27. jason says:

    U.S. officials project that illegal border crossings could drop up to 20% this month”

    Breaking news:

    Even under the most optimistic scenario for the tariff loving AFL-CIO conservatives, at least 80% of the thousands of illegals will continue pouring across the border.

    WE ARE WINNING! STAY THE COURSE!

  28. jason says:

    However, IMO, trump has grown in his leadership role as US president. Foreign entities may not necessarily like him, but I do believe they respect him much more than they did his predecessor.”

    Really? I can think of a few that would… Bolsonaro of Brazil is one. And those that only respect force like Rocket Man and the Iranian mullahs probably respect him more too, although they probably preferred Obama, who they could push around.

    The vast majority of foreign leaders, especially in Europe, are not fans of Trump, and I doubt they respect him.

    However, being loved by foreign leaders or not is not going to be a deciding issue in 2020.

  29. NYCmike says:

    Small correction – I don’t want to see Wes corrected by anyone else:

    “The Tea Party had broad support at its inception. It became **MY** bete noire because its members, often infiltrated by Paulbots, overreached and counterproductively began backing unelectable candidates. Support for the Tea Party utterly collapsed in 2014 when no candidate aligned with it won a nomination for a competitive race as Republicans swept aside Tea Partiers for capable candidates.”

  30. NYCmike says:

    “The vast majority of foreign leaders, especially in Europe, are not fans of Trump, and I doubt they respect him.”

    -Being called out for not spending enough on personal defense usually riles these people up.

    Trump is well-liked in Poland and other countries on the border of Russia, as they are the ones under direct threat.

    God forbid anything happens beyond that, and European leaders will be fighting each other for our friendship, even with Trump as President.

  31. jason says:

    “Same worries that united the GOP and Dem establishments — and the press — against the Tea Party here.”

    What united the GOP establishment against the Tea Party was when it became divorced from its original purpose and became infiltrated by Paulbots and kooks.

  32. Wes says:

    Given how toxic the Tea Party was in 2012 and, more notably, 2014, Mikey, it wasn’t just my personal bete noire but that of many other people observing or participating in politics.

  33. mnw says:

    48/51 & -8 today.

  34. jason says:

    Sorry, NYC’s “correction” is wrong.

    Since the Tea Party imploded, wes is correct that it became “a” bete noire.

  35. NYCmike says:

    What is the reason that border crossings are down 20%?**

    **Asking this question does not mean that I think the battle is won. It is far from finished. Keep building the wall. Keep going after illegals. Keep enforcing all current laws.

  36. mnw says:

    The fact that EU leaders detest Trump is a feature, not a bug.

    The (heart)ed Zero– does that mean we should JOIN them in that?

  37. NYCmike says:

    And a hearty Thank You to my wonderful governor, who just today made my license less valuable, by granting them to people who are not here legally.

  38. NYCmike says:

    Hopefully, liberal NY’ers who travel a lot will now have to show 2 forms of ID to prove they are legal.

    If I have to live under this crap, the people voting for it should be as bothered by it as I already am. Glad that I got one of those passport ID cards the last time I renewed my passport.

  39. jason says:

    I certainly supported the Tea Party as originally launched by Rick Santelli, who was not a Paulbot. In fact the Tea Party was originally funded by the Koch Brothers. It was for small government, fiscal responsibility. It was based on ideas by Ronald Reagan, not Ron Paul.

    “The Tea Party’s economic platform follows its overall belief that less government is good. The free markets are the best generator of jobs and economic growth. The Tea Party quotes former President Ronald Reagan, “The government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.”

    But the king of pork and earmarks, Ron Paul, managed to associate the Tea Party with his movement, which has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility or smaller government, and that was the end of it for me.

  40. jason says:

    Keep building the wall. Keep going
    after illegals. Keep enforcing all current laws.”

    By all means since this is working so well. What a success!

    How many more millions have come across since we “kept building the wall, kept going after illegals, kept enforcing all current laws”? How many more sanctuary cities and states have emerged? How many more benefits have illegals obtained and how many more billions has it cost taxpayers? How many more legal battles and favorable rulings have illegals won?

    WE ARE WINNING! STAY THE COURSE!

  41. NYCmike says:

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-sorry-banning-plastic-bags-wont-save-our-planet/

    -I saw a documentary several years ago with Jeremy Irons, in which he spoke about the problem of trash, as opposed to the issue of global warming and/or climate change.

    Unfortunately, his message doesn’t seem to have spread very far, as the same people are still pushing for the same things – BAN, BAN, BAN – even if that has no lasting affect in regard to the problems they seek to fix.

  42. NYCmike says:

    “How many more millions have come across since we “kept building the wall, kept going after illegals, kept enforcing all current laws”?”

    -It hasn’t been 3 years since Trump was elected……yet you expect him to reverse what has been happening since the late 80’s?

  43. lisab says:

    if biden is the candidate

    i think trump wins easily

    the more i see biden, the worse he looks

    he is not the biden from 2012

    and his segregationist quotes will crush him

  44. NYCmike says:

    “How many more sanctuary cities and states have emerged?”

    -This is a negative?

    FINALLY, the Democratic Party is openly showing that they are for open borders. Let’s see if enough Republicans will stand against that.

    Will you?

  45. NYCmike says:

    “How many more benefits have illegals obtained and how many more billions has it cost taxpayers?”

    -Again, the curtain has been pulled away, and more and more people will see the wizard (Establishment) behind it.

  46. lisab says:

    not sure biden can win the nomination now

    he looks old

    i think he will lose the debate badly

    of course, he is an old war horse

    so he might be able to pull himself together for one night

    but i think one of the younger candidates will challenge him

  47. lisab says:

    it is difficult to say the wall is not working

    when it has not been built

    and the dems are scared of it being built

    and the illegals are trying to get in before it is built

    they all must think it will work

  48. NYCmike says:

    “How many more legal battles and favorable rulings have illegals won?”

    -WAH WAH WAH…..

    Check out NYC circa 1990…..Dinkins era……not that long after Koch said the city was ungovernable……all you need is some guts and voters behind you……again, let’s see how many Republicans are truly for law and order when it comes to immigration.

  49. NYCmike says:

    “they all must think it will work”

    -No way…it can’t be that!

  50. lisab says:

    clearly an electronic fence will not work

    because apprehending illegals only causes them to be released into the usa once they claim asylum

    250 congolese who crossed via mexico, yes they are from africa and crossed over the mexican border

    are now living in the portland maine expo center

    why?

    because according to the law

    the illegals

    can decide where they want to be temporarily detained

    and maine has more welfare than texas!

  51. Wes says:

    Tea Partiers became hubristic and megalomaniac surprisingly quickly.

    They had early success backing Ron Johnson and Marco Rubio but revealed their tone-deaf nature when backing Christine O’Donnell and Sharron Angle.

    In 2012, Eric Hovde, Duane Sand, and Dick Mourdock were their cause celebres.

    By 2014, real Republicans were sick of the Tea Party’s intruding into their primaries to support unelectable candidates. Since then, the Tea Party has won few, if any, Senate primaries.

  52. mnw says:

    Mike

    I read a lengthy, scholarly article about recycling v. landfills. Landfills win hands down, but… it’s like nuclear power. That fight is over.

    I recycle, but it’s a big bogus fraud.

  53. jason says:

    it is difficult to say the wall is not working

    when it has not been built”

    It will never be built, that is the problem. Despite NYC talking about how many Republicans vote for law and order, we know there is no consensus in the country on the wall or on immigration and there are not enough Republican either in office or in the populace to implement this.

    And if it was built, it would have to be continuously funded and monitored, which would also take bi-partisan support.

    So why not try to at least get a physical wall where necessary, and have fencing, monitoring, surveillance, drones, satellite coverage, etc as part of a comprehensive deal.

    I know, it is better to think we are winning while millions pour over the border and the Dems are one election or one SCOTUS judge away from implementing what they really want, open borders.

  54. lisab says:

    who decided that the

    illegals

    get to decide where they will be given free housing? food? healthcare?

    the only good thing according to the maine officials is that they congolese have been traveling so long

    that they don’t think they have ebola

    ————-

    apparently only the poorest exploited congolese can afford the planefare to mexico these days

  55. jason says:

    all you need is some guts and voters behind you”

    Wow, when is that going to happen…

    Meanwhile:

    WE ARE WINNING! STAY THE COURSE!

  56. jason says:

    who decided that the

    illegals

    get to decide where they will be given free housing? food? healthcare?”

    Wrong question.

    Who is going to stop this from happening?

  57. janz says:

    One can be unpopular but respected, at the same time. This president seems to place more value on the latter than the former. From the president of NATO, to middle eastern, Asian countries, South of the border, leaders seem to tread carefully, and in some cases there have been definitive behavioral changes to appease the US rather than provoke it.

    However, If one were to diagram the response of allies and enemies should the dems win in 2020 I think it would show a collective sigh of relief. They could all relax, especially China and Iran, because assuredly the next administration would be “easier” to work with – aka less disruptive and more likely to cave in order to go along to get along.

  58. lisab says:

    monitoring is useless

    you catch them

    they say asylum

    you have to let them stay
    ———

    plus the efence would be turned off day one of the next democrat president

    you cannot turn off a wall

  59. lisab says:

    the biggest threat to trump in 2020

    is trump

    followed by iran

    followed by the dem candidate

  60. jason says:

    but revealed their tone-deaf nature”

    You can see NYC is still tone deaf.

    “It became **MY** bete noire because its members, often infiltrated by Paulbots, overreached and counterproductively began backing unelectable candidates.”

    You know why? He supported those unelectable candidates.

  61. jason says:

    “you cannot turn off a wall”

    Sure you can. A wall without monitoring can be easily climbed over or tunneled under in no time at all.

    Plus, we know the wall will never be built, so it is moot.

    When you go for a wall or nothing, nothing is what you get.

  62. lisab says:

    people in portland maine are very upset that illegals from the

    congo

    who came over the mexican border

    are being supported by the people of maine

    it is all over the news here

    * not * that they are against illegals coming in and getting free welfare for life so long as they vote democrat

    they just thought texas residents would be paying for it

    it is humorous to see the dem pols defending this, they are asking for the rural areas of maine to chip in for the welfare costs

    so far … the rural areas are saying …

    no

  63. jason says:

    you catch them

    they say asylum

    you have to let them stay”

    Right. But the only way to change that is to change the law.

    That can be done under a comprehensive agreement.

    You bring up a good point. The wall is also useless unless this law is changed to require asylum can only be requested from OUTSIDE the country.

  64. lisab says:

    ive been to the great wall

    it is still there

    and

    since the border patrol will continue to exist

    they can easily monitor a physical wall

    now will more of the wall be built?

    probably several hundred miles by 2020

  65. jason says:

    t is humorous to see the dem pols defending this, they are asking for the rural areas of maine to chip in for the welfare costs”

    Except that there are a lot more people in the urban areas of Maine that will support this.

    However, it does increase Trump’s chances of holding on to that 1 Maine EV.

  66. jason says:

    Yeah, the great wall of China certainly didn’t protect those who built it.

    Several hundred miles? The border is 2000 miles long.

    That is way optimistic, but even if true it sounds like the “tariffs might have reduced crossings by 20% this month”.

    Finger in the dam mentality.

  67. NYCmike says:

    jason, for some reason, keeps writing “WE ARE WINNING! STAY THE COURSE!” despite the fact that those he directs this towards are willing to try everything to change the status quo, while he wants to sit back and appease those people (mainly Democrats, but plenty of so-called Republicans) who are unwilling to compromise anything.

    The only thing you get with his approach is giving cover to the open borders crowd……the same cover which has allowed that crowd to keep power for the last 30 years.

  68. janz says:

    IMO this election is not going to be driven by which candidate is more cuddly.

    Instead, there are stark issues and deep divides showcasing who you cast a vote for. Do you want voter ID or ballot harvesting in place? Do you want ever a bigger centralized government, a return to more regulations, higher taxation, healthcare that would resemble the NHS type in the Uk, open borders? Or, do you at least want a chance of governance that gives more freedom to succeed or fail to the individual?

    I’m totally clear as to what my vote is going towards – not because of a personality, but because of the policy being promoted by a given candidate.

  69. NYCmike says:

    Heh….something tells me that a Great Wall combined with modern technology, which I would expect to be used in conjunction with the physical barrier, is now being used in China. They definitely keep track of all the tourists who visit there.

    A physical barrier is necessary……maybe not across the whole length of the border…..but combined with modern technology and a NYC-like approach to law enforcement, and dang straight it could help deter illegals.

  70. jason says:

    I am not opposed to building the wall per se. I think it is necessary along several areas of the border.

    My objections are the following.

    1. There is no consensus that it should be built, half the country at least is against it, and it is not going to get the money needed for building it. So if you don’t want to look for other solutions, you are basically banging your head against a wall, pun intended.

    2. Even if by a miracle it could be built, it is not a real solution unless it is continuously monitored along its entire length by electronic surveillance, drones, sensors, satellites. If there is no funding for this, the wall will be porous, and will be breached, scaled and tunneled under very easily.

    Requiring asylum seekers to apply from outside the country is the most effective way to reduce the number of illegals entering the country.

  71. NYCmike says:

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/poll-aoc-unliked-untrusted-unwanted-in-her-own-ny-district

    -We need her to win her primary next year…..she may give us a chance in that district.

  72. jason says:

    janz, unfortunately you won’t be framing the questions put forth before the voters?

    Try “do you want to save your children from being drowned by the rising seas caused by climate change”?

  73. NYCmike says:

    #2 objection – what the heck else is a Border Patrol supposed to be doing?

  74. NYCmike says:

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/line-for-trumps-2020-launch-rally-forms-more-than-a-day-and-a-half-early/

    “Our Country is doing great, far beyond what the haters & losers thought possible – and it will only get better!”

    -He does have his own style! As long as he stays positive!

  75. jason says:

    are willing to try everything to change the status quo”

    are unwilling to compromise anything.”

    Hello? LOL. Surreal.

    You have been AGAINST any compromise on immigration for years.

    You wouldn’t even admit that proposing massive cuts in LEGAL IMMIGRATION was never going anywhere even in the Republican caucus, let alone outside of it, and you want to say you are for compromise?

    Btw, how is Cotton-Perdue doing, has it been brought up for a vote yet?

  76. jason says:

    what the heck else is a Border Patrol supposed to be doing?”

    They have to be recruited, trained, funded and supported.

    The Dems want to do away with ICE. Border Patrol will be next, bet on it.

  77. mnw says:

    If the stock market rallies 350 points on reports that Trump & Xi will have “an extended meeting,” what kind of rally might we expect If & when the trade dispute with China is actually settled?

    I still think it’s “when.” not “if,” btw.

    I also think the tariffs on China gave extreme credibility to Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Mexico.

  78. NYCmike says:

    https://sports.yahoo.com/matt-carpenter-expertly-conquers-marlins-shift-with-bunt-double-video-141627223.html

    -Love this play!

    On Yankees broadcasts, Phil “Scooter” Rizzuto used to speak all of the time about bunting. He was very good at it. It helped keep him in the big leagues for a long time, and helped his team win ballgames. You would think more players would adopt that small-ball attitude.

  79. NYCmike says:

    “The Dems want to do away with ICE. Border Patrol will be next, bet on it.”

    -FORCE THEM to campaign on that!

    That will be a winner for Republicans, IF Democrats do that.

  80. janz says:

    Jason, don’t get me started on the foolishness of nonsensical AGW thinking!

  81. NYCmike says:

    mnw,

    Is that the case with recycling vs landfill?

    I don’t have much of an issue with recycling, and reusing, and will with little reluctance pay the added costs for doing so, but I do have an issue with banning, especially when it is short-sighted, politically-driven, and not backed up with facts.

  82. janz says:

    Do the dems ever rely on any long range brain cells? They offer such ludicrous ideas regarding how this country should function. Their reliance, though, is appealing to the whims of takers, not producers. How can that kind of focus endure in catering primarily to the needs of users rather than the providers? Dumb, dumb, dumb……

  83. jason says:

    jason’s comprehensive, bi-partisan deal on immigration.

    What Republicans get

    1) Change in law so that asylum can only be applied for from outside the country.

    2) Guaranteed long term funding for border security, a wall in urban areas, fencing, surveillance, drones, satellites, sensors, helicopters, border patrol, etc until the entire border is under adequate surveillance.

    3) Registration of all illegals currently in the country within 12 months, including “dreamers”. At the end of 12 months any illegal not registered can be legally deported with an expedited procedure.

    4) All convicted felons currently in jail or apprehended after the 12 month period can be deported under an expedited procedure.

    5) No more catch and release once the new program goes into effect.

    What the Democrats get:

    1) Dreamers who are not felons get work permits. If they serve honorably in the military for 3 years and/or are gainfully employed and crime free for 5 years get green cards, which allows them to apply for citizenship under the general green card rules, without preference over other applicants.

    2) Illegals that are already in the country and have registered and are not convicted of one felony and/or 3 misdemeanors get 5 year work permits. After 5 years, if they are crime free and gainfully employed, they get permanent work permits. Those not crime free or employed get deported under an expedited system.

    Analysis:

    This plan takes into account that nobody is going to to deport 12 million illegals and that since that is not going to happen, where do we go from there?

    I doubt the Dems will go for this, they might have years ago, but now they are too close absolute victory and open borders to agree to the deal. The all nothings on their side will hate.

    But for Republicans, it is an honest offer. The all or nothings on our side will hate it.

    It won’t happen, and the Dems are going to win sooner or later.

    The WE ARE WINNING, STAY THE COURSE crowd can take the blame.

  84. janz says:

    Logical thinking, Jason, on your republican immigration plan. If only…..

  85. jason says:

    I also think the tariffs on China gave extreme credibility to Trump’s threat to impose tariffs on Mexico.”

    The ability of the AFL-CIO conservatives to delude themselves never ceases to amaze me.

    But it is amusing that the AFL-CIO conservatives think Trump needs “credibility” to impose his asinine 5% tariffs on Mexico.

  86. mnw says:

    Mike

    I don’t have an issue with recycling, either. I do it too. It’s not a major issue.

    I think now the consensus among experts is that curbside recycling is worthless, but harmless.

    The women’s tennis championship in NY is played on top of a landfill. All the U.S. recyclable waste for the next 1000 years would fit in a landfill that is the size of 1/10 of 1% of arable land, I read.

    Plus, it’s not your father’s nasty, leaking old landfills any more. The new ones are VERY high tech.

  87. Phil says:

    I’m considered a border hawk on this site…and according to Corey somewhat of a racist as a result. However, I can completely get behind Jason’s plan. Very reasonable and workable. In fact, it’s just common sense….but no, Democrats would never go for it. They are indeed very close to their open borders panacea. Once that gets codified it’s adios to the Republican Party and hello one party rule. We’re he country of California at that point….and the left knows it.

  88. Bitterlaw says:

    Nothing last forever in politics so there will be a Democrat elected President at some point. Watching mnw, NYC, and the other “I oppose tariffs except Trump’s tariffs” conservatives suddenly oppose tariffs again will be hilarious.

  89. Chicon says:

    Jason, what’s your plan when the Dems say no to your (reasonable) plan? Which is exactly the reality. The Dems will not change the law at all. So, you’re in charge; we know there’s things you don’t want to do, what things – based in the current reality – would you do?

  90. jason says:

    Thanks Phil.

    I know the immigration deadenders will call it amnesty.

    But we have had de-facto amnesty now. Have had it for decades.

    Only the most radical immigration deadenders think we will round up deport 12 million people, there is no political appetite for that and it will never happen.

    So what is plan B?

    I know, we are winning, do nothing.

  91. jason says:

    Jason, what’s your plan when the Dems say no to your (reasonable) plan? Which is exactly the reality. The Dems will not change the law at all. So, you’re in charge; we know there’s things you don’t want to do, what things – based in the current reality – would you do?”

    Well I would propose a plan anyway, let the Dems reject what is essentially what they used to propose themselves.

    I don’t see the downside for Rs, unless the immigration deadenders refuse to vote for Trump because he came up with a plan. It will paint the Dems as the radicals, not that they care, but it could help with legal Hispanics and moderates.

    Trump is right when he says we could go a long way if we just changed the asylum law. So there should be a big legislative push coordinated with McConnell in that direction.

    Trump should continue to try to get as much funding for border security as possible. He should term it border security and not “wall”. He can use funds to build the wall on a priority location basis but frame it as border security, which it is. It might seem like semantics but if you look at the polling you can see that “border security” is much more popular that “the wall”. His insistence on the physical wall for the entire border just doesn’t have enough political support to prevail.

    But the basic answer to your question is that I think the ship has sailed. Republicans waited too long to make a deal, instead choosing to demonize those that favored one. Now the Dems see light at the end of the tunnel, all they need is one more SCOTUS judge or to win an election and they are home free. Time is on their side.

  92. Chicon says:

    92 – I agree with the political aspects of what you say, and in how to position it to hurt the Dems.

    Here’s the thing, though. Trump is a guy who wants to get stuff done, especially stuff he promised. Reasons he can’t get it done are not of much interest to him. He sees a crazy border situation and wants it improved bigly.

  93. mnw says:

    BL

    You constantly misstate my positions. That’s a bad habit for a lawyer, don’t you think? “Straw man” is a related concept to what you do.

    Now…my interest in tariffs is EXCLUSIVELY related to my profound concern over China’s predatory trade practices– a growing concern which I’ve had for DECADES. It makes not the slightest difference to me whether a POTUS is a DEM or not. My concern is a constant.

    Btw… you were 100% WRONG about “Manafort going to Rikers” being business as usual, & not a deep state ploy. It was absolutely not handled routinely. It had “special handling” written all over it, as Dershowitz tried to explain.

    Today, the DOJ intervened, & NY state REVERSED its previously announced decision to transfer Manafort to Rikers Island. I never saw a federal prison inmate treated the way NY state originally intended to treat Manafort. Never.

  94. John says:

    Recently released poll numbers from Political Polls/Firehouse-Optimus for Pa, Wis, and Michigan…

    Pa.
    Biden…43
    Trump…42

    Mich.
    Biden…46
    Trump…43

    Wisc.
    Biden…46
    Trump…40

    https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers?lang=en

  95. NYCmike says:

    https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13337

    -I hope this mother gets some satisfaction from this.

  96. jason says:

    Watching mnw, NYC, and the other “I oppose tariffs except Trump’s tariffs” conservatives suddenly oppose tariffs again will be hilarious.”

    Bitter, Trump’s tariffs are special.

    They are much smarter than regular tariffs, and they have all sorts of secret purposes that only Trump is aware of, the “victims” have not figured them out.

    And while tariffs are usually the exact opposite of free trade, these are Ninja Tariffs, they promote free trade, the first of their kind.

    While tariffs are actually tax hikes on consumers, Trump tariffs have been inoculated against such nefarious effects.

    Finally, while throughout History the evidence is overwhelming that tariffs don’t work and are counterproductive, these special tariffs are guaranteed to violate all laws of economics and supply and demand with impunity.

    The Trump Tariff – Beautiful to Behold

  97. jason says:

    Biden…43
    Trump…42

    Mich.
    Biden…46
    Trump…43

    Wisc.
    Biden…46
    Trump…40″

    Wow, John has some “cojones”.

    Another Biden Report showing Biden ahead everywhere.

    John, you will be torn apart for this act of defiance against the owners of the Trump Report, but I wish you luck.

  98. jason says:

    Now…my interest in tariffs is EXCLUSIVELY related to my profound concern over China’s predatory trade practices”

    Huh oh…EXCLUSIVELY…

    We have someone pretending to be mnw that supports the Mexican tariffs too.

    We need to unmask this impostor.

  99. Chicon says:

    95 – not bad. When I start the Trump Report, those would be subject of their own post/blog!

  100. Chicon says:

    Psst, Jason…those numbers are pretty good for Trump in those states at this point.

  101. Robbie says:

    Whether you want to take this poll or any poll as the gospel truth, the collection of recent polls show Trump is in a terrible re-election position despite a GREAT economy. If this is best he can do with great economic data, what happens if the economy even slightly slows?

    If this trend continues into the Fall, and it probably will since these results are about Trump the person, I don’t see how the party can’t, at least, consider an alternative to him. Blind loyalty to Trump should not be the organizing principle of the Republican Party.

    Just as the generic ballot and Trump’s low approval in Summer 2017 were flashing red light about the chances for House Republicans in 2018, what we’re seeing now are flashing red lights for Trump in 2020. These kind of numbers will result in the Senate going Democrat.

    But MAGA, right!

    John Harwood
    @JohnJHarwood

    new Quinnipiac Florida poll as President Trump announces his 2020 re-election campaign at Orlando rally:

    Biden 50%, Trump 41%

    also,

    Sanders 48%, Trump 42%
    Warren 47%, Trump 43%
    Harris 45%, Trump 44%
    O’Rourke 45%, Trump 44%
    Buttigieg 44%, Trump 43%

  102. Chicon says:

    What was the actual revenue generated by the tariffs on Mexico?

  103. Robbie says:

    Chicon says:
    June 18, 2019 at 1:49 pm
    Psst, Jason…those numbers are pretty good for Trump in those states at this point.

    – LOL! Bless your heart. Trumpers tell themselves the funniest things.

  104. Chicon says:

    Robbie, have you been busy with the 737MAX test flights?

  105. John says:

    #98-actually my point was that two of these states are basically statistically tied and the third is half of what was recently released.
    FYI…FO uses likely voters and was done about a week ago.

  106. jason says:

    Reasons he can’t get it done are not of much interest to him. ”

    Well, maybe, but I see that as a problem.

    If you ignore the reasons, you can’t really get much done.

    If you are aware of the reasons, sometimes you can overcome them.

  107. jason says:

    John I am sorry, but no matter how good those polls are for Trump, they show Biden ahead.

    That is a huge NO-NO with the Trump Report crowd, so get prepared to be crucified.

    But don’t feel bad, Jesus was crucified too.

  108. Chicon says:

    John, your point was clear. It seems Jason and Robbie think Trump being down 1 in PA and 3 in MI is bad news right now.

  109. Robbie says:

    Chicon says:
    June 18, 2019 at 1:52 pm
    Robbie, have you been busy with the 737MAX test flights?

    – No. I got sick of this forum becoming nothing a but a Trump slobber fest that was focused on the stupid wall and defending Trump’s asinine tariffs.

    Because of that, I check this forum only sporadically.

  110. jason says:

    Psst, Jason…those numbers are pretty good for Trump in those states at this point.”

    I know. In fact they are excellent.

    I am just having a little fun with the Trump Report.

  111. NYCmike says:

    “That is a huge NO-NO with the Trump Report crowd, so get prepared to be crucified. ”

    -NOBODY had an issue with polls suggesting Trump may lose.

    Also, considering the poll run-up to November 8, 2016, I expect nothing less than the same this time around…….DOOM all the way for Trump!

  112. jason says:

    ‘and defending Trump’s asinine tariffs”

    Yeah, that’s why I come here, to defend Trump’s asinine tariffs.

    Amoral Scumbag is really an amoral scumbag.

  113. Chicon says:

    110 – sweet. See you in 2023 when you’ll be telling us how Mitt or JEB! will lose with class.

  114. NYCmike says:

    “Because of that, I check this forum only sporadically.”

    Susy-Q may look to this statement as proof of GOD.

  115. jason says:

    -NOBODY had an issue with polls suggesting Trump may lose.”

    You certainly did, why were you supporting Tina’s “Biden Report” nonsense?

    Are you at war with yourself again?

  116. jason says:

    “I don’t see how the party can’t, at least, consider an alternative to him”

    Ahhh, yes, here we go, the 2019 version of the “Brokered Convention”.

    Or maybe the 2019 version of the “RNC will pull the rug from Trump at the convention”.

    An Amoral Scumbag never changes his spots (mixed metaphor?… GFY).

  117. NYCmike says:

    #116 – what was the editorial statement that Wissing made at that time?

    It was something to the affect that “Trump will lose to anyone according to these (national)polls.” despite the fact that the election is determined by the Electoral College.

    If you think polls which say Trump has no shot are right-on, then go with them.

    I think those polls are bunk. Let’s get a candidate on the other side, and some debates, then lets talk about polling data.

  118. jason says:

    Amoral Scumbag is upset that the one challenger Trump has, Whisky Weld, won’t damage Trump’s re-election chances sufficiently.

    He wants someone else who hopefully will ensure the socialist wins.

    Amoral Scumbag is not a deep thinker, it’s easy to see the strategy behind the idiocies.

  119. jason says:

    I think those polls are bunk. Let’s get a candidate on the other side, and some debates, then lets talk about polling data.”

    This is a polling site. Dave posts the available polls, it’s what he has done for 15 years.

    And it is his blog, he can editorialize as much as he wants. And he was right on his comment on the poll results anyway.

    If you don’t like it, start your own blog with Trump winning polls only, and comment on them when you think its the “right time”.

    Until then, GFY.

  120. jason says:

    “Trump will lose to anyone according to these (national)polls.” despite the fact that the election is determined by the Electoral College.”

    Hey, we have a brand new standard for commenting on polls.

    You can no longer say a candidate is “losing” in a poll, because only the EC determines the winner.

    I must have seen more idiotic things here, but I just can’t remember when.

  121. jason says:

    Brazil vs Italy coming up in the Women’s World Cup.

    Should be a good match.

    Also USA vs Guyana tonight for the men’s Concacaf Gold Cup.

  122. Robbie says:

    If any other Republican were president today (choose whomever you like save Cruz) with the economic data we have and the leftward push of the Democrat party, that Republican would have an approval rating somewhere between 52% and 55% and be in the strongest position for re-election since Nixon in 1972.

    Instead, we’ve got Trump who made a fool of himself at the Omaha Beach cemetery, litigates every slight made against him on Twitter, and generally acts like he ought to be in an insane asylum. As a result, on his best day Trump can barely muster a 44% approval rating. That’s political death in two-way race.

    Presidential re-elections are always referendums on the incumbent and that won’t be good news for Trump. After two and a half years, the public has clearly grown weary of Trump’s antics. They may like some of his policies, but not him. Were it not for a great economy, his approval would probably be no better than 35%.

    Right now, I think Trump is headed towards a significant defeat in 2020. My guess is, assuming Biden is the nominee and he shows no signs of slowing down, Trump will lose by a margin that’s probably greater than Romney’s loss to Obama, but smaller than McCain’s loss to Obama.

    Suburbia, the home of the Republican Party for decades, has mostly given up on Trump and there just aren’t enough rural voters to overcome that. I’m not suggesting each of these states will go against Trump, but PA, MI, WI, OH, NC, and FL could swing quite easily. Just a widespread 1 or 2 point shift nationally could lead to Trump getting swamped in places he never expected.

  123. jason says:

    Tuning out for the soccer match.

    The tariff lovers, Trump Report lovers, and brokered convention lovers can post unchallenged.

  124. Robbie says:

    Chicon says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:00 pm
    110 – sweet. See you in 2023 when you’ll be telling us how Mitt or JEB! will lose with class.

    – The best part about slack jawed Trumpers like you is you just continually ignore reality. I thought you promised to set me straight right after the 2018 midterms when you were convinced I was going to be wrong that Democrats were going to swamp Republicans in the House and were on pace to win 30 or more seats. Funny how you disappeared for a good long while after that.

  125. jason says:

    As a result, on his best day Trump can barely muster a 44% approval rating.”

    I love this one, can’t let it go unchallenged.

    Remember, Amoral Scumbag swore here for years that at 45%, Trump would win re-election.

    The goal posts are moving, as usual.

    “Right now, I think Trump is headed towards a significant defeat in 2020.”

    We heard this in 2016, along with 7 senate seats.

    SOCIALIST 2020!

  126. Chicon says:

    “The tariff lovers, Trump Report lovers, can post unchallenged.”

    As we usually do…..

  127. Robbie says:

    jason says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:00 pm
    ‘and defending Trump’s asinine tariffs”
    Yeah, that’s why I come here, to defend Trump’s asinine tariffs.
    Amoral Scumbag is really an amoral scumbag.

    – I wasn’t referring to you. I was referring to the supposed real conservatives like NYCmoron who advocated Tea Party conservatism for all those years only to embrace liberal ideas like tariffs because Trump proposed them.

  128. jason says:

    If any other Republican were president today”

    But that wasn’t really what would have happened, was it, unless you think Jeb would really have beaten Hillary.

    zzzzzzzzzz…….

  129. Robbie says:

    jason says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:04 pm
    “I don’t see how the party can’t, at least, consider an alternative to him”
    Ahhh, yes, here we go, the 2019 version of the “Brokered Convention”.
    Or maybe the 2019 version of the “RNC will pull the rug from Trump at the convention”.
    An Amoral Scumbag never changes his spots (mixed metaphor?… GFY).

    – I will stipulate no one with a reasonable chance of defeating Trump in the primary is going to challenge him. However, it seems totally ridiculous to me a political party with the goal of winning wouldn’t at least wonder this Fall if it might be better to nominate someone other than the person who is likely going to lose and probably have the Senate change hands as a result.

    If Matt Bevin loses here in November, a possibility, it will cause panic in Republican circles in DC because he is viewed as a mini-Trump. Every day, Bevin wakes up and sets out to piss off people here. It’s little wonder he’s the most unpopular governor in the country.

  130. Robbie says:

    jason says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:06 pm
    Amoral Scumbag is upset that the one challenger Trump has, Whisky Weld, won’t damage Trump’s re-election chances sufficiently.
    He wants someone else who hopefully will ensure the socialist wins.
    Amoral Scumbag is not a deep thinker, it’s easy to see the strategy behind the idiocies.

    – Yes. A deep thinker is actually someone who opposed Trump every day of the 2016 campaign, refused to vote for him, and then left the party over him only to become one of his most ardent supporters even though Trump’s only deeply held policy view is tariffs, something free trader Jason fraud opposes.

    As for Weld, he’s a joke. He’s nothing more than a gnat and he’ll play no role in Trump’s 2020 chances. The only people who could seriously challenge Trump are Romney and Haley. Romney has no interest and Haley seems intent on positioning herself to pick up the pieces after Trump loses in 2020 so she can position herself as leader in the clubhouse for 2024.

  131. Robbie says:

    jason says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:16 pm
    As a result, on his best day Trump can barely muster a 44% approval rating.”
    I love this one, can’t let it go unchallenged.
    Remember, Amoral Scumbag swore here for years that at 45%, Trump would win re-election.

    – And I can’t let a fraud like you get by with misstating my view. I wrote in mid 2017 I thought a RCP JA average of 45% was probably an important number for House Republicans heading into the midterms in 2018. At the time, I believed, just as there was in 2016, there might be a hidden vote for him that didn’t register in the polling. And if Trump was around 47% that would be good enough to save the House.

    As 2018 showed, there wasn’t a hidden vote for Trump and Republicans. The number he got in the polling was, basically, the number he and Republicans got on election day 2018. The hidden vote (suburban voters mainly) was with the Democrats.

    As for 2020, I think moron Trump will need to be around 49% or so in the RCP head-to-head average on election to have any chance to draw another inside straight as he did in 2016. Since he’s likely to lose the popular vote, that leaves him little margin for error in the states he’ll need to win the electoral college.

    If Trump is around 49% or so, that would be 4 points higher than Trump’s been in the RCP average at almost any point in his presidency other than the first two weeks. If he can’t muster 49% with a great economy now, why would anyone expect it will go up in the next 17 months?

  132. Sheeple, Jr. says:

    #102
    Robbie—- You do remember that Quinnipiac showed Republicans Desantis(Gov) and Scott(Sen) losing by 6 & 7 pts. in its last Florida polls in 2018?
    So why give this poll any credibility?
    I looked at the cross tabs. Would you like me to “fisk” it even more? Hint: Panhandle voting.

  133. Phil says:

    Yeah, 48 or 49%. I wouldn’t argue with that.

    Still not convinced a Warren wins a head to head with Trump. Country is not that far gone……yet.

  134. Robbie says:

    jason says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:18 pm
    If any other Republican were president today”
    But that wasn’t really what would have happened, was it, unless you think Jeb would really have beaten Hillary.
    zzzzzzzzzz…….

    – I truly love this moronic revisionist history by Jason fraud that because Trump accidentally defeated the worst Democrat nominated since McGovern that somehow meant only Trump could have defeated Clinton.

    Trump was the worst Republican nominee for president the party has ever nominated. First, he wasn’t even a Republican. Second, he held few, if any, conservative views. Third, he was a moral black hole. Fourth, he was a conspiratorial nut. Fifth, he held racist and misogynistic views.

    The only think Trump had going for him was the fact Clinton was just that much more unpopular than him and the country rarely gives one party three terms with the presidency. If you don’t think Rubio, Kasich, Jeb, Cruz, Christie, and Romney (had he run) could’ve beaten Clinton, then you’ve suffered an undiagnosed brain injury.

  135. NYCmike says:

    “Romney has no interest and Haley seems intent on positioning herself to pick up the pieces after Trump loses in 2020 so she can position herself as leader in the clubhouse for 2024.”

    -Romney is too busying acting like McCain with the media, and Haley is smart enough to wait until 2024, if she wants to try then, since at this time she will be supporting Trump’s efforts to get re-elected.

  136. Robbie says:

    Sheeple, Jr. says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:44 pm
    #102
    Robbie—- You do remember that Quinnipiac showed Republicans Desantis(Gov) and Scott(Sen) losing by 6 & 7 pts. in its last Florida polls in 2018?
    So why give this poll any credibility?
    I looked at the cross tabs. Would you like me to “fisk” it even more? Hint: Panhandle voting.

    – Unskew! Unskew!

    Read the first line I wrote in 102.

    “Whether you want to take this poll or any poll as the gospel truth, the collection of recent polls show Trump is in a terrible re-election position despite a GREAT economy.”

    I did not say Q was right on the money. I said it was in line with other polling that shows Trump is losing to Biden an by a good sized margin.

  137. NYCmike says:

    “The only think Trump had going for him”

    -Make that 3 things:

    WI, PA and MI.

  138. NYCmike says:

    “I said it was in line with other polling that shows Trump is losing to Biden an by a good sized margin.”

    -Can’t you see how upset Robbie is that a Democrat may win the White House!!

  139. NYCmike says:

    If those women in the suburbs think that Trump is insufferable, wait until Democrats get hold of their sons!

    As usual, the poor will be the hurt the most by a Democrat taking over. Their chance to get a job, or higher pay will be lost once again under the guise of “We are from the government, and we are here to help you!” (Please excuse that foot we have on your neck!).

  140. Robbie says:

    Phil says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:46 pm
    Yeah, 48 or 49%. I wouldn’t argue with that.
    Still not convinced a Warren wins a head to head with Trump. Country is not that far gone……yet.

    – I think Warren is a lot like Cruz in 2016. The heroine of the left. The only reason Cruz got as far as he did was he was the last man standing against Trump. Unless the Democrat primary goes haywire and Biden craters, I don’t see her as a factor.

    However, I don’t discount that she could defeat Trump. Re-elections are referendums on the incumbent. If the country is simply sick and tired of Trump, she could win and with some room to spare. No one thought Reagan would blowout Carter, but the country was ready for a big change. Then it was purely about ideology. This time it feels like it would be about style and tone more so than policy.

  141. Robbie says:

    NYCmike says:
    June 18, 2019 at 2:54 pm
    “I said it was in line with other polling that shows Trump is losing to Biden an by a good sized margin.”
    -Can’t you see how upset Robbie is that a Democrat may win the White House!!

    – I’m upset we have an imbecile for president who is destroying the conservative foundation of the Republican Party.

    You’re busy trying to explain how tariffs are actually conservative and how only a NYC conman like Trump can save the country.

  142. NYCmike says:

    “– I’m upset we have an imbecile for president who is destroying the conservative foundation of the Republican Party.

    You’re busy trying to explain how tariffs are actually conservative and how only a NYC conman like Trump can save the country.”

    So much to deal with in this comment:

    You blame Trump for the destruction of the conservative foundation……..if Republicans had governed like conservatives, Trump would NEVER have been elected.

    I never said tariffs are a conservative idea. In theory I am against them……but history will be a better judge of Trump in that regard. The simple fact that there are more options these days could conceivably convince China to make concessions….we shall see.

    As for only Trump “can save the country”, well, he did beat Hillary in 2016. That is fact. DEAL WITH IT!

  143. NYCmike says:

    Trump is so NOT the conservative!

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/git-r-done-trump-opens-1-4-million-federal-acres-to-hunters-anglers

    “But maybe more than any president since Teddy Roosevelt, he understands the importance of others getting outside to boat, hunt, fish, shoot, and hike and their demands for access to federal lands and waterways.

    “He’s basically said, ‘Git-R-Done,’” said Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, who is spearheading the opening of 1.4 million acres and elimination of 7,500 regulations limiting access.

    “The president fundamentally gets that hunters and anglers are the true conservationists in our society. He understands that history and that we need to act in efforts to expand hunting and fishing while at the same time being respectful of private land rights, respectful of state law,” added Bernhardt.”

  144. Chicon says:

    Asked above…..nothing…… How much revenue was generated by the tariffs on Mexico?

    Since they didn’t go into effect, I’ll go with 0. So what was the lasting damage to the US economy? Trade Deadenders to come along to ‘splain (intentional grammatical mistake, Wes) that the damage was huge and irreparable, in 3,2,1…..

  145. NYCmike says:

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/poll-trump-better-for-better-for-black-americans-than-obama/

    -Will people vote their self-interest? Or their self-identity?

  146. Chicon says:

    146 – mostly the latter. But will Trump make inroads into the black community?

  147. Bitterlaw says:

    94 So mnw will now support current AND future tariffs against China. The AFL-CIO thanks him.

    As for his Manafort point, the fact that Manafort is not going to Rikers does not prove there is a Deep State. It is evidence that there is not a Deep State. A lawyer of mnw’s experience should realize that.

    Federal employees are too lazy to have a Deep State. A few bad actors? Sure. A large scale organized conspiracy? Salaried workers are unlikely to get overtime and Federal Employees are not going to work extra hours for the Deep State.

  148. NYCmike says:

    “A large scale organized conspiracy?”

    -There goes Bitterlaw speaking about something “large scale”.

    I guess he makes his own rules in his position, and the boss has no supervision over him.

    The supervisors have no power.

    None at all.

    Just like the head of the CIA, and all of the department heads under him/her……he/she has no control of what jobs the thousands under them do!

  149. NYCmike says:

    It’s kind of like the media……there was no large scale organized conspiracy to report on the Russia collusion story…..

  150. NYCmike says:

    https://www.thecollegefix.com/campus-food-service-worker-hit-with-bias-complaint-after-saying-hello-to-student-in-japanese/

    -This “microaggression” crap will not end well…..keep reading to find out about how the College Republicans are treated.

  151. Bitterlaw says:

    in theory.” In practice? He is fine with them if President Trump proposes/imposes them.

  152. Bitterlaw says:

    If there was a Deep State, shouldn’t it be…ummm….deep? If it existed, it should be hidden better.