Now would be a great time to launch a 9/11 style investigation into the government's handling of deaths of thousands of Americans. The GOP could muster up all the outrage for the single digit death toll in Benghazi when it was President Obama and Secretary Clinton.

Slowhand wrote:

JFLNYC wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Can't wait for the second half of this gem

Donald Trump wrote:3000 people did not die in the two hurricanes that hit Puerto Rico. When I left the Island, AFTER the storm had hit, they had anywhere from 6 to 18 deaths. As time went by it did not go up by much. Then, a long time later, they started to report really large numbers, like 3000...

Donald Trump wrote:... but they died because of Obama (who was not born in America), freed criminal Hillary and the mayor of San Juan (who is a rapist and drug dealer, although some of his relatives may be good people)

It’s sad that I wasn’t certain whether you made that up or he really said that. Sad!

The only thing that really tipped me off is that the mayor is a woman

appears the bar is on the ground now. or in the basement. not sure really.

JUburton wrote:appears the bar is on the ground now. or in the basement. not sure really.

just you wait, it'll go lower

Hurricane truther is an interesting heel turn

curious if this will actually bring the polls lower

ahhh who am I kidding

our worst person

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:curious if this will actually bring the polls lower

ahhh who am I kidding

He's actually dropped a couple of percent in the last few weeks. I think there are a few explanations.

first, the mueller indictments. there's a polling lag but these seem to have had an effect. second, and there's no hard data to support this but he's tweeting more and more about collusion and i think people might finally be getting sick of him being a little bitch about the whole thing and never taking responsibility for anything.

any republican who meets with him in the next two months should probably have a primary goal of destroying his twitter phone.

slugsrbad wrote:

Donald Trump wrote:3000 people did not die in the two hurricanes that hit Puerto Rico. When I left the Island, AFTER the storm had hit, they had anywhere from 6 to 18 deaths. As time went by it did not go up by much. Then, a long time later, they started to report really large numbers, like 3000. This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico. If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list. Bad politics. I love Puerto Rico!

I put the two together. He's #$!&@ horrible.

He's pure fucking evil.

I am curious as to why Fox either didn't poll Texas, or didn't release the poll results. (Several other Senate elections, like NJ and PA (I think)) were also left out. I would assume they'll release those later, but with the storm probably dominating TV news for the next cycle or two, I wonder why.

TenuredVulture wrote:I am curious as to why Fox either didn't poll Texas, or didn't release the poll results. (Several other Senate elections, like NJ and PA (I think)) were also left out. I would assume they'll release those later, but with the storm probably dominating TV news for the next cycle or two, I wonder why.

There's probably diminishing returns to an effect by overpolling a place like Texas (JH can bring the actual info) and a waste in money in polling a place like PA where high quality polls show a large lead.

TenuredVulture wrote:I am curious as to why Fox either didn't poll Texas, or didn't release the poll results. (Several other Senate elections, like NJ and PA (I think)) were also left out. I would assume they'll release those later, but with the storm probably dominating TV news for the next cycle or two, I wonder why.

Polls cost a lot of money

I would guess the Fox news audience would have a huge interest in Texas polling.

I would guess Fox News is going to more polling in the next two months. They also didn't poll Florida, which is a big state, or West Virginia or Nevada or Montana.

Does anyone think Mich McConnell would acquiesce and reach a deal to fast track Obama judicial nominees if the situation was reversed? What is Chuck Schumer doing?

Roger Dorn wrote:Does anyone think Mich McConnell would acquiesce and reach a deal to fast track Obama judicial nominees if the situation was reversed? What is Chuck Schumer doing?

Chuck needs to go; he is absolutely spineless.

Roger Dorn wrote:Does anyone think Mich McConnell would acquiesce and reach a deal to fast track Obama judicial nominees if the situation was reversed? What is Chuck Schumer doing?

If we somehow get the Senate back this may have been the thing that put our vulnerable Senators over the hump since they can go back and campaign. McConnell is willing to sacrifice NV and maybe Texas by keeping Heitkamp, Donnelly, Nelson, etc. in DC.

Was the thing about old age on Fox and Friends? Where did he get it from?

slugsrbad wrote:

Roger Dorn wrote:Does anyone think Mich McConnell would acquiesce and reach a deal to fast track Obama judicial nominees if the situation was reversed? What is Chuck Schumer doing?

If we somehow get the Senate back this may have been the thing that put our vulnerable Senators over the hump since they can go back and campaign. McConnell is willing to sacrifice NV and maybe Texas by keeping Heitkamp, Donnelly, Nelson, etc. in DC.

I thought McConnell already announced a session in October?