In Southwest Washington, in a historically solid red district, JaimeHerrerra Beutler, an incumbent (R) representative who voted for impeachment, was very narrowly defeated in the primary by a pro-Trump candidate, 22.3% to 22.7%. The Dem running against them in the open primary received 31% of the votes.
It will be interesting how the general election goes, and whether enough of the Herrera Beutler voters will vote for the Dem or just stay home to flip the district, but it’s clear in this solid red district that the anti-Trump and pro-Trump Republicans are split almost evenly.
It’s really strange how it’s NEVER Trump’s fault. It’s bias by so-and-so, or a witch hunt blah blah blah. Sure. Whatever. "If you meet an asshole in the morning, an asshole in the afternoon. . . "
Slovenia is a Mediterranean country on the Adriatic coast with deep cultural ties to Italy (esp. Venice) and Austria. It’s a member of the European Union and NATO.
Hardly Russia, or a country where you can’t find peace and quiet.
I don’t think you’re wrong about the rest of your post but this part - they squawk so loud about everything because everything has to be the end of freedom, the herald of the oncoming rounding up of everyone who isn’t a brainwashed, woke, trans, liberal.
They do it whenever and wherever they can because the constant deluge of this shit works on their audience.
It normalises and embeds the idea that this nefarious evil plot is going on, even if nothing ever actually happens.
I also expect some Q nuts will claim he had to reclaim documents, as he was secretly running the government. Also, within a month, Trump will explain that keeping presents and papers related to the president shouldn’t be illegal, it’s perfect behavior.
They may either deludedly, or shrewdly, depending on your cynicism, expect to be on the Supreme Court, if Donald’s next coup goes a little better. Though, everything Trump touches, dies.
And that’s exactly what I was responding to, and what my sample calculations were based on.
Overestimating their numbers lends them power. That’s why I fight those false assertions wherever I encounter them.
They are a minority of a minority of a minority of Americans. They are few and afraid, but very loud. Giving them more credit for numbers that they really have plays into their hand.
That’s confusing, because that takes it pretty far out of the context of the original post.
Assuming that people who have a vague distrust of the FBI would be manipulated by Q-nuts is a pretty big leap. That 54% might not trust the FBI, but polls show the people bleating about this enjoy much, much lower trust levels than that.
Democratic support of the FBI has been rock steady for years, so any disapproval that they’re not doing enough is unmoving from the left. Degradation has been among Republicans and Independents. The latter might harbor split misgivings about lack of effort, but I’m pretty certain the former don’t. So the increasing distrust appears to consist of those who disapprove of their actions rather than their inactions.
Yeah, that’s true - and explains the whole frothing-at-the-mouth response about the “raid” in general, but specifically the “planted evidence” narrative that they’re pushing so damn hard really indicates Trump is in some fairly serious legal jeopardy. It’s intended as a preemptive defense. (Although, ironically, it is partially necessary because they’re the ones making a big deal out of the FBI showing up - without Trump and his allies trumpeting the news and making it more dramatic than it was, we’d probably not even know about it in the first place. So having created this exaggerated narrative about the FBI raid, they then needed to also diminish its importance.)
To be honest, I feel like Trump might be saying this regardless. His MO is to play the victim in every situation, and to discredit institutions as much as possible. This “evidence planting” silliness is a way to do both. It rallies his base even if the only reason the FBI was there was to pick up some harmless paperwork that he was supposed to give back (which may well be the case).
I wonder if Garland will smack his knuckles, with a hammer, for that claim?
“We will now release all raw bodycam footage from all agents as they conducted the search, separating the material covered by the warrant from the interesting stuff not covered by it. Unless, of course, the former president objects.”
