It's complicated. There is a lot of state forest too. But also, Trump and friends talk about logging to solve this. Because he hasn't been to those forests. When people talk about more logging, they are imagining the Pacific Northwest. And if you allowed logging for "fire suppression," that's where the logging would occur. There is not much usable timber in the places that are the highest burn threats, they aren't that kind of stand. It's sad, he's swinging for natural resource extraction industry under the guise of management policy. It isn't a lack of timber harvest causing these fires, and these places wouldn't be suitable for timber harvest anyway.
Thanks for the clarification. Also, I believe that tweet was sent out at 3:30 in the morning, or something like that. Cannot remember if he was in Europe at the time, and that would account for it, but otherwise, nothing good happens at 3:30 am.
The problem is that you are so enamored with yourself you forget what I actually said in 2016. I gave Trump a chance to win and by no means was it forgone in any way, look at the actual voting. You are so full of shit in the way you put words in people's mouth and then continue to use your misrepresentations as reality. I do love that you are always doing the woe is me, I'm so offended shtick while simultaneously telling everyone who doesn't agree with you how stupid they are. I also like the term "annihilate" when you told me I was illiterate for saying you had suggested a landslide in 2020. Keep on being you, Tenny. Oh, yes, one final extea point. I do like this reinvention of Hilary as a string candidate, the best the Dems could offer, ignoring how unmitigatedly awful her campaign was and her strategy. Dumb stuff, like, if she bothered to do a decent GOTV campaign in Milwaukee, she probaly wins Wisconsin.
I will Economy stays strong - Trump wins Recession hits pre-November 2020 - Trump loses Hillary will run
Trump winning? It's a bit far away to make informed judgments. Right now I'd say more likely not, than yes. 65-35, no. Hillary as the nominee was the bet and, no, it's not happening.
Her chance to win the nomination is extremely slim. She's damaged goods and Im sure the Ds know it. I don't think that prevents her from running tho. She has as high opinion of herself as Donald does.
The second you realize that she is your safest - maybe not best, but definitely safest - shot to beat Trump, you’ll change your mind.
The re-election depends on too many factors to make a prediction now. I don't know if Hillary will run. She won't win, for sure.
There are a lot better options than Hillary for Democrats and to think otherwise is silly. I wouldn't be surprised to see a few governors step up.
I think the idea of Hillary running will receive enough backlash that she will come out and deny all rumors and the stink away again.
If the democrats want to be safe, maybe they could nominate Roy Cooper. I think that’s probably too safe, though. I think Gavin Newsom will be thrown around, but he will probably be too new of a governor to pull it off.
So, you won’t make a prediction on Trump’s re-Election? Surely it’s the easiest - just look at your many polls and recall how strongly you insist that everyone hates him. If he’s really hated as badly as you so often allege, you shouldn’t think it possible he’s re-elected, under any conditions. Can’t you do one of those professional analyses that you’re always bragging about?
