POLITICS President Trump: 100+ Mornings After (Term 1 Complete)

See, I disagree on the last part. Perdue ad Ossoff are definitely within range where it may make a difference.

 

It's simple statistics. If the probability was 50% for each, the probability for both would still be 25%.

If it was 60/40 loss/win, the probability of both losing would still only be 36%.

And they aren't anywhere near 60/40, and is closer 50/50, meaning, at best, there is a 25% chance both lose.

Ergo, McConnell has no worries.

 

This assumes the races are completely independent, when in reality most people are simply voting D and R, candidates be damned. I'd expect both races to be near identical in voting margin.

 

I think there's a decent chance at a split. Loeffler is not popular.

 

And is against a reverend with a dog. That's a buzz saw.

 

True, people probably mash their party for both and move on. But even if one person doesn't, and more than one will, the probability of both losing is still lower than the individual probability of one losing. Enough so that the likelihood of losing both is still smaller than the smallest probability of any one.

 

I would not mind seeing a split if Purdue and Warnock. I like him more than any of the other 3.

 

I had hoped that Trump would ride off into the sunset. Apparently not. Hearing he is working on 3 goals:
- Destroy the Biden Presidency
- Take back the House
- Assuming they take the House; encourage Republicans to Impeach Biden

Hopefully yesterday shows Republicans are ready to break from him.

 

Why would the first veto in four years, on a bill dealing with DEFENSE show that republicans are ready to break? I don't see it. Especially with all the whispering and noise about the objections that will be raised on the 6th.

If the bill was something like... health care, then sure, I could see it. But not overriding a defense bill.

 

There were also the other items passed, while somewhat minor in comparison to defense, in the bill like renaming military bases, the corporate transparency act and section 230, that went against Trump’s wishes.

 

Weren't those packaged into the defense bill? Which was the purpose of the veto in the first place?

 

Hence my use of the word "hopefully".

Also, the Democratic objections in 2004 and 2016 were wrong and the objections on the 6th will be wrong.

 

The question at hand is are they equally wrong?

Is one person's objection equivalent to two people's objections? What about... 20?

There is both magnitude AND direction in wrongness. Some people, for whatever reason, seem to think a touch on the shoulder is the same as a slap to the face.

 

I didn't realize there were congressional objections in 2004 or 2016.

 

There was one from Ohio, for Kerry. 2016 is new to me. I'll have to look it up one day.

 

So in 2016, house members rose to object, and Biden gaveled them down due to not having a senator agree with their objection. So they weren't objections. They were... noise making.

In 2004, there was an actual objection, as there were house members and a senator.

 

Is a touch on the shoulder wrong? Do you not touch people on the shoulder?

 

Objections must be in writing or they are ruled out of order.

 

When someone says they don't want to be touched, yes, a touch on the shoulder is wrong, and I do not touch them on the shoulder.

Generally, I don't touch people, period, as I don't know if they want to be touched or not.

 

Yes, which means, they aren't actually objections.

An objection requires to be in writing, and have both a House and Senate signature. So if something doesn't meet that rule, it isn't an objection. There were no objections for 2016. There was one for 2004.