Bordeaux Wine Enthusiasts

When LePage ran for his first term 6 years ago they wanted to bring him by my office on Lisbon Street because, well, everyone running for statewide office comes through Lewiston and my office is the heart of Lewiston. I made sure I wasn't around, not because he was a Tea Bagger but because he was pretty much just considered a joke at the time. I didn't want a judgeship, the previous governor offered me one and I turned him down. So he really didn't have anything I was interested in even if he was elected. Then two perfect storms happened. He got a plurality of the vote in a multi candidate Repubican primary, then he won by like 2 percentage points in a 3 way general election. Then for a while I was kind of pissed at myself for not meeting him. I mean, he was elected governor after all, I would have liked to have met him even though he is 180 degrees opposite of my politics. (I do like it when he trashes on Portland, though.). Since his election, and especially since his reelection, he has been an abomination. His plurality victories were flukes. But don't tell me that Trump can't win. Those of us in supposedly moderate Maine know better!

A little humor for a Saturday afternoon -

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz ... gn-bus/amp

Funny. In my mind Mike Pence is a million times more dangerous than Donald Trump.
Now that is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Mike Pence is more dangerous for domestic policy, Trump for foreign policy.

Here's the unedited voicemail (at the end of the story) from our esteemed governor:

http://www.sunjournal.com/news/maine/20 ... il/1983074

Comte Flaneur wrote:Btw Chris who are you voting for? I couldn't figure it out from your posts. You seemed to be sitting on the fence, hedging your bets.

No fence-sitter here.
I find Trump to be a reprehensible, odious human being, Nothing about his character appeals to me.
I have great respect for Clinton, who has withstood a near constant (but unsuccessful) onslaught from her opponents, ever since entering the political arena.
She really showed her mettle during 11 hours of testimony before congress in the Benghazi witch hunt.

JimHow wrote:Here's the unedited voicemail (at the end of the story) from our esteemed governor:

http://www.sunjournal.com/news/maine/20 ... il/1983074

What a sweetheart! I think he was auditioning for a position in a Trump administration. Why else would he have said he wanted it recorded? Other than stupidity, which come to think of it is probably a prime criterion for a high-level position in a Trump administration. What do you think he's angling for? Secretary of Labor? Health and Human Services? Maybe HUD?

tim wrote:Mike Pence is more dangerous for domestic policy, Trump for foreign policy.

I agree with this.

My take is that Congress at least can be somewhat of an anchor on domestic policy. A loose cannon in the White House can quickly do irreparable damage internationally as there is very little Congress can do until after the fact.

I think our gov is close to resigning.

Saw a story earlier today that sounded that way. Seems like he has no bridges left to burn with his party.

Now he says he's not going anywhere.
Which, of course, makes sense, you don't resign a governorship over stupid comments.
There's no scandal or impeachable offenses involved.

I heard on NPR this afternoon that he said he wasn't sure if he would finish his term.

Why would anyone resign a political office? You get paid, you don't work. Particularly where your political belief is that government is the enemy of all things and should be as small as possible and do as little as possible. All of the work comes in getting the office and in keeping it if that's desired. The job itself, only so much work as one cares to do.

Speaking of Penn & Teller (in another thread),
Penn Jillette spent two seasons on The Apprentice so he knows a bit about the Donald.
He was on Bloomberg Politics the other night with his new card trick called "The Trump".

See it on Youtube here: Penn performs The Trump

As predicted, the race is a dead heat by Labor Day:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/f ... tie-227611

JimHow wrote:As predicted, the race is a dead heat by Labor Day:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/f ... tie-227611

Fox news conducted the poll. Most polls show Clinton ahead but her unfavorable rating is at an all time high. 2 more months of this garbage race

I have found the Fox polls to be middle of the road , even skewed towards Hillary.

I revise my previous prediction.

Trump will not be TIED with Hillary by Labor Day.

Trump will be AHEAD OF Hillary by Labor Day:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ ... li=BBnb7Kz

I've got Hillary still ahead in the electoral college, 279-259, but her lead even there is dissolving rapidly:

http://www.270towin.com

L.A. Times has Trump up by 3 points.
Another poll has him up by 5 points in Iowa.
She's in trouble.

Donald up two in today's CNN poll, 45-43%.
Wow.

And here's the link

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016 ... ecast.html

I've got Clinton at 279-259 right now.
I can easily see OH, FL, NC, AZ, and IA going for Trump.
And in that scenario if you flip just ONE of those rust belt states -- WI, say -- then it goes to the big man.
And I just keep getting really nervous the more I hear that PA is in play, which, of course, would be the end for Hillary.

The media, and not just Fox, has a huge vested interest in keeping it close to encourage viewership. I'm a true Maize and Blue fan but got so bored watching Michigan steamroller Hawaii on Saturday that I didn't last past the first quarter. The media knows the same holds true for Clinton v Trump. Pushing Clinton "scandals" in the absence of any real wrongdoing while ignoring Trump's truly scandalous behavior makes the race closer. Media types themselves have less venal explanations for why this is happening:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... ff80440916

Pretty sad and shameful that the press has become such a worthless self-serving lot. If Trump gets elected, I'll put a lot of the blame on them.

Omg that's so Nixonian of you David.
Blame it on the media!
Maybe she just sucks.
"The media" didn't seem to hurt Obama the last two elections.

No, she doesn't suck. She's well-qualified. She's accomplished. She's done "good works" well in excess of the bad stuff she's actually (not reportedly) done. I know you disagree and I guess neither of us will change the other's mind.

With Nixon, where there was smoke there was fire. With HRC, it's the media that is blowing smoke. Whether it's editing clips to show her coughing or spinning the Clinton Foundation into some sort of corrupt enterprise. It's 99 and 44/100 percent baloney. Unfortunately, most people form their opinions from sound bites. Barnum could have been describing the American electorate when he said there's a sucker born every minute. Mencken was more specific in his disdain:

On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

It's pretty clear that the media has a hard-on for anything that can be spun as a Clinton scandal. They don't have to spin/distort Trump because he's a walking scandal as is. But we see the talking heads bobbing up and down saying "that's interesting" to an awful lot of hooey spewed by Trump surrogates. I can't believe that they are too ignorant to realize that they're listening to pure, unadulterated bull, especially when it's been repeated often enough that they've had plenty of time to get the facts. Are they too timid to respond? Perhaps. Maybe they are just spineless talking heads. Not that that lends them any more respectability than if they are just cravenly playing both-side risk to keep the race close and keep the ratings up. If Trump gets ahead, they'll turn their guns on him.

I guess it just shows how out of touch with the times I am to expect the press to take some responsibility for what they put out there.

All that said, Clinton is not doing a great job of counterpunching. She does seem to suck at that.

He went from like 10 points down to 2 points up in a week. That's not good (for her), by any measure.

Jim,
A detailed look at the CNN poll shows that the sample was skewed in comparison to their previous poll.
Professional pollsters consider that poll an outlier. The best that can be taken from it is there's been a tightening in the race.

Electoral maps still clearly show Clinton with a huge lead, and only a few paths for Trump to reach 270.

Tonight the candidates will be answering questions on foreign policy & national security.
It should be an opportunity for Hillary to begin pulling ahead as they prepare for their first debate.

I like that Mencken quote.
Its just hard to accept that the greatest country of our time is filled with so many morons.

Chris, want to bet that the Clinton coverage will not mention one iota of her policy positions, but focus on some aspect of one of the made-up scandals or her health? Her policy positions are too reasonable and boring compared to Trump's chimpanzee-ish feces hurling sound bites.

DavidG wrote:Chris, want to bet that the Clinton coverage will not mention one iota of her policy positions, but focus on some aspect of one of the made-up scandals or her health? Her policy positions are too reasonable and boring compared to Trump's chimpanzee-ish feces hurling sound bites.

I think now that she has a new airplane with room for the press corps, things will begin to swing the other way again.

I've seen a lot of talk among the pundits lately about the bias which the press has shown so far. Trump gets a pass on all his outrageous comments and his past bigotry and unethical behavior, but Clinton is held to account for weak rumours of past wrongdoing.
It looks like there may be a correction coming soon.

OMG I love you guys but you are sounding so pathetic blaming the press for Hillary's woes.
What are you saying, the press has NOT been reporting all of Trump's outrages?
Do you watch Joe Scarborough?
Do you read the NYT and Washington Post?
Do you watch msnbc, NBC, CBS, and ABC?
When she was up by ten in the polls I didn't hear any whining about the unfair press.
Ten days ago this race was supposedly "ovah."
CNN poll an "outlier"? Really?
I thought Rasmussen was always the outlier.
How about LA Times (Trump +3). Is that an outlier too?
The liberals and the liberal media better get their heads out of their asses.
She's losing this race. Those electoral college advantages will disappear very quickly if these trends continue.
Heck, I saw a poll recently that had her up by ONE point in VA.
I've been telling you guys this for months.
People like me think she's a fraud. A phony.
I frankly could care less about the email controversy.
And I'm not big on the concept of the Clinton "Foundation" <rolls eyes> but that's not a make or break for me.
And I have no qualms about her health.
Rather, the problem is she's just another phony pol.
She says and does whatever she needs to in order to get elected.
People see through that stuff.
And then when the vast right wing conspiracy throws all this email and Benghazi crap at her, some of it sticks.
Trump would be a catastrophe for the country and the world.
But I blame the Democrats and their "rigged" system for putting up such a flawed, weak candidate.

Count me firmly in the "she just sucks" column. What exactly is it that she's accomplished? What are her "good works?" If holding an office alone counts for accomplishment then what was the rationale for voting for Obama? I don't recall Mother Teresa building a $100M net worth on her way through Calcutta.

Of course she faces criticism daily. So does he. Which election in history hasn't been conducted that way? Those who have decided to support her believe that without exception every criticism is persecution, manufactured whole cloth. It is no less dogmatic to defend her every action than it is to criticize them. Her track record for bad judgment, self-service and questionable behavior is gargantuan. If the litmus test is criminal conviction then Nixon was a saint. I understand someone saying they so despise Trump that they will hold their nose and vote for her despite the fact that she is deeply flawed and unprincipled. What strikes me as double barreled, 200 proof denial is that the endless parade of misdeeds is all fantasy and that she is perfect.



Trump has done nothing wrong. The press is just out to get him. Every day they're bashing him about something, manufacturing scandals, twisting his words out of context. He was never convicted of anything! Look at all of his accomplishments and good works! He's on the record saying that he want to make America great again. How can anyone not support that?

JimHow wrote:OMG I love you guys but you are sounding so pathetic blaming the press for Hillary's woes.

I'm not blaming the press. Members of the press are beginning to blame themselves for the current situation.
They readily admit they set the bar too low for Trump - if he doesn't say something horrible today, it's a good day for him.
They're the ones who wait on pins and needles for any indication of a further scandal related to Clinton, and then do their best to blow it out of proportion to reality.
They're the ones who dismiss each of Trump's outrageous remarks within 24 hours, because it's "normal".
They're the ones who gave extensive free coverage to the worst possible presidential candidate at the beginning of the election cycle, and then wondered how he defied the pundits who predicted his early demise.

I'm pretty sure I'm looking at the same stuff as Jim and Scott et al.
I guess we see what we want to see, and hear what we want to hear.
Trump has had plenty of bad press, not saying he hasn't.
But somehow a lot of the crap he's pulled that is similar to the stuff Clinton has supposedly done gets ignored.
OK, maybe pushed aside since there's just no time to cover all of his inanities without leaving some time for the latest Clinton sneeze.
It's like the press has to give each candidate equal time.

Did you folks watch the two CNN specials about the candidates Monday night?
Jim, I think your characterization of Hillary Clinton as a fraud is inaccurate.

Last night was like a warm-up debate which took place on the USS Intrepid, where the two candidates answered questions from both Matt Lauer (well done by the way) and members (veterans) of the audience.
The "Commander In Chief" Forum was organized by veterans. They were on stage separately so never actually faced off.
It gave both candidates an opportunity to look "presidential".
Trump is a boob and I don't see how anyone thinks he is capable of being presidential. The fact that he is enamored of Putin because Putin complimented him is mind boggling.
He was caught lying multiple times during this event. He even tried (unsuccessfully) to correct one vet's statement about how many veteran suicides occur.
Something Trump claimed - that the intelligence briefers let him know they were unhappy with Obama not following their advice - has been largely decried by intelligence experts as a likely impossibility.
He also was incapable of following instructions to keep answers focused on his own policy ideas instead of using the time to attack his opponent.

Clinton went down that road too, a couple of times, but always tied her comments about Trump to a meaningful comparison with her own thoughts.
I thought that in general she did a better job of satisfactorily answering nearly all the questions.
I'm satisfied with the email situation after her direct answers, although the press seems to think she didn't cover that ground well last night.

I give the win to Clinton on this one.

Thanks for the analysis Chris.
I did not see the program.
Judging from the latest round of whining this morning by the NYT and elsewhere in the mainstream media about more media bias against Hillary, I had gathered that many did not think that either Hillary or Matt did as well as you feel they did:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/arts/ ... -news&_r=0

That NYT piece is in the Television section of the paper, not Politics. The facts are accurate but I don't agree with all his conclusions.
I understand that Matt Lauer wasn't quite equal in his treatment of the two candidates but I think that's an effect of the two personalities involved, and the previous media treatment of their campaigns.
I also don't have a problem with an interviewer not calling out someone's lies in the moment, as long as they do so in any analysis after the fact.

Mike Barnicle on Morning Joe today gave Donald an F and Hillary a B-, which seems reasonable to me.

Chris et al:

I don't know if you saw the latest polls that came out today from Quinnipiac and elsewhere.
Guys. By any measure… Your girl is in trouble. She's in BIG trouble.

Even ultra-liberal apologist Nate Silver is alarmed:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/ele ... ening-too/

Blame it on the media. Blame it on whatever you want.
Hillary Clinton is in a big heap of trouble in this race.