Health and Human Services spokesman warns of an armed insurrection after the election

[Atomic Kid]

Trump's support from black Americans is at 20% and rapidly rising. Hispanics are at 35% for Trump.

This is YOUR problem.

Your party is losing its favorite play, and they're willing to destroy America to try and get it back.

Too late.

No it isn't. It's half that or less.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Health and Human Services spokesman Michael Caputo warns of armed insurrection after election

Only the best my friends! Only the best!

Caputo is a Roger Stone protégé. So it shouldn't come as any surprise to see him making the same unhinged calls for insurrection as his Trump rat ****er buddy Roger.

 

[post]

Trump's support from black Americans is at 20% and rapidly rising. Hispanics are at 35% for Trump.

This is YOUR problem.

Your party is losing its favorite play, and they're willing to destroy America to try and get it back.

Too late.

Uhhh.... one more time, the thread topic is Putin-Trump thug, Michael Caputo's "outburst". I wasn't born yesterday, were you?

Caputo is a Roger Stone protégé. So it shouldn't come as any surprise to see him making the same unhinged calls for insurrection as his Trump rat ****er buddy Roger.

Here is Caputo's "mentor", less than 96 hours before Caputo urged Trumpsters to buy more ammunition....

.....



....Stone: @ 1:19:20, "the ballots in Nevada on election night should be seized by federal marshals..."

....Stone: @ 1:26:00, above, "There was a coup plot, and it involved Gen. James Mattis and acting Atty. Gen. Rod Rosenstein..."

Loyal Trump Backer Is Now a Face of the Administration’s Virus Response - The New York Times

Loyal Trump Backer Is Now a Face of the Administration’s Virus Response - The New York Times
Loyal Trump Backer Is Now a Face of the Administration's ...
Apr 16, 2020 - The loyalty of the longtime Trump adviser Michael Caputo helped him secure a ... A protégé of the operative and self-described “dirty trickster” Roger J. Stone Jr., Mr. Caputo has known Mr. Trump since the 1980s, when he ... Mr. Manafort, whom Mr. Caputo regarded with awe, primarily handled that work.

 

[apdst]

Please apologize.

For what?

 

[Pound4abrown]

Yeah... "If trump loses they are coming for you and they are coming for your children."

Did you notice his twitchiness?

No one is coming to get any Trump supporters, or their children, we all just want them to go back to where they were hiding before 2016.

 

[Logophile]

Ah, the people you ask, every day. What is the sample size? How many states did you focus on? Was it landline, cell phone, online, or in-person? How did you adjust for weighting?

If I strike up a conversation with a stranger, I generally ask if he or she will be voting by mail. People are happy to disclose how they will be voting and almost always, they will be voting by mail. But if I ask if they are - per chance - Democrat or Republican, they get suspicious and balky, and inevitably offended. I can pretty easily talk to people and glean information, but not when it comes to their voting preference. It's interesting.

Just the nature of what you are asking tells me that you have faith in the days gone by and are trying to apply yesterday's standards to today's information superhighway, and the two are vastly different. Landlines are becoming scarce, and people rarely answer unknown numbers because of scams. Cellphone wise, a person can live in Sacramento and have a Norwalk area code, can easily lie about their residence. But there again, people are not inclined to answer unsolicited or unfamiliar calls. In person is the only reliable method imho, because most people responding to a poll on the internet have an agenda, and are just interested in advancing it, while people who receive a poll in the mail are probably not going to sit down and answer all those questions unless they, too have an agenda, making it worth their while to make the effort.

In person right now is not as easy because of a little virus that has people less inclined to hang around a street corner answering questions, on top of which, people are busy. So it's likely that a significant amount of the respondents to polls are not reliable indicators of the voting public.

States that reveal mail-in ballot requests are a pretty good indicator of who is going to vote, but I don't measure those requests as you do, as an indicator of WHO they will vote for. I prefer to measure the ballot requests with the physical demographics of the respective state, ie age, race and the percentage of urban population. In my view, it provides a better indicator of political leanings, but there is absolutely no crystal ball. Thanks!!

 

[Cardinal]

If I strike up a conversation with a stranger, I generally ask if he or she will be voting by mail. People are happy to disclose how they will be voting and almost always, they will be voting by mail. But if I ask if they are - per chance - Democrat or Republican, they get suspicious and balky, and inevitably offended. I can pretty easily talk to people and glean information, but not when it comes to their voting preference. It's interesting.

Just the nature of what you are asking tells me that you have faith in the days gone by and are trying to apply yesterday's standards to today's information superhighway, and the two are vastly different. Landlines are becoming scarce, and people rarely answer unknown numbers because of scams. Cellphone wise, a person can live in Sacramento and have a Norwalk area code, can easily lie about their residence. But there again, people are not inclined to answer unsolicited or unfamiliar calls. In person is the only reliable method imho, because most people responding to a poll on the internet have an agenda, and are just interested in advancing it, while people who receive a poll in the mail are probably not going to sit down and answer all those questions unless they, too have an agenda, making it worth their while to make the effort.

In person right now is not as easy because of a little virus that has people less inclined to hang around a street corner answering questions, on top of which, people are busy. So it's likely that a significant amount of the respondents to polls are not reliable indicators of the voting public.

States that reveal mail-in ballot requests are a pretty good indicator of who is going to vote, but I don't measure those requests as you do, as an indicator of WHO they will vote for. I prefer to measure the ballot requests with the physical demographics of the respective state, ie age, race and the percentage of urban population. In my view, it provides a better indicator of political leanings, but there is absolutely no crystal ball. Thanks!!

So your sample size is “guy you met on a street bench.”

 

[Torus34]

More nonsense!

Everyone knows the lefties are against guns and certainly don't have any themselves. To think that peace-loving, law-abiding, Second Amendment-supporting conservatives would start an insurrection were President of the United States of America Donald Trump to win re-election is absurd. Even those criminals who possess guns would be scared to death of being captured and jailed in the second term of a Trump presidency and would certainly not get involved in any political insurrection.

As I said, nonsense. Total balderdash!

Regards, stay safe 'n well. Remember the Big 3: masks, hand washing and physical distancing.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

I want to make something really clear to you. Nobody's "lying." I don't accuse people of lying on a political forum for a simple reason: people have a different points of view. They often have a different take on the news and hear the facts in terms of their own biases aka internal voices. But to suggest that somebody is deliberately "lying" is below the belt. Thanks!!

I'm done being polite with mean and ignorant Trump supporters who are okay with kidnapping children from their parents at the border, performing forced hysterectomies on immigrant women, suppressing the votes of their political opponents, and Trump downplaying the Covid-19 virus despite full knowledge of the danger of the virus ultimately resulting in the unnecessary deaths of tens of thousands possibly hundreds of thousands of American citizens.

What Trump is doing is evil. What Trump supporters are doing by supporting Trump is wrong.

Furthermore, there is such a thing as objective reality. There is such a thing as the truth and such a thing as a lie. And I think it's time that we stop walking on eggshells and describe the things Trump and his supporters are doing to promote Trump as what they are: lies. So, no, I don't agree that it is "below the belt." I think it is our job as good citizens to point out when people lie, especially when the future of our Republic depends on it. All this crap you and others and people like Caputo are spreading, all these stupid conspiracy theories, are very harmful to our country.

So, knock it off. Stop lying.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Biden’s vulnerability
The latest New York Times/Siena College poll showed Joe Biden to be leading President Trump in four important swing states. But it also showed how Biden could lose the election.

If the campaign is a referendum on the coronavirus, Trump will probably lose. The U.S. has suffered more than almost any other rich country, as many voters realize. When new outbreaks were exploding this summer, Biden’s lead grew to almost 10 percentage points.

But the other issue that’s dominated the news in recent months — the combination of police violence, racial injustice, peaceful protests and rising crime in many cities — is more politically complicated. It has the potential to hurt both Trump and Biden, in different ways. And so far, Biden has not managed to send voters a persuasive message that protects his vulnerabilities.

Perhaps the most surprising finding from the poll was this: In the four swing states — Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire and Wisconsin — a larger share of voters said “addressing law and order” was a more important campaign issue to them than said “addressing the coronavirus pandemic” was.

On first glance, these law-and-order concerns may still seem to help Biden. More voters trust him to do a better job on several related issues — including violent crime, unifying the country and handling the protests — than trust Trump. But it’s not quite that simple.

Remember: Most Americans have already made up their minds about the election. Their answers to poll questions about which candidate they trust on specific issues are almost meaningless at this point. The bigger issue is how undecided and uncommitted voters feel.

Biden’s problem is that, on the broad issues of crime and policing, he appears to have a larger group of soft supporters — people who could flip — than Trump does. As Nate Cohn, a Times reporter who helped oversee the poll, told me, “There is definitely some Biden support with worry about crime.” Those worries span Black, Latino and white voters.

https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/

So sorry, it was Monday. It goes on and on. I get the news brief. I'm not sure it's still available through the Times but I can reprint it all here if you'd like. Thanks!!

Do you understand that this excerpt does not in any way support your argument about the NYT having an opinion on Biden not condemning violence enough?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Trump's support from black Americans is at 20% and rapidly rising. Hispanics are at 35% for Trump.

This is YOUR problem.

Your party is losing its favorite play, and they're willing to destroy America to try and get it back.

Too late.

Nearly every single thing you've written in this post is a lie.

 

[Lursa]

Top HHS spokesman apologizes to staff for accusing government scientists of sedition - CNNPolitics

Well, that was quick.

Buh bye:

Caputo apologizes to HHS staff, signals desire for medical leave - POLITICO

I saw that this am.

:lamo :lamo

Another follower/loser. But at least neutered for now.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[D_NATURED]

What we're seeing is a few dozen stupid hoodlums in a few major cities taking advantage of the protests by committing crimes. The idea that there is some sort of organized, disciplined Communist force lurking in the background ready to revolt is idiotic.

You can articulate any of the standard sources of right wing paranoia/conspiracy and follow with the word "idiotic". I don't believe politics is an intellectual process for most of them. I mean, who thinks deeply about this nation's ills and comes out the other side with a blank check for war, conspiracies about the deep state and a sense of worship for a notorious, orange moron who fails at everything?

 

[MaryP]

If I strike up a conversation with a stranger, I generally ask if he or she will be voting by mail. People are happy to disclose how they will be voting and almost always, they will be voting by mail. But if I ask if they are - per chance - Democrat or Republican, they get suspicious and balky, and inevitably offended. I can pretty easily talk to people and glean information, but not when it comes to their voting preference. It's interesting.

Just the nature of what you are asking tells me that you have faith in the days gone by and are trying to apply yesterday's standards to today's information superhighway, and the two are vastly different. Landlines are becoming scarce, and people rarely answer unknown numbers because of scams. Cellphone wise, a person can live in Sacramento and have a Norwalk area code, can easily lie about their residence. But there again, people are not inclined to answer unsolicited or unfamiliar calls. In person is the only reliable method imho, because most people responding to a poll on the internet have an agenda, and are just interested in advancing it, while people who receive a poll in the mail are probably not going to sit down and answer all those questions unless they, too have an agenda, making it worth their while to make the effort.

In person right now is not as easy because of a little virus that has people less inclined to hang around a street corner answering questions, on top of which, people are busy. So it's likely that a significant amount of the respondents to polls are not reliable indicators of the voting public.

States that reveal mail-in ballot requests are a pretty good indicator of who is going to vote, but I don't measure those requests as you do, as an indicator of WHO they will vote for. I prefer to measure the ballot requests with the physical demographics of the respective state, ie age, race and the percentage of urban population. In my view, it provides a better indicator of political leanings, but there is absolutely no crystal ball. Thanks!!

I was raised that it's highly rude to ask a person how they voted or how much money they make. It isn't done. That's why they balk. You're welcome for the lesson in manners. No charge.

 

[Logophile]

So your sample size is “guy you met on a street bench.”

That's your take away from four paragraphs of communication?? I don't mind you being a smart ass for the sake of amusement, but if your consistent rebuttal is some dismissive wise crack, I chalk it up to lazy. Thanks!!

 

[TomFitz]

He’s taking a leave of absence.

I guess that was a preview of things to come of the clown survives.

 

[Logophile]

I was raised that it's highly rude to ask a person how they voted or how much money they make. It isn't done. That's why they balk. You're welcome for the lesson in manners. No charge.

I don't care how you were raised, Mary. Times have changed, and believe it or not, there was a time when most people answered polls with good will and were happy to tell you who they would vote for without fear of violence or reproach. I just passed two Trump/Pence signs smeared with spray paint. You should take a hard look at how many people have stickers on their vehicles in support of their candidates these days. And I would submit that the "lesson in manners" that you think you are delivering should be a reason for your own self-reflection. When you add smug phrases like "you're welcome for the lesson in manners. No charge" you defeat yourself by intimating a smug and supercilious persona, which is an immediate turn-off. You should have just left it at "balk," albeit it would have been better if you had prefaced that sentence by saying something like, "I believe." Thanks!!

 

[Cardinal]

That's your take away from four paragraphs of communication?? I don't mind you being a smart ass for the sake of amusement, but if your consistent rebuttal is some dismissive wise crack, I chalk it up to lazy. Thanks!!

The point is your method of gauging voter intent is meaningless. If I told you who was voting for which candidate based on who I talked to you then 100% of Americans will be voting for Biden. If a resident in West Virginia talks to the people around him then he'll tell you that 100% of Americans will be voting for Trump. The people around you are a bubble, and that bubble is only informative of your social circle or immediate community, and nothing more.

 

[eohrnberger]

It's all about race.

Case in point:

You see racism where none exists.
So, no, not really.

Shall we review?

Yep.

I'm encouraged by the Detroit Chief of police and his performance.
He's allowed peaceful protests and peaceful demonstrations without impedance, as it should be, and has also enforced the law when crimes are committed.
I guess the 68-69 riots, and their results, haven't left collective memory yet.

As long as that stays that way, I'm a little more at ease.
But I've got my bug-out location reserved, and my bug-out gear. I can be there in a few hours drive.

Detroit Chief of police is a Black man, and I applaud his performance.
The 68-69 riots devastated Detroit, not only in immediate property and economic loss, the fleeing of the tax base to locations which didn't have riots as well. 50 years later and only now starting to recover economically, and now, BLM and AntiFa riots? Let's just hope that they don't happen in Detroit.
Another 50 years of dry spell and Detroit might cease to exist anymore, and that'd be a shame.

 

[eohrnberger]

This is crazy talk. You guys have been watching too much Fox News.

You are showing yourself to be whoa-fully uninformed and misinformed.

 

[Logophile]

The point is your method of gauging voter intent is meaningless. If I told you who was voting for which candidate based on who I talked to you then 100% of Americans will be voting for Biden. If a resident in West Virginia talks to the people around him then he'll tell you that 100% of Americans will be voting for Trump. The people around you are a bubble, and that bubble is only informative of your social circle or immediate community, and nothing more.

Let's say in lieu of being lazy, you are making assumptions. Instead of making assumptions, why don't you ask more questions?? In my sphere there's no bubble. A social circle for me is meaningless. And more importantly, I think it's meaningless for you, despite the slaps on the back you may be enjoying for your political preference. I think if you want truth - or the closest we can come to it - you have to shed the illusion of invulnerability. West Virginia - to which you have alluded - would not have been a Trump stronghold unless the people who cared so little about the residents there made it their business to diminish them and worse, alienate them. And yet you still think that the same tactics are going to work to get Biden elected?? So you think the same divisive rhetoric and gross generalizations are going to shore up another Democratic candidate?? Well, you have that in common with a few. But seriously, do you think that tacit regional, snobby separatism that you appear to lean on is going to somehow launch unity and usher in a consummate politician?? Thanks!!

 

[Cardinal]

Let's say in lieu of being lazy, you are making assumptions. Instead of making assumptions, why don't you ask more questions?? In my sphere there's no bubble. A social circle for me is meaningless. And more importantly, I think it's meaningless for you, despite the slaps on the back you may be enjoying for your political preference. I think if you want truth - or the closest we can come to it - you have to shed the illusion of invulnerability. West Virginia - to which you have alluded - would not have been a Trump stronghold unless the people who cared so little about the residents there made it their business to diminish them and worse, alienate them. And yet you still think that the same tactics are going to work to get Biden elected?? So you think the same divisive rhetoric and gross generalizations are going to shore up another Democratic candidate?? Well, you have that in common with a few. But seriously, do you think that tacit regional, snobby separatism that you appear to lean on is going to somehow launch unity and usher in a consummate politician?? Thanks!!

A bubble is, not coincidentally, the shape of a sphere.

 

[Logophile]

A bubble is, not coincidentally, the shape of a sphere.

Not necessarily, as the nuances - of which there are several - obviously eluding you. In the future - if there is, regarding our debating - I will remember your aversion to an encompassing argument, and will be expecting the same: a cherry picked, one liner rebuttal in the hopes that any earnest attempt on your part to be a serious part of the discussion is overlooked. Thanks!!

 

[Moderate Right]

Health and Human Services spokesman Michael Caputo warns of armed insurrection after election

Only the best my friends! Only the best!

“42 percent of the people in each party view the opposition as ‘downright evil.’” A stunning 20 percent of Democrats and 16 percent of Republicans believe “we’d be better off as a country if large numbers of the opposing party in the public today just died.” And if the opposing party wins the 2020 election, 18 percent of Democrats and 13 percent of Republicans “feel violence would be justified.”

Nancy Pelosi & Trump Impeachment -- Partisan Hate Is Becoming a National Crisis | National Review