CNN’s Jake Tapper Admits Trump’s ‘Sh*thole’ Statement Was Twisted by Fake News Reporters

[ICEMAN!]

27 minutes ago, DAVE said:

They have won the most recent elections....i have a feeling the people who were on the fence that voted for Trump are turned off by his nonsense.

Time will tell.

Nahhh, sub 20% congressional approval ratings for 2 years and a sub 40% Presidential approval rating usually leads to big wins for the incumbent

 

Gallup reported early Thursday that congressional approval ratings stayed below 20 percent for the eighth year in a row, with an average of 19 percent of Americans saying they approved of Congress in 2017.

The 2017 approval rating is a slight improvement from last year's annual average, which showed Congress's average approval rating at 17 percent in 2016.

Seventeen percent of respondents said they approved of Congress in Gallup's monthly poll earlier this month, signaling an improvement from the 13 percent of respondents who said they approved in November.

 https://www.google.ca/amp/thehill.com/homenews/senate/364878-congress-mired-in-low-approval-ratings%3famp

[Zambroski]

8 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

Nahhh, sub 20% congressional approval ratings for 2 years and a sub 40% Presidential approval rating usually leads to big wins for the incumbent

 

Gallup reported early Thursday that congressional approval ratings stayed below 20 percent for the eighth year in a row, with an average of 19 percent of Americans saying they approved of Congress in 2017.

The 2017 approval rating is a slight improvement from last year's annual average, which showed Congress's average approval rating at 17 percent in 2016.

Seventeen percent of respondents said they approved of Congress in Gallup's monthly poll earlier this month, signaling an improvement from the 13 percent of respondents who said they approved in November.

 https://www.google.ca/amp/thehill.com/homenews/senate/364878-congress-mired-in-low-approval-ratings%3famp

His numbers were worse before the election.

Dolt.

[ICEMAN!]

29 minutes ago, Zambroski said:

His numbers were worse before the election.

Dolt.

Ohhhhh, so historically low approval ratings for the President are a good thing, as are shitty approval ratings for a Rep controlled House and Senate going into midterm elections?

That’s some professional grade turd polishing right there

 

[Zambroski]

4 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

Ohhhhh, so historically low approval ratings for the President are a good thing, as are shitty approval ratings for a Rep controlled House and Senate going into midterm elections?

That’s some professional grade turd polishing right there

 

That's what you got out of my post?  

Seriously.  You people are literally some of the most ass-hurt, emotional, metal misfits I've ever even thought existed.  

[Highmark]

18 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

Ohhhhh, so historically low approval ratings for the President are a good thing, as are shitty approval ratings for a Rep controlled House and Senate going into midterm elections?

That’s some professional grade turd polishing right there

 

No question history has shown midterm losses for the party in the WH, especially 1st term.   Will it be enough to swing the majority?   We will see.   Here are some underlining factors that are not always taken into account.

In 94 and in 2010 the economy was not nearly as strong as it is right now.   Both of those swapped to the other side.   Neither also had the benefit of a recent tax cut to increase the size of peoples checks.  2002 election is hard to judge because coming off 9/11 the year before.

Currently the GOP has a lead by 47 seats in the house.   That's a substantial lead to lose but has been done before.

There are 9-10 current dem senate seats coming up in states where Trump won by a significant margin.   Those red state senate seats are definitely in play.

I wouldn't read too much into poll numbers of Congress.   They always poll low.

It wouldn't shock me to see the GOP lose some lead in the house and gain some lead in the senate.

The economy plays a huge role in midterm elections.   If its rolling I don't think things are looking very good for the dems.  

Unless something huge breaks on the Trump investigation what do the dems have to run on if the economy is booming?   

 

 

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by Highmark

[DriftBusta]

59 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

Nahhh, sub 20% congressional approval ratings for 2 years and a sub 40% Presidential approval rating usually leads to big wins for the incumbent

 

Gallup reported early Thursday that congressional approval ratings stayed below 20 percent for the eighth year in a row, with an average of 19 percent of Americans saying they approved of Congress in 2017.

The 2017 approval rating is a slight improvement from last year's annual average, which showed Congress's average approval rating at 17 percent in 2016.

Seventeen percent of respondents said they approved of Congress in Gallup's monthly poll earlier this month, signaling an improvement from the 13 percent of respondents who said they approved in November.

 https://www.google.ca/amp/thehill.com/homenews/senate/364878-congress-mired-in-low-approval-ratings%3famp

And from what I read recently, like 25-26 seats in the house and senate are up for reelection this cycle, 17 of them are D, and from several states that voted Trump.  You don't have to be a mathematician to see how thats likely to turn out for the D's.

Edited January 15, 2018 by DriftBusta

[Highmark]

2 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

And from what I read recently, like 25-26 seats in the house and senate are up for reelection this cycle, 17 of them are D, and from several states that voted Trump.  You don't have to be a mathematician to see how thats likely to turn out for the D's.

Huh?   All 435 house seats are up every 2 years.   33 of the senate are up in 2018 with all seats in the house.   Did you mean people not running for reelection?  

Edited January 15, 2018 by Highmark

[DriftBusta]

Just now, Highmark said:

Huh?   All 435 house seats are up every 2 years.   33 of the senate are up in 2018.   Did you mean people not running for reelection?  

going by something I read a couple weeks ago....my #s could be off, the point was the D's have alot more seats in play or at risk than the Rs, so the R majority was likely to continue if not be strengthened.  

[steve from amherst]

Heading into the election, the Republican Party holds a 51 seat majority in the chamber. Democrats hold 47 seats, and the remaining two are held by independents who caucus with the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is on the defensive in 2018, as they are left defending 25 seats (two of which are held by independents), while only eight seats up for election in 2018 are held by Republican incumbents. The Democratic Party is further weakened by having to defend seats in 10 states which supported Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016.

[Highmark]

Just now, steve from amherst said:

Heading into the election, the Republican Party holds a 51 seat majority in the chamber. Democrats hold 47 seats, and the remaining two are held by independents who caucus with the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is on the defensive in 2018, as they are left defending 25 seats (two of which are held by independents), while only eight seats up for election in 2018 are held by Republican incumbents. The Democratic Party is further weakened by having to defend seats in 10 states which supported Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016.

That's just the Senate.  

[steve from amherst]

Correct o, obviously the house being a 2 yr term has the entire body up for election.

[Mainecat]

The Russiapublicans are fucked.

[steve from amherst]

Yes , because a bigger paycheck always pisses people off.

[Rod]

The alt left: how DARE you call those beautiful countries shitholes you racist

smart people: ok if it’s so nice we will just leave them all there then

the alt left: omg you can’t do that those countries are shitholes!!!!

[ICEMAN!]

30 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Huh?   All 435 house seats are up every 2 years.   33 of the senate are up in 2018 with all seats in the house.   Did you mean people not running for reelection?  

Wolfie is lost

35 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

And from what I read recently, like 25-26 seats in the house and senate are up for reelection this cycle, 17 of them are D, and from several states that voted Trump.  You don't have to be a mathematician to see how thats likely to turn out for the D's.

You don’t even know how your own government works.

 

[SnowRider]

 He irony of the OP and he semantics while blindly defending the obvious fuck up  

[hayward]

42 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

The alt left: how DARE you call those beautiful countries shitholes you racist

smart people: ok if it’s so nice we will just leave them all there then

the alt left: omg you can’t do that those countries are shitholes!!!!

yup, thats it in a nutshell.  Every lib here just completely ignored you, and what a shame.  They'd have finally learned something. 

[Snoslinger]

1 minute ago, hayward said:

yup, thats it in a nutshell.  Every lib here just completely ignored you, and what a shame.  They'd have finally learned something. 

no that's not "it in a nutshell" but I'm not surprised you can't see the problem here. we often ignore sludgey because he's a complete waste of time, like some others.

[Snoslinger]

trump and his cronies are terrible liars. trump makes the statement, others in the meeting hera it, trump nor the WH deny it. days later several trump cronies at the meeting say they can't recall what he said exactly. then days later the same clowns say he didn't say what he did.

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by Snoslinger

[hayward]

2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

no that's not "it in a nutshell" but I'm not surprised you can't see the problem here. we often ignore sludgey because he's a complete waste of time, like some others.

I told you they wouldn"t learn.  Many of your own down state brethren Slinger live in a shithole, would you agree or not? 

 

[Snoslinger]

1 minute ago, hayward said:

I told you they wouldn"t learn.  Many of your own down state brethren Slinger live in a shithole, would you agree or not? 

 

yes, and I would say that. but again, I am not the potus who has a lot of history of racial comments/actions.

[Zambroski]

1 minute ago, Snoslinger said:

yes, and I would say that. but again, I am not the potus who has a lot of history of racial comments/actions.

smh.

 

[Snoslinger]

Just now, Zambroski said:

smh.

 

I wouldn't expect you and other trumpsters to see it. you're on a completely different wavelength than most people. not a good one either.

[Zambroski]

Just now, Snoslinger said:

I wouldn't expect you and other trumpsters to see it. you're on a completely different wavelength than most people. not a good one either.

It's not about a "good (or bad) wavelength".  It's about the correct one.  And I sure wouldn't expect you to see that either.  Your sides blatant lies and/or "modifications of the truth" to try and keep alive an agenda that was voted out is disolving your own party.....and that's all there is to that.  Just be glad the Libertarians or Green party can't seem to put down their pot long enough to come up with a plan or a leader worth a shit.  

How fucked up is your party that if Bernie runs as an independant, there's a good chance you'll all be sweeping up the floor after the party is over.  Don't deny it.  

[hayward]

10 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

yes, and I would say that. but again, I am not the potus who has a lot of history of racial comments/actions.

well i've  got news for ya, you and I agree, it's a real shithole, made up of just about every race imaginable on the face of the earth, even some of our own.  But that doesn't make you or I a racist for coming to agreement that the place is a shithole, now does it? 

Now if someone wants to beat down on the guy for a racial comment, then so be it.  He should expect no less.  But deep down you and I both know the way it's been repeated in context, by everyone including CNN and other media channels, this obviously does not fit into the category of being racial.  Fair enough?