monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Lash wrote:

Mitt is trying to return to politics. Wouldn’t it be nice if Romney’s leftier, more intelligent Republicanism became the new normal for the GOP?

He'd still be WAAAAY to the right of any proposal Bernie would put on the table.

Romney wouldn't vote for any progressive policy you'd like to see implemented.

It would be nice to raise the level of conversation though.

Maybe we can goad him into it by the knowledge that he’ll totally hand Obama and Democrats they asses if he achieves meaningful change.

President Trump’s $200 billion plan to rebuild America upends the criteria that have long been used to pick ambitious federal projects, putting little emphasis on how much an infrastructure proposal benefits the public and more on finding private investors and other outside sources of money.

Unveiled on Monday, the infrastructure program that Mr. Trump has championed since the campaign is intended to attract a huge amount of additional money from states, localities and private investors. The goal is to generate a total pot of $1.5 trillion to upgrade the country’s highways, airports and railroads.

Those financial priorities are crystallized in the new guidelines established by the White House. The ability to find sources of funding outside the federal government will be the most important yardstick, accounting for 70 percent of the formula for choosing infrastructure projects. How “the project will spur economic and social returns on investment” ranks at the bottom, at just 5 percent.

In this new competition for federal funds, a plan to, say, build a better access road for a luxury development — a project with the potential to bring in more dollars from private investors — could have a strong chance of getting the green light. By comparison, a critical tunnel overhaul that has trouble getting new money might not be approved.

“Instead of the public sector deciding on public needs and public priorities, the projects that are most attractive to private investors are the ones that will go to the head of the line,” said Elliott Sclar, professor of urban planning and international affairs at Columbia University. “Private investors will become the tail that will wag the dog, because they’ll want projects that will give returns.”

Proposals intended to serve more impoverished communities that require more state and local money, including improving drinking water in a place like Flint, Mich., could be given short shrift. Financial investors may not see a big profit in such a project.

“A private corporation has a fiduciary obligation to make a profit. The government is supposed to be providing a public service,” Mr. Sclar said.

Three things turned the 2016 election to tRump in the final days:

1) The Russian illegal hacking and illegal social media manipulation.
2) Comey declaring that the eMail investigation re: Clinton had been reopened. The final Comey notification that she was still not guilty of any crimes was late and received little broadcast announcement.
3) Clinton did not do and late campaigning in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennslyvania.

All three are marketing related! If any one of the three didn't happen, tRump would have been defeated. If all three hadn't of happened, it would have been a landslide for Hillary.

I’m pretty sure nobody mistakes Trump for a socialist, democratic or otherwise.

Whatever it means and whatever the result will be, but Trump open to improving background checks, spokesman says

A very accurate encapsulation of the ongoing denial arguments of Democrats who can't accept the reality of the election outcome.

He's a national socialist.

A very accurate encapsulation of the ongoing denial arguments of Democrats who can't accept the reality of the election outcome.

Bill has failed to consider the obvious question of just Why Hillary, and her well funded campaign, were so vulnerable to such minor errors and events.

In honor of Presidents' Day, the New York Times published the results of an interesting survey today. Members of the American Political Science Association's Presidents and Executive Politics section -- 170 scholars, in total -- ranked each of the presidents from best to worst.

Here, for example, is the new top 10 list:

1. Lincoln
2. Washington
3. F.D. Roosevelt
4. T. Roosevelt
5. Jefferson
6. Truman
7. Eisenhower
8. Obama
9. Reagan
10. L.B. Johnson

And here's the list of the bottom 10:

35. Taylor
36. Hoover
37. Tyler
38. Fillmore
39. Harding
40. A. Johnson
41. Pierce
42. W.H. Harrison
43. Buchanan
44. Trump

...When the scholars are broken down by party affiliation, Trump ranks #44 among Democratic scholars, #43 among independents, and #40 among Republican scholars. In other words, according to scholars of every stripe, our current president is off to a truly abysmal start and is well on his way to historical ignominy.

Bill has failed to consider the obvious question of just Why Hillary, and her well funded campaign, were so vulnerable to such minor errors and events.

Donald Trump is taking his criticism of Hillary Clinton into new territory.

The Republican front-runner mocked his Democratic counterpart for a “disgusting” bathroom trip she made during Saturday night’s debate, and said Barack Obama “schlonged” her in the 2008 primaries at a raucous rally here on Monday night.

For Trump — who comments often on Clinton’s penchant for pantsuits, has insinuated she is in a lesbian relationship with close aide Huma Abedin and insists she doesn’t have “the strength or the stamina” to be president — Monday’s remarks take his focus on her personal life to a new level of intimacy.

Remarking on Clinton’s late return to the podium after using the bathroom during a commercial break at this weekend’s Democratic debate, Trump said, “I know where she went. It’s disgusting. I don’t want to talk about it. It’s disgusting.”