Date: March 4, 2016

Trump loses to Clinton in 90% of polls

It always amazes me how some politicians can lie so easily about objective facts that are available with just a few seconds of Googling, and how journalists, who have heard their lines again and again, never check and correct them. One of the worst examples is polling.

Trump trotted out polls again on Thursday night at the debate in Detroit to argue that he’s winning in the polls. As Ted Cruz said, Trump is obsessed with polls. But here’s why he shouldn’t be: All the polls show Trump losing to Clinton.

When called on it, Trump misleadingly stated, “I beat Hillary Clinton in many polls.” (Politico, in their story on the candidates arguing about polls, could have interjected with facts but didn’t and let Trump’s relatively inaccurate statement stand.)

Yes, Trump beats Hillary in some polls, but not “many”–unless you consider 5-out-of-49 to be many.

There’s actually a website where you can check these things: RealClearPolitics. RealClearPolitics includes summaries of all credible polls done this year and averages them. Of all the polls since May (link), Trump only led in five–five that he incessently cites (USA Today, 2/11-15; Fox News, 1/4-7; Fox News, 11/16-19; Fox News, 10/10-12; SurveyUSA, 9/2-3; two ties; not Quinnipac). That’s two polls from this year and three from Fox News.

Don’t take my word for it. Check at RealClearPolitics Clinton vs Trump polls. And yet Politico’s Michael Grunwald not let Trump’s claim stand, he even restated Trump’s straight-up lie that he’s leading in a Quinnipac poll.

Read More

“New Cold War” and policies to confront Russia

Joint editorial by Mitchell Blatt and Sumantra Maitra, editors of Bombs and Dollars


 

For those who make a career out of observing and analyzing international relations, the Munich security conference is a surreal experience. A lot changed since the passive aggressive rupture in 2007 by Vladimir Putin, in front of a stunned and a little dismissive European audience, and the world has come a long way since then. Russia pummeled Georgia, annexed Crimea, divided Ukraine, and intervened in Syria. Europe faces a migration crisis unlike ever before in history, of an exceptional magnitude and character. Migration and jihadism are used as weapons of blackmail not just by an adversarial Russia but a supposed ally in Turkey, and partners in East Europe. The liberal world order has crashed, and history has returned with a vengeance. Not everything has changed, of course… Stop the War, Code Pink and Global Research Canada still blames Western imperialism. Ed Snowden and Glenn Greenwald still think intelligence-gathering and espionage in times of war are totally outdated and provocative policies, a view shared (rhetorically, at least) by Ted Cruz, for some reason. Donald Trump proudly touts his support from Putin and pledges to buddy up to him in return, while Trump’s supporters comment on Facebook that at least they think an autocratic tyrant who is behind the deaths of dissidents is better than President Obama. Trump defended him, on the grounds that, “the U.S. kills people, too,” and “there’s no evidence” he has killed a journalist, but it doesn’t matter, because even if he did start shooting people on Fifth Avenue, they would still support him. Mitt Romney was mocked in 2012 for stating that Russia was America’s“biggest enemy.” Obama painted him as an out-of-touch old hawk who didn’t know the Cold War ended decades ago. Just this February, Russian PM Dimitry Medvedevsaid, “We are in a new Cold War.” 291150701-e1409886026827

So are we or are we not in a new cold war? And if we are, how big is Putin’s Russia a threat to the West, and how to deal with it?

Well…the question itself is complicated, and the key is in the wording. While news outlets that printed Medvedev’s quote used capital letters for “Cold War,” as if it were a proper noun, it is indisputable that we are in a cold war—not like the one between America and Russia, but a geo-political battle of a different scale. No matter how much German foreign minister tries to Germansplain Medvedev’s remarks, there is no questioning that is true. Russia is a shadow of the former Soviet self and simply lacks the capability for global political, military, economic and ideological confrontation. However, that doesn’t make it any less important, because unlike last time, the West is not united. Many in Western Europe and the U.S. and Canada are complacent and accommodating this time around. But for the Baltic countries and Ukraine, they are in big trouble, and they know it.

To deal with this new development, we need to understand and more importantly accept that we’re in a geo-political conflict. Here’s how. 

Read More

Why I will never vote for Trump #NeverTrump

My name is Marybeth Glenn, and I go by the handle @MBGlenn on Twitter, and I’m also the sarcastic mind behind the The Collision Blog. I was obsessed with writing and American history by the time I was 10, so political involvement naturally followed. I’m a small government conservative who refuses to be fed my opinions by the media talking heads, and I think this world would be a much better place if we all laughed a little more, researched a lot more, and stood by our principles – regardless of their popularity.

Which brings me to the reason for this post: I will never vote for Donald Trump.I have various reasons to oppose a Trump presidency, but first and foremost would be the preservation of conservative heritage. We are the movement that fought slavery, championed equal rights, and stood with minorities for civil rights. We are the movement of compassion, decency, and inclusion. I will not be an obsequious accomplice to the overhaul of every principle that gives this movement worth. Trump stands for anger, bitterness, and the disregard of minorities, women and ethical conservatism.

To stand by and allow his rise, or vote for such ideology out of desperation, would be to aid in ordering the assassination of our moral compass.

Read More

Trump: Fraud case against me will drag on for years

At the Republican primary debate in Detroit, Donald Trump said that the fraud case against him will likely drag on for three years of so.

Questioned by moderator Megyn Kelly and attacked by opponent Marco Rubio, Trump said, “Let’s see what happens in court. This is a civil case. Very easy to have settled. Could have settled it now. Let’s see what happens at the end of a couple of years when this case is over, okay.”

Hit by further questioning from Rubio, who said Trump “refused to give them their money back,” Trump said, “I gave many people their money back.”

Then Trump continued: “We will see who is right at the end of a few years. … Let’s see what happens at the end of three years.”

There are less than five months until the Republican National Convention starts on July 18 and nine months until the 2016 general election. The final pretrial conference is scheduled for May 6.

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén

Get the most important and interesting articles right at your inbox. Sign up for B+D periodic emails.