The Economy Over Character And Morality: The Typical Trump Supporter

It is very disconcerting that a large percentage of Donald Trump supporters admit they do not like his tweets; wish he would stop uttering a lot of his controversial comments and promotion of divisiveness; and yet still support him, all because of the stock market being up, and their 401 Ks being better, and many wealthy people getting massive tax cuts.

So economics, the evil of money, dominates them, and if Trump takes us into a war; or is destroying environmental laws; or undermining consumer protections; or is flirting with authoritarian leaders; or is destroying our traditional alliances with democracies; or is threatening civil liberties and civil rights; or is mistreating migrant children and undermining their physical and emotional health long term; or is out to destroy all regulations of corporate practices; or is turning our court system back to the Gilded Age; or is working to destroy all the good that came out of the New Deal of FDR and the Great Society of LBJ; well, that is not important as long as one’s economic prosperity is greater.

The fact that the economy being in good shape is due to the amazing revival under Barack Obama, and would most certainly have continued under Hillary Clinton, is often denied by such people. And they clearly do not give a damn what happens to the nation, as long as they, personally, are doing well economically. Nothing else matters, as this is a case of ME, MYSELF and I, and nothing else.

So character and morality and the harm being done to America does not matter as long as one is economically better off personally, so to hell with what is good for America!

What could be more despicable than that? But remember, a similar mentality existed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, and look what it led to!

59 comments on “The Economy Over Character And Morality: The Typical Trump Supporter

  1. Pragmatic Progressive September 22, 2019 9:56 am

    Many of them in our neck of the woods are low information voters who are not very well educated.

  2. D September 22, 2019 11:05 am

    Ronald has two arguments: 1) A voter’s vote is personal; 2) Re-election for Donald Trump.

    The first point is this: I am likely the only person here who voted the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination not to Hillary Clinton but to Bernie Sanders. When the DNC, under then-chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz, rigged the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination for Hillary Clinton, they did not rig it only against Bernie Sanders—they also rigged it against every person who voted the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination to Bernie Sanders. (This is includes me.)

    For those who voted in the general election to flip the presidency from Democratic to Republican for electing Donald Trump the 45th U.S. president, the reasons are numerous.

    One of the reasons, resulting in the election of Donald Trump, concerned that election’s top domestic issue—income inequality. This is because enough voters they did not feel the economic recovery to Ronald credits two-term Democratic incumbent U.S. president Barack Obama.

    One of the reasons was also opposition to the TPP. Even while be plenty aware of its massive unpopularity, Obama spent time during the general election pushing the TPP. The party’s nominee, Hillary Clinton, especially with her history, was not a remotely convincing advocate for the people—especially from the Rust Belt (she did not campaign in tipping point state Wisconsin; linked video follows)—and enough voters went ahead and opted to vote in the opposition-party nominee to the presidency of the United States.

    Another reason why Donald Trump prevailed is that Hillary Clinton was the epitome of an establishment candidate in an election year in which voters were pissed at the establishment—and they did not want yet another establishment president.

    The second point is this: Donald Trump is personally popular with his political party—with self-identified Republican voters—and that suggests he will easily win 2020 re-nomination by the the Republican Party. But, he is also the president of the United States of record with “the economy being in good shape”—as noted by Ronald—and, for the possibility with a sufficient number of voters, they “personally, are doing well economically.” If people, when they are voting in the general election, find this to their satisfaction—and their economic well-being is certainly personal—well, that helps to add up to re-election. If this becomes the result, a sufficient number of voters will have figured: Stay the course!

    https://youtu.be/OZS6ycf2Q6A

  3. Princess Leia September 22, 2019 12:32 pm

    Bernie lost because he could not get the support of older black voters, who make up a huge chunk of the Democratic party voters. Those very same voters are why Biden continues to lead.

    Trump lied to his base. They are nostalgia voters, wanting the 1950s back. The 1950s are not coming back.

  4. Former Republican September 22, 2019 12:55 pm

    Any Democrat who sat out in 2016 is partly to blame. Our democracy was in danger and it still is.

  5. Former Republican September 22, 2019 3:00 pm

    Dems are vowing to do what they should have done in 2016 – vote Blue no matter who.

  6. D September 22, 2019 4:36 pm

    Princess Leia writes, “Bernie lost because he could not get the support of older black voters, who make up a huge chunk of the Democratic party voters. Those very same voters are why Biden continues to lead.”

    The DNC, under then-chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz, front-loaded the schedule with seven of the Old Confederacy states on March 1, 2016 and an eighth state on March 5, 2016. March 1 was the fourth date to hold any contests. And you do that in the more conservative states—ones which do not typically align with your party in a general, U.S. presidential election—to give advantage to your party establishment’s preferred, corporate candidate.

    Reminders: Debbie Wasserman Schultz had to step down from chairing the DNC when “WikiLeaks” reported the e-mails on the DNC rigging the 2016 presidential primaries. That was the weekend of the Democratic National Convention. Schultz was rewarded by Clinton: https://fortune.com/2016/07/24/wasserman-schultz-clinton-campaign/. In 2017, Donna Brazile wrote her book effectively stating Hillary Clinton controlled the DNC: https://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-dnc-fundraising-money-bernie-sanders-2017-11.

  7. D September 22, 2019 5:15 pm

    Former Republican writes the following:

    “Any Democrat who sat out in 2016 is partly to blame. Our democracy was in danger and it still is.”

    The nominee was Hillary Clinton. It was up to her to win the general election. She lost. And she lost to Donald Trump.

    If you recognize a “danger,” you should have something of a response to the danger of Hillary Clinton and her campaign’s “Pied Piper Candidates” strategy. It encouraged boosting three “extreme” 2016 Republican presidential candidates—one of whom was Donald Trump. (Link: https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/.)

    “Dems are vowing to do what they should have done in 2016 – vote Blue no matter who.”

    That was the messaging in 2018. It didn’t make the difference, because the 2018 Democrats won the overall gains in the midterm elections (flipping the U.S. House), while the White House is in the column of the Republican Party specifically with Donald Trump. They won because of historical pattern in midterm elections (from 1914 to 2018, the White House party won the overall gains in just 3 of 27 midterm election cycles), and they won because of Trump.

    “Vote Blue No Matter Who” = Surrender Your Mind.

    It also will not work. Supporting this is the following report from Gallup: https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx.

  8. Former Republican September 22, 2019 6:45 pm

    Leia’s right. Black voters weren’t interested in Bernie’s “revolution”.

  9. Former Republican September 22, 2019 6:48 pm

    The pollsters are saying that Democratic voters are interested in electability over ideology for 2020.

  10. D September 22, 2019 7:20 pm

    Former Republican,

    Princess Leia and you are incorrect.

  11. Jeffrey Moebus September 22, 2019 7:41 pm

    Heh. Do the words “It’s the Economy, Stupid!!!” ring a bell?

    That was the mantra James Carville used to such great effect in Billy Bobb Clinton’s win against Bush the Elder back in 1992.

    So, were all those folks swept up by Clinton back in ’92 similarly focused on “economics, the evil of money” [sic], and concerned only that “one’s economic prosperity is greater”; on “ME, MYSELF and I, and nothing else”? Or was that a different time, with different generations of voter/citizens working under different circumstances?

    The only reason Bush the Elder ~ still flush with victory from liberating Iraq and all those Incubator Babies ~ lost to Clinton was because of the Economy, Stupid or otherwise.

    The perfect example of this today is all those Farmers out in Trumplandia getting that $28 billion bailout as a result of the trade war with China. Do You blame them for not wanting to have to bear any of the Costs for that bone-headed decision to start that [expletive deleted]ing war in the first place? Especially when there is a system in this country where somebody else can foot the bill?

    Have any Democrats ~ liberal, corporate, progressives, neo-proto-socialist ~ come out against that bailout of the Farmers? Of course not: That would all but guarantee losing that vote come 2020.

    But, but, but…. what about the non-Farmer?

    How do You think he/she/they [i understand that that’s a newly-officialized singular, non-gendered {sorry, non-binaried} noun] feel about not only having to pay more for goods being shipped In From China, but also for goods that are not being shipped Out To China?

    Again…. has anybody running for President ~ or intent on Impeachment ~ even thought about that?
    …….

    Regardless. Much if not most of Trump’s support comes from people without stock portfolios, let alone 401Ks, let alone getting any of those massive tax cuts [see above for just one example]. They support him for reasons that have nothing to do with “economics, the evil of money” [sic again].

    Hence a solid 40-45% of Americans like and endorse at least some and/or some combination of aspects of the racist, sexist, nativist, jingoist, xenophobic, populist, mercantilist, patriotist, wrapped-in-the-flag-carrying-a-bible faith, ideology, worldview, mindet, and operating paradigm of Trumpatismo.

    And it may or may not have anything or nothing at all to do the the state of their own personal economies.

    And, which “FACT [emphasis added]” [sic] is that that “the economy being in good shape is due to the amazing revival under Barack Obama, and would most certainly have continued under Hillary Clinton”?

    For a Professor of History, Dr Feinman, You have an unusual interpretation and use of the word “fact.”

    First of all, how certain are You that that “amazing revival” isn’t just another Bubble, like the ones Bush the Lesser and Billy Bob presided over? And if it in fact is, How and Why do these Bubbles keep happening?

    Second of all, that “amazing revival” had nothing to do with Obama, but with his owners, operators, and handlers over at the Federal Reserve, as choreographed and directed up on Wall Street, and carried out by his Goldman Sachs operatives at Treasury and on his Council of Economic Advisers. Interestingly enough, the very cohort that created and produced the so called “¢ri$i$/meltdown,” in the first [expletive deleted]ing place.

    All Obama did was read his scripts. Just like Trump with all the GS and other petro-finacial web alumns on his team.

    And, on what conceivable economic or historical basis can You claim that that “revival would most certainly have continued under Hillary Clinton” as a “fact”? i’d call that, at best, one of those “alternative facts” that have become all the rage since the onset of The Age of Trump; if even that.

    Altho, now that i think about it, You might be correct. After all, The Hillary has the same set of owners, operators, and handlers as does The Donald, eh?
    …….

    You concluded: “So character and morality and the harm being done to America does not matter as long as one is economically better off personally, so to hell with what is good for America!

    “What could be more despicable than that? But remember, a similar mentality existed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s, and look what it led to!”

    Doc, those statements merit an entire book to refute and rebut, if not rebuke. i’ll be brief.

    1. The mentality that existed in Nazi Germany in the 1930s was a direct result of what happened to Weimar Germany in the 1920s following Versailles, when folks coming across a wheelbarrow full of Deutschmarks dumped the money and took the barrow. The mentality that exists in America today is the direct result of:

    the so-called “¢ri$i$/meltdown” of 2008 [noted above];
    9/11 and the so-called “Global” so-called “War On” so-called “Terrorism”;
    9/11 and the emergent surveillance-secrecy-security-safety Panopticon;
    9/11 and the techno-infotainment matrix, and the plugged-in, portable, and personal Orwellian telescreens. with their built-in Echo Chambers and News Silos.

    2. The mentality that existed in Nazi Germany consisted of: To hell with what is good for You, as an individual Citizen as regards Your Human Rights, and Your Economic and non-Material Needs and Wants. The only thing that matters is whether or not You have the character and morality to do What Is Good For Germany, as defined by US, Your Leaders. Because what is Good for Germany is Good For YOU, German.

    There is no one, single “mentality” in America today as regards Rights, Needs, and Wants, let alone what constitutes what’s “Good for America” [let alone what a “Great Again” America would look like].

    But everybody seems to agree that Their Leaders’ and Sages’ definitions are the right, real, true, and correct ones. In fact, there is nothing but confusion about that. And that is a big part of the whole problem. [But that’s a separate rant.]

    3. The one thing that the mentalities of 1930s Nazi Germany and 2019 America have in common is an Event That Changed Their Worlds: In Germany’s case, the Reichstag Fire; and in America’s, of course, and as noted above, 9/11.

    The one question that America’s Peace and Social Justice Warrior Class has never dared to ask itself is: What do the Reichstag Fire and 9/11 have in common?

    Until that question is asked and answered, there will be no end to this “Forever War,” and thus there will be no Justice, no Equality, no Anything but more of the same, regardless of who wins in 2020.

    ###

  12. Jeffrey Moebus September 22, 2019 8:00 pm

    And no, i’m not what’s termed in the parlance a “9/11 Truther.” So don’t let that scare You away. Been there and Done that. i am what is termed a “9/11 Skeptic”. Further info available at 911studygrp.sitka@gmail.com .

  13. Pragmatic Progressive September 22, 2019 8:22 pm

    Former Republican is correct. In a lot of recent polling, the preference for electability—as opposed to agreement on issues—has been even higher among Democrats this year than it was at this point in the 2004 race, or among Republicans when they tried to defeat an incumbent Democratic president, Barack Obama, in 2012. In 2008 and 2016, by contrast, most Democratic voters prioritized ideology over electability in public polling.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/electability-democratic-2020-primary-biden-warren-trump/596137/

  14. Rustbelt Democrat September 22, 2019 8:45 pm

    Exactly, Professor. Trumpty Dumbty’s supporters are a bunch of hypocrites!

  15. Rustbelt Democrat September 22, 2019 9:56 pm

    You’re speaking to the wrong audience here. The rest of us here are not 9/11 skeptics. You’ll like Common Dreams better. They tend to be skeptical of stuff there.

  16. Princess Leia September 22, 2019 9:59 pm

    I second that about Common Dreams. You’ll fit in better there.

  17. D September 22, 2019 10:41 pm

    Jeffrey Moebus,

    I look forward to reading even more of your comments here on “The Progressive Professor.”

  18. Rational Lefty September 23, 2019 12:13 pm

    The People’s View, the blog that the person of color posted on, is one of several political blogs on the internet who are in support of pragmatic, progressive, democratic ideals. These blogs were formed during President Barack Obama’s presidency as a way to counter the narrative that President Obama wasn’t doing enough for liberal values and that he was selling out to corporate influence. As a result, these blogs were established as a way to unite those in favor of incremental change as well as those who understood that the political process takes time and effort to ensure even the smallest victory.

    The supporters of these blogs wanted a candidate to carry on President Barack Obama’s legacy. Their first choice would have been Biden, had he chosen to run then. Since he didn’t run at that time, they decided to support Hillary, as she asserted herself in the debates as someone who would fight to carry on the policies of Barack Obama. They didn’t like Bernie Sanders because he was attacking and undermining President Obama’s legacy and accomplishments. They did not like that Bernie Sanders was parroting Karl Rove-inspired talking points in his attacks against both President Obama and Hillary Clinton.

    Some of these blogs are still around. Others have shut down. Facebook and Twitter seem to be replacing blogs in general.

  19. Rational Lefty September 23, 2019 12:23 pm

    For me, Southern Liberal, Former Republican, Pragmatic Progressive, Princess Leia, and Rustbelt Democrat, 9/11 was the equivalent of Pearl Harbor.

  20. Rational Lefty September 23, 2019 12:53 pm

    Even though Southern Liberal, Former Republican, Pragmatic Progressive, Princess Leia, and Rustbelt Democrat and I don’t match ideologically with Bernie on everything, we plan to vote for him if he’s the nominee, as the most important thing in 2020 is to defeat Trump.

  21. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 2:58 pm

    Rational Lefty: “For me, Southern Liberal, Former Republican, Pragmatic Progressive, Princess Leia, and Rustbelt Democrat, 9/11 was the equivalent of Pearl Harbor.”

    That’s interesting, Rational Lefty, because 9/11 is equivalent to Pearl Harbor for a lot of people. And there are at least two different correlations:

    1. That Pearl Harbor was a dastardly, cowardly sneak attack on America by a bunch of fanatical barbarians who hated our freedoms, and were intent on taking over at least that part of the world.

    Much like The Terror Event of September 11, 2001. At least according to the “Official Conspiracy Theory” [OCT], as determined by the 9/11 Commission, and marketed and sold to the America people by the media, academia, and culturedom.

    2. That the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor was known by the Pentagon and the White House, and no attempt was made to prepare for or prevent it because the United States desperately wanted and needed to get into that new World War cranked up in Europe and EastAsia.

    Much like 9/11 justified large-scale military action in Southwest Asia and the Middle East, something we’d been desperately trying to figure out how to make happen since the collapse of the USSR and the end of Cold War I, just after we “liberated” Kuwait, back in 1991.

    Related to 2, “a new Pearl Harbor” was exactly what was called for by the neoliberal/neoconservative Project for a New American Century back at the turn of the century, and was the one sure-fire way [they perceived] to get American citizens, taxpayers, and voters enthusiastic about [or better, indifferent to] making that New American Century happen by bringing “peace, prosperity, democracy, and so forth” to everyplace on the planet that has sizable amounts of oil and other non-renewable natural resources. Places like Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc.

    Which is exactly what has happened: Making Americans totally indifferent to the outrages perpetrated and perpetuated by this nation in the [expletive deleted]ing name and honor of “the Victims of 9/11.” Forgetting that the victims of 9/11 only started that day, and haven’t ended since.

    So, Rational Lefty, Southern Liberal, Former Republican, Pragmatic Progressive, Princess Leia, and Rustbelt Democrat: What sort of Pearl Harbor = 9/11 person are You?

  22. Rustbelt Democrat September 23, 2019 4:52 pm

    Combo of 1 and 2. Bush missed the warning flags that the attack was imminent. However, Al Qaeda has hatred for Western civilization.

  23. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 5:05 pm

    Did Bush miss the warning signs? Or did the Departments of Defense and State, the CIA, FBI, INS, FAA, and several other federal agencies not provide them? Or did they provide them and he ignored them?

    So, then, do You accept the Official Conspiracy Theory that al-Queda did 9/11, completely on their own? And the only way they did it was because of the good fortune of the massive incompetence displayed by America’s defense, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies before and during 9/11 [and since, as well]?

  24. Former Republican September 23, 2019 5:36 pm

    The official report is NOT a conspiracy theory, dumb dumb!

    Professor needs to screen posters better.

  25. Ronald September 23, 2019 5:39 pm

    Former Republican, sorry, but I do not believe in censorship of unpopular views, and believe in open discourse.

    The right to disagree exists!

  26. Princess Leia September 23, 2019 5:49 pm

    The thing is Professor some people that go to forums are trolls. Trolls don’t want to carry on intelligent conversations, they just want to make participants in the forums angry. That’s why a lot of forums have moderators, to keep things civilized.

  27. Former Republican September 23, 2019 5:52 pm

    It’s very obvious he’s a conspiracy theorist.

  28. Ronald September 23, 2019 5:57 pm

    I understand, but you have every right to challenge him, and unless it gets totally out of hand, I am trying to avoid being a censor.

    I believe in freedom of expression, and of course, you can ignore what he says, and that will tend to cut back on continued responses on his part, if you do not “feed” him.

  29. Pragmatic Progressive September 23, 2019 6:20 pm

    I get the impression that he’s a Libertarian who supports Wikileaks.

  30. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 6:53 pm

    [Thank You, Professor. i was certain that that would be Your response for requests for censorship. And, no, Princess Leia: i’m not a troll trying to get people angry. i’m inviting You folks to look at things in ways that You may not have considered before. Trolls don’t frequently write 600-1000 word essays in response to either Blog Articles or Comments, do they?]

    Former Republican wrote: “The official report is NOT a conspiracy theory, dumb dumb!” and “It’s very obvious he’s a conspiracy theorist.”

    Well, Former Republican, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, a conspiracy is: “A combination or confederacy between two or more persons formed for the purpose of committing, by their joint efforts, some unlawful or criminal act, or some act which is innocent in itself, but becomes unlawful when done by the concerted action of the conspirators, or for the purpose of using criminal or unlawful means to the commission of an act not in itself unlawful.” [https://thelawdictionary.org/conspiracy/]

    Does that not make 9/11 a “conspiracy”?

    Also according to BLD, the legal definition of a theory is: “A set of propositions, assumptions or facts attempting to provide a rational explanation of cause and effect of observed phenomenon.” [https://thelawdictionary.org/conspiracy/]

    Does that not make the 9/11 Commission Report a “theory”? A theory about a conspiracy?

    And an Official theory about a conspiracy ~ with the full force of the American government’s sterling record of never lying to the citizenry, especially when it comes to getting us involved in another War holding it up ~ at that.

    Or, the Official Conspiracy Theory, or OCT, for short.

    You apparently have bought into the meme that 9/11 conspiracy theories are only for tin-hatted paranoids and/or seditious traitors. All those folks are, Former Republican, are subscribers to Alternative Conspiracy Theories; alternatives to the one You subscribe to, the OCT.

  31. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 6:58 pm

    And You are absolutely correct, Pragmatic Progressive, i am indeed a little “L” libertarian, and i definitely support WikiLeaks and Snowden’s efforts to expose the Lies this government tells us, the Secrets it keeps from us, and the games it plays with us and our and our Kids’ and Their Kids’ Blood and Treasure.

    i love how the Left loved Snowden til he revealed some dirt on The Hillary. Heh.

  32. Rational Lefty September 23, 2019 7:09 pm

    Nailed it Pragmatic. They think they are Fox Mulder.

  33. Rational Lefty September 23, 2019 7:13 pm

    D is the only one here, besides you, who loves Wikileaks as well, so you should get along with him just fine.

  34. Rustbelt Democrat September 23, 2019 7:15 pm

    That’s why I said he would love Common Dreams. The last time I lurked there, the posters there talked like him.

  35. Pragmatic Progressive September 23, 2019 7:17 pm

    Exactly, Rational Lefty. They’re loony.

  36. Southern Liberal September 23, 2019 7:21 pm

    I hear that Elizabeth Warren is leading in Iowa.

  37. Princess Leia September 23, 2019 7:30 pm

    Rustbelt – The posters at AlterNet talk the same way.

  38. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 7:38 pm

    Heh. So why are You folks and the whole Left down on WikiLeaks and Snowden? Because he ratted on Hillary?

    Do You think he should be tried, convicted, and executed for betraying State Secrets?

    Oh, never mind. Have a nice day.

  39. Former Republican September 23, 2019 8:19 pm

    Because they are connected to Russia. Russia is our enemy.
    We’re heading off to watch some TV, then headed to bed. Good night.

  40. Jeffrey Moebus September 23, 2019 8:35 pm

    Ahhh. So WikiLeaks and Snowden are connected to Russia. Like Trump, i guess, eh? And Russia is our enemy. Also like Trump.

    So You had no problem with Obama’s Director of National Intelligence lying under oath to Congress about whether or not the NSA was mass-surveilling Americans’ cell, txt, and inet communictions?

    And that by exposing that Lie, that Perjury, that Snowden and WikiLeaks [and Assange, let’s not forget him] betrayed national security secrets that helped our enemy, the Russians?

    Enjoy Your tv show.

  41. Princess Leia September 24, 2019 12:28 pm

    Any scandals that occurred during Obama’s presidency are a molehill compared to Trump’s ever growing mountain.

  42. Princess Leia September 24, 2019 12:30 pm

    In New Hampshire, Liz is in a statistical tie with Biden.

  43. Southern Liberal September 24, 2019 12:31 pm

    Speaking of TV shows, the Trumpanzees hate that the writers of the Supergirl show use the human/alien world of Supergirl to talk about important issues of identity and diversity, like tolerance/acceptance, gender equality, LGBTQ representation, immigration, and the fight against tyranny.

  44. Former Republican September 24, 2019 12:38 pm

    Superhero stories have always been used as political platforms. Using the Supergirl tv show to address political issues isn’t out of the ordinary. I do think it can be a bit heavy handed at times though.

    The Gifted was an X-Men spinoff show that ran on Fox for two seasons. I’ve been renting it from Netflix. It explores themes such as the persecution of minority groups, sacrificing freedom for safety, and criticizing “big government”. The show bases its stories on a number of different points of view, including everyone from the family on the run to the government officers in charge of tracking them down. The Gifted is not a terribly subtle show, but the comics that inspire it aren’t either – and despite laying out its politics plainly, it isn’t preachy.

  45. Princess Leia September 24, 2019 4:42 pm

    The Trumpanzees* are not the show’s target audience. The CW, the channel that Supergirl is shown on, is aimed at Millennials. Millennials tend to be more liberal than the Trumpanzees. Of the superhero shows on the CW, this show seems to be specifically aimed at women. If you took out the superhero elements, it feels like a show you would find on the Hallmark channel.

    *Great name for them, by the way! 🙂

  46. Rustbelt Democrat September 24, 2019 4:45 pm

    Pelosi is going to be announcing the formal impeachment inquiry today at 5 p.m.

  47. Rational Lefty September 24, 2019 4:50 pm

    Other things the Trumpanzees are attacking is the new Star Wars trilogy and Black Panther. They’re whining about SJW, just because women and people of color are the main heroes.

  48. Former Republican September 24, 2019 5:02 pm

    What got us here is the info on the Ukraine story. That was the final straw for the moderate Dems.

  49. Princess Leia September 24, 2019 5:10 pm

    I’d like to see the inquiry draw in Pence-ill-neck!

  50. Pragmatic Progressive September 24, 2019 5:19 pm

    Shocking everyone, McConnell agrees to pursue the Ukraine whistleblower complaint

    Moscow Mitch McConnell might have found something out in the last 24 hours to make him more amenable to an investigation into just what the intelligence officer/whistleblower has to say about Donald Trump and Ukraine. Sen. Chuck Schumer announced Tuesday morning that he’d press for a unanimous consent resolution pushing for the release of that report to the Senate Intelligence Committee.
    In normal McConnell procedure, it would have been summarily blocked, and usually by McConnell. Instead, McConnell “hotlined” the resolution Tuesday afternoon, meaning essentially that he was expediting it, “bypassing regular Senate procedures and moving legislation through to a vote with little or no floor debate in an attempt to pass the legislation through the unanimous consent of all Senators.”
    McConnell, after much grousing about this being a “made-for-TV moment,” unnecessarily politicized and partisan, did not object. It passed unanimously.
    So, here we go. This follows two interesting tidbits of news: that the Senate Intelligence Committee is already requesting an interview with the whistleblower, and that Sens. Richard Burr and Mark Warner, the chair and ranking member, have asked for it together. Also, they will be interviewing separately the inspector general who brought the existence of the complaint to Congress’ attention when acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire didn’t send the complaint as he was supposed to.

    https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/9/24/1887625/-Shocking-everyone-McConnell-agrees-to-pursue-the-Ukraine-whistleblower-complaint

  51. Rustbelt Democrat September 24, 2019 5:22 pm

    Interesting about McConnell. So is the chief rat jumping ship? LOL!

  52. Rational Lefty September 24, 2019 5:33 pm

    Bad day for wanna-be dictators. First Boris, now Trump, both got checked by other branches of democracy. Haha!

  53. Rustbelt Democrat September 24, 2019 5:35 pm

    Netenyahoo also get some bad news recently too…Lost seats for his coalition AND starts his corruption trial soon.

  54. Rustbelt Democrat September 25, 2019 12:10 pm

    My beef with the new Star Wars trilogy is that it can’t decide if it wants to be new or be a remake.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.