Tag Archives: venta

Trump Is Too Busy for His Fraud Trial—But Apparently He Has Time for a Victory Tour

by WesleyHeim Posted on November 17, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Donald Trump is a busy man these days. So busy, his lawyer argues, that he can’t reasonably be expected to testify in a civil lawsuit against him that’s set to begin later this month. But Trump apparently does have time for a multi-state “victory tour” to celebrate his surprise electoral win.

Pool reporters covering the presidential transition transition revealed Thursday that beginning sometime after Thanksgiving, Trump is planning to visit states he won in the election. Doing so would allow Trump to continue holding the huge rallies he enjoyed so much during the campaign, something he has reportedly expressed interest in doing.

But Trump’s victory lap would seem to run contrary to what his own lawyers will be arguing in front of a San Diego judge Friday morning. The president-elect still faces three outstanding civil fraud lawsuits related to his Trump University business. Besides a suit filed by New York state’s attorney general, two cases are being brought in federal court by former students who felt Trump’s marketing of his “university” was dishonest. They claim they didn’t receive the insightful, personalized attention that Trump promised them in promotional materials. In fact, jury selection in the first of the trials is scheduled to start November 28. Last Friday, Trump’s lawyer submitted a filing to the judge in the case asking for a delay in the trial.

“President-Elect Trump and his transition team have only 69 days to prepare to lead the country,” Trump attorney Daniel Petrocelli wrote in his brief to Gonzalo Curiel, the American-born judge of Mexican descent whom Trump attacked over his ancestry during the campaign. “The task is momentous, exceedingly complex, and requires careful coordination involving the respective staffs and teams of both President Obama and President-Elect Trump. In fewer than three months, the President-Elect must be prepared to manage 15 executive departments, more than 100 federal agencies, 2 million civilian employees, and a budget of almost $4 trillion.”

Trump will not be required to be in the courtroom for most of the trial and will only have to attend court when he testifies. (Thanks to the precedent set by the Paula Jones case, Trump will likely have to testify.) But even that small requirement would be problematic, Petrocelli said.

Petrocelli went so far as to argue that the distractions created by Trump having to testify during the presidential transition might actually pose a threat to national security. “The transition period also has significant security implications, particularly because foreign enemies may perceive the United States to be more vulnerable during a Presidential transition,” Petrocelli wrote. “Requiring the President-Elect to defend himself in a civil trial while ‘preparing for the vast challenges a political novice will face in assuming the presidency’ threatens the effectiveness of this transition.”

Curiel will hold a hearing Friday at 9 a.m. PST to determine just how packed Trump’s transition schedule will be.

Source: 

Trump Is Too Busy for His Fraud Trial—But Apparently He Has Time for a Victory Tour

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Is Too Busy for His Fraud Trial—But Apparently He Has Time for a Victory Tour

About That Wall….

by SandraDenning Posted on November 17, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Reuters reports on the progress of Donald Trump’s Mexican wall:

Just a day after Trump’s stunning election victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton, congressional aides told Reuters the lawmakers wanted to meet with Trump’s advisers to discuss a less costly option to his “big, beautiful, powerful wall.”

The plan would involve more border fencing and additional border staffing with federal agents….A House Republican aide and a Department of Homeland Security official said a wall was not realistic because it would block visibility for border agents and cut through rugged terrain, as well as bodies of water and private land.

So Congress doesn’t want it because it would cost too much, and DHS doesn’t want it because agents prefer being able to see the other side. And Mexico, of course, continues to laugh at the idea that they will pay for it. Then there’s this comparison to the concrete wall Israel has built along the border with the West Bank:

Its main goal is to stop terrorists from detonating themselves in restaurants and cafes and buses in the cities and towns of central Israel….The rules of engagement were written accordingly. If someone trying to cross the fence in the middle of the night is presumed to be a terrorist, there’s no need to hesitate before shooting. To kill.

In other words, a wall can be effective. But it’s expensive to build, and it needs lots of expensive guard towers staffed by lots of expensive and ruthless guards or else it probably won’t work very well. I’m not sure the American public is up for that.

UPDATE: Via email, reader SB adds this:

It’s worth noting in this context that the Israeli army doesn’t like the wall at all, and wherever they can they build a fence instead—not because it’s cheaper, but because the fence is more effective (it offers defense-in-depth as well as the ability to see through it). They only build concrete walls through urban areas where they can’t get the space for a fence (which requires 50 meters), or when a court forces them to (because local residents have sued to retain access to their land). So even in the West Bank walls don’t work as well as fences.

See original article – 

About That Wall….

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on About That Wall….

Twitter Cracks Down On A Few Alt-Righters But Fails To Protect Users

by HelaineMcGowen4 Posted on November 17, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Twitter is finally taking steps to clean up its platform:

Long criticized for allowing bullies, terrorists and bigots to run rampant to the detriment of its own bottom line, Twitter made a surprising move Tuesday by banning a slew of accounts belonging to white nationalists and leaders of the alt-right movement — which holds that traditional conservatives don’t sufficiently protect the interests of white people….Among recently banned Twitter users are Richard Spencer, head of the alt-right think tank National Policy Institute, and other alt-right leaders, including Paul Town, Pax Dickinson, Ricky Vaughn and John Rivers, according to news reports.

Maybe I’m just getting cranky in my old age,1 but there’s something fishy about this. Twitter critics have been asking for years for better tools to manage the tsunami of abuse that frequently engulfs users, especially women and people of color.2 Here are a few suggestions for abuse management tools that have made the rounds:

Ability to block IP addresses
Allow people to up/down rate new accounts
Provide some kind of human tech support for complaints
Ability to block new accounts
Ability to block accounts with certain words in bio
Ability to block all followers of an account (this helps prevent abuse storms from followers of popular accounts)
Ability to suspend retweets
Ability to block tweets that contain certain keywords3

This list is by no means comprehensive, but do you notice something? Nobody especially wants Twitter to eject specific individuals: it smacks of censorship; it’s not something Twitter management is good at doing; and it will never come close to solving the abuse problem anyway. There’s no way Twitter will ever be able to ban all the flaming assholes in the world, and very few of us feel comfortable with Twitter deciding on who they are in any case. We just want tools that allow us to manage our abuse problems, which are different for everyone.

So why would Twitter do the one thing that even Twitter critics might be uncomfortable with, instead of all the things Twitter critics have actually asked for? It’s almost as if they’re trying to make Twitter reform controversial. We tried, but nothing satisfies you guys!

But then again, maybe I’m just getting cranky in my old age.

1OK, fine, there’s no maybe about it.

2If you want to learn more about this, BuzzFeed’s “A Honeypot For Assholes” is probably the definitive piece about Twitter’s problems.

3Twitter announced a tool for this a couple of days ago. Time will tell how well it works.

View original post here: 

Twitter Cracks Down On A Few Alt-Righters But Fails To Protect Users

Posted in bigo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Twitter Cracks Down On A Few Alt-Righters But Fails To Protect Users

Inflationary Pressure Is Yet Again Right Around the Corner

by kandace39y Posted on November 17, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Inflation! It’s always sneaking up on us:

U.S. consumer-price gains accelerated in October for the third-straight month largely due to rising energy costs, the latest sign inflation pressures in the economy are firming….The “report provided further confirmation of strong energy base effects boosting headline CPI,” said Barclays economist Blerina Uruçi. “Although core inflation rose less than expected, we still believe that domestic price pressures remain strong.”

Hold on to your britches. Here’s what the various measures of inflation look like through October:

Yes, you read that chart right. Headline CPI (the blue line) soared all the way to…1.6 percent. But of course, the Fed supposedly doesn’t care about that anyway. They care about core inflation (the red line). Core CPI is slightly above 2 percent, but has been flat all year. No acceleration there. But wait. The Fed doesn’t care about core CPI either. They rely on the PCE inflation index, which is…hovering around 1 percent (the green line). Data for October isn’t even available yet. And data for core PCE isn’t available either.

But what about future inflation? Well, the 10-year breakeven skyrocketed from 1.51 percent in September to 1.67 percent in October. In other words, expected inflation bumped upward slightly, but is still well below 2 percent and has been trending downward for the past two years:

And yet, inflation is always right around the corner. Here’s the very last paragraph of the Journal article:

Separately Thursday, data showed workers’ earnings were flat in October from September, when adjusting for inflation. Stronger inflation offset the increase hourly wages, and the average workweek was unchanged.

Yeah, inflationary pressure is really a big threat. The labor market is so tight that wages were completely flat. Sigh.

Continue reading here: 

Inflationary Pressure Is Yet Again Right Around the Corner

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Inflationary Pressure Is Yet Again Right Around the Corner

This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

by KimberlHiggs Posted on November 16, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The charges against Anna Yocca, a 32-year-old Tennessee woman who used a coat hanger in an attempt to terminate her pregnancy last year, have varied since she was first jailed in December 2015. The initial charge was attempted first-degree murder, which was downgraded last spring to aggravated assault.

But on November 12, three new charges were filed by a Rutherford County grand jury: aggravated assault with a weapon, attempted procurement of a miscarriage, and attempted criminal abortion. The new charges will replace the aggravated assault charge brought last spring.

In September 2015, Yocca attempted to self-induce abortion with a coat hanger in her bathtub in Murfreesboro, Tennessee, when she was 24 weeks pregnant. When she began to bleed uncontrollably, her boyfriend drove her to the hospital. Physicians delivered a 1.5-pound boy who had severe medical problems resulting from the premature delivery and the attempted termination of her pregnancy.

At her public defense attorney’s request, Yocca underwent a mental evaluation to establish competency to stand trial, and the evaluation found that “there is no indication that Ms. Yocca failed to have sufficient reality contact in regard to the nature and wrongfulness of her accused behavior.”

Last month, Yocca’s attorney filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that bringing her to trial “makes every pregnant woman vulnerable to arrest and prosecution if she is perceived to have caused or even risked harm to a human embryo or fetus…and that the prosecution is absurd, illogical, and unconstitutional.”

Tennessee has some of the most restrictive abortion laws in the country, and state legislators have been vocal about their plans to propose more. In 2014, an amendment to the state constitution clarified that it would not protect a woman’s right to an abortion and prohibited public funding for abortion—despite that fact that state and federal dollars cannot legally be used to fund abortion. The average cost of an abortion in the state has been calculated to be $475 to $680. Clinics in Tennessee don’t perform abortions after about 17 weeks.The 2014 amendment was one of the most expensive ballot measures in the state’s history, and it also gave state lawmakers more power to restrict abortion access.

The state Legislature enacted an additional law implementing a 48-hour waiting period in May 2015. The state also passed a “fetal homicide law” in 2014, which meant prosecutors could charge women for any behavior, such as taking drugs, that might harm or kill a fetus. The law expired in July.

There are some ongoing legal efforts to roll back these measures. The Center for Reproductive Rights filed a federal lawsuit in June 2015 to challenge three Tennessee laws—one that required abortion clinics to meet the standards of an ambulatory surgical center, one that required abortion providers to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, and the 48-hour waiting period. A federal judge blocked the ambulatory surgical center law after CRR filed its lawsuit last year.

“The cumulative effect of these restrictions is to make it very difficult for women in these parts of the state to access abortion and to create huge delays in women’s abortion care,” Stephanie Toti, senior legal counsel for CRR said. “It is a lesson that we have learned all around the world that when women don’t have adequate access to safe abortion care, they turn to other means.”

Yocca’s new court date to face these charges is November 28.

Read this article:  

This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on This Woman’s Attempted Coat-Hanger Abortion Landed Her in Jail for a Year. Now She Faces New Charges.

IUD Sales Set to Soar After Trump Win

by RafaelaSeitz Posted on November 16, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

After Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, gun shops did a land office business selling firearms to folks who were convinced that Obama was going to take their guns away. Now the shoe is on the other foot:

Since Donald Trump became president-elect, many women in California say they’ve started looking into long-acting, reversible birth control methods, in case access to contraception or abortions is rolled back. Trump has not said he wants to restrict birth control, but he has spoken often of repealing Obamacare, which could have that effect.

Collins said 45 people were ahead of her in line when she called the clinic. “So I was not the only person with that idea,” she said.

Doctors and Planned Parenthood offices across the state report that in the last week an increased number of women have asked about IUDs. The devices are inserted once and some types could even outlast a two-term Trump presidency. Google Trends shows more searches for “IUD” on Nov. 10 than in the previous 90 days.

I suppose there’s no harm in this. Long-acting birth control is generally a good idea, and IUDs are an excellent choice for many women. Still, don’t be like the gun nuts. It’s possible that Trump could take executive action that rolls back birth control to the dark ages of 2013, but that’s about it. And he hasn’t given any indication that he even wants to do that.

Still, IUDs are great! And there’s a chance that a year from now you might have to pay more for them. Might as well get one now, I suppose. Especially if you work for Hobby Lobby.

Excerpt from – 

IUD Sales Set to Soar After Trump Win

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on IUD Sales Set to Soar After Trump Win

Trump Should Think Twice Before Flying Off the Handle About China

by FrederiBoatman Posted on November 16, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Donald Trump—or someone speaking for him, anyway—says that he plans to label China a currency manipulator on “day one” of his presidency. Fair enough. China does intervene in currency markets to manipulate the value of the yuan. Unfortunately, Trump might not like what would happen if China decides to call his bluff:

The simple act of calling out China for manipulating the value of its currency to gain an export advantage shouldn’t roil Beijing to the point of retaliation, said Derek Scissors, a China economy expert at the American Enterprise Institute….But slapping retaliatory tariffs on Chinese goods would be more difficult because it would require congressional approval — a problem given that Republican leaders have been opposed to legislation to punish Chinese currency devaluation with duties, Scissors said.

There’s also the question of whether China is actually devaluing its currency. Most economists agree Beijing intervenes heavily in its currency markets, but in recent years has actually been propping up the value of the renminbi rather than lowering it.

Hmmm. Here is Brad Setser:

The monthly data suggest China has not bought foreign exchange in the market to keep the yuan from appreciating in the past 6 quarters or so, only sold. Its intervention in the market has worked to prevent exchange rate moves that would have the effect of widening China’s current account surplus over time. Every indicator of intervention that I track is telling the same story.

….If China stopped all management (“e.g. manipulation”) and let the yuan float against the dollar, China’s currency would drop. Possibly precipitously. China’s export machine would get a new boost. And rising exports would take pressure off China’s governments to make the difficult reforms needed to create a stronger domestic consumer base.

In other words, right now China’s currency is overvalued. If they weren’t manipulating it, it would most likely have fallen even more than it has—something along the lines of the chart on the right. This would mean Chinese imports get even cheaper, American exports get more expensive, and the trade deficit increases. This is exactly the opposite of what Trump wants.

Demonizing foreigners as the cause of all our problems is apparently a good campaign tactic. Dealing with the real world is a little different. Hopefully Trump will talk to a few actual economists and trade experts before he makes good on this particular promise.

Source – 

Trump Should Think Twice Before Flying Off the Handle About China

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Trump Should Think Twice Before Flying Off the Handle About China

Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

by carinlondon Posted on November 16, 2016

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The private prison company formerly known as the Corrections Corporation of America—recently rebranded CoreCivic—announced Tuesday that the Federal Bureau of Prisons will extend its two-year contract with the company, despite recent findings of inadequate supervision and gaps in oversight of private prisons.

In August, the Department of Justice announced that it would phase out its use of private prisons. The announcement came on the heels of a blockbuster Mother Jones investigation of a Louisiana CCA prison by reporter Shane Bauer, and just one week after the DOJ’s inspector general released a report that found shortcomings in safety, security, and oversight at private prisons used by the government. The Bureau of Prisons is a subsidiary of the DOJ.

The Bureau of Prisons’ 1,633-bed contract extension for the McRae Correctional Facility in Georgia goes against the recommendation of Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, who in an August memo explained the DOJ decision to end its partnerships with private prisons. “As each private prison contract reaches the end of its term, the bureau should either decline to renew that contract or substantially reduce its scope in a manner consistent with law and the overall decline of the bureau’s inmate population,” Yates wrote. “This is the first step in the process of reducing, and ultimately ending, our use of privately operated prisons.”

The renewed contract covers 8 percent fewer beds than the former.

Continued – 

Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

Posted in FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Federal Bureau of Prisons Renews Contract With the Company Formerly Known as CCA

Good News! The Economy Has Soared Over the Past Week.

by BernieceV96 Posted on November 15, 2016

Mother Jones

So how’s the economy doing? Getting better, getting worse, or what? Gallup asked people this question twice in November and it turns out that Republicans have had a huge change of heart over the past week. The number who think the economy is on the mend has skyrocketed from 16 percent to 49 percent.

The point of this is not to make fun of Republicans.1 Democrats responded the same way, though not by nearly as much. The point is that we shouldn’t pay too much attention to poll questions like this. I’d put the beloved “right-track-wrong-track” question in this category too. Very often, people view these things as proxies for “what do you think of the current president?” They don’t really have any idea whether the economy is getting better or worse, but they don’t like that Obama guy, so they give a negative answer.

This tendency appears to be more pronounced among conservatives than liberals, but both sides do it. As an objective measure of what people really think about the economy, poll questions like this don’t tell us much.

1OK, maybe a little bit.

Link – 

Good News! The Economy Has Soared Over the Past Week.

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Good News! The Economy Has Soared Over the Past Week.

Why Did Trump Win? A Roundup of the Most Popular Theories.

by JessikaLetters Posted on November 15, 2016

Mother Jones

In the past week, I’ve seen hundreds of pieces about why Donald Trump won and why Hillary Clinton lost. In the next few months, I’ll see thousands more. So do we have an answer yet?

Ha ha. Of course not. For the most part, people are just blaming all the stuff they already believed in. I recommend skipping those pieces entirely. I haven’t entirely made up my mind yet, but for the record, here’s how I’m currently feeling about all the usual suspects:

James Comey. Yeah, I think he made a big difference. Pretty much everyone on both sides agrees that support for Clinton shifted in response to Comey’s first letter and then again in response to his second letter. My guess is that his last minute intervention swayed the vote by about 2 percent. That’s not a lot, but in this election it was the difference between winning and losing.

Whitelash. In general, I’m unconvinced. White voters made up 72 percent of the electorate in 2012 and 70 percent in 2016. This doesn’t suggest that Trump motivated white voters to turn out in unprecedented numbers. Nor did white voters support Trump at a higher rate than they supported Romney. However, there’s more to this….

The white working class. Maybe. They did vote for Trump in greater numbers than they voted for Romney, but that merely extended a trend that’s decades old. The white working class has been getting steadily more Republican since Nixon, so it’s not clear if Trump accelerated this trend or merely benefited from it. It’s also possible that rural blue-collar whites had a substantial effect in a few key swing states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin) even if they didn’t have a big effect nationally. We need more data here.

Racism. This one is tricky. Obviously Trump appealed to white racism, but it’s not as if racism suddenly spiked in 2016. It’s about the same as it’s always been, and it’s hard to see in the data that it made a big difference compared to previous years. However, we did learn something new and disheartening: it didn’t make a difference. In 2012, 93 percent of Republicans voted for Romney. This year, 90 percent voted for Trump. It turns out that Republicans just don’t care about explicit appeals to racism and misogyny. You can be as openly bigoted as you want, and you’ll only lose 3 percent of the Republican vote.

Third parties. This doesn’t explain anything. Third-party candidates did double their vote share compared to 2012, but so what? Gary Johnson and Jill Stein were candidates in 2012 too. If they got more votes this year, it’s because the two major party candidates were less appealing than Obama and Romney—which is what we’re trying to explain in the first place.

The fundamentals. This probably had a bigger effect than it’s getting credit for. There are lots of models out there, but generally speaking they mostly suggested that 2016 was a very winnable year for Republicans. The economy was OK but not great; Democrats had been in office for eight years; and Obama’s approval rating was mediocre. Clinton was fighting a modestly uphill battle the whole way.

The media. I think the press played a significant role in Trump’s victory, though the evidence is all anecdotal. Two things were in play. First, Trump hacked cable news. He figured out that they’re basically in the entertainment business and will provide endless coverage to anyone who drives ratings. The more outrageous he was, the more coverage he got. Second, the media’s gullible willingness to cover Clinton’s email woes so relentlessly hurt her badly. It’s easy to say that Clinton has no one but herself to blame for this, and there’s something to that. Still, even long after they should have known better, the press reported every new development in breathless tones and 60-point headlines—even though, time after time, it turned out there was nothing there. They got played—and what’s worse, they got played by the same wide-ranging cast of Hillary haters that’s played them before.

Sexism. I don’t know. It obviously seems likely that it played a role, but I haven’t seen any real data to back it up.

Lousy turnout from Democrats. Maybe. It appears that voter turnout in general was down from 2012, but only slightly—and once all the votes are counted it might be dead even. In any case, turnout seems to have affected Democrats and Republicans about equally. We need more data before we can say much about this.

Millennials. This clearly had an effect. Young voters abandoned Clinton in much greater numbers than older voters (about 5 percent vs. 1 percent, by my calculation). Likewise, third parties got about 9 percent of the millennial vote, compared to 3 percent of the older vote. There’s not much question that Clinton did poorly among millennials, and this reduced her overall vote total by 1-2 percentage points. The question is why this happened. The options are (a) Clinton was a corrupt, neoliberal sellout that young voters were never likely to warm up to, or (b) Bernie Sanders convinced millions of millennials that Clinton was a corrupt, neoliberal sellout who didn’t deserve their vote. Take your pick.

Voter suppression. This had, at most, a small effect. Among the key “firewall” states that Clinton lost, Pennsylvania has no voter ID law; Michigan has a loose ID law that allows you to vote without ID if you sign an affadavit; and Wisconsin has a strict photo ID law. Wisconsin was very close, and voter ID might have made the difference there. But Clinton still would have lost.

The electoral college. Yeah, there was that.

Once again: this is my best take on all of these theories right now. But the actual evidence is still weak. CPS data won’t be available for years, and in the meantime we have exit poll data—which is suggestive but not much more—and a lot of people looking at county and precinct level data, trying to tease out who voted for whom. We’ll eventually know more, but it will take a while. Until then, it’s probably best not to be too sure of whatever your own pet theory is.

Except for James Comey, of course. That guy sucks.

Original source:  

Why Did Trump Win? A Roundup of the Most Popular Theories.

Posted in bigo, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Did Trump Win? A Roundup of the Most Popular Theories.