Trump Tells Freshman Women To Go Back To Their “Original” Countries

President Donald Trump caused another twitter storm this week with a highly offensive posting in which he told four female freshman members to go back to their “original countries” and that they “can’t leave fast enough.” It is a well-known trope used against immigrants. Most of us have heard it. My Sicilian immigrant grandparents heard it continually. It is a disgraceful thing to say to another citizen and it should be condemned by all Americans as unacceptable from an American president. In response to bipartisan criticism, Trump doubled down and tweeted “Their disgusting language and the many terrible things they say about the United States must not be allowed to go unchallenged.”

Here is the posting from Sunday:

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly …

… and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how. …

… it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough. I’m sure that Nancy Pelosi would be very happy to quickly work out free travel arrangements!

Those progressive congresswomen are Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ayanna S. Pressley of Massachusetts.

For the record, the “original” country form Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley is the United States. Omar was a refugee from Somalia. Moreover, Omar is working to make this country a better place as all citizens should. It is her country. I strongly disagree with her policies and frankly I am not a fan. Her views have not “gone unchallenged,” as suggested by the President However, she is a fellow American who stood up to take part in our political system. Others have called for the same reforms as Omar and singling out her origins suggests that she is somehow less qualified or legitimate in working for such changes in her adopted country. She chose this country (as did my grandparents) and she has fulfilled her duty as a citizen to fight the freedoms and opportunities that brought her to these shores.

As President, Trump does great disservice to his office and his country with such offensive statements. He should apologize to these women and to the country.

270 thoughts on “Trump Tells Freshman Women To Go Back To Their “Original” Countries”

  1. Bernie’s not a democrat but he’s running to be the democrat nominee in 2020. But he’s not a democrat. If he was a true independent he’d run 3rd party. Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, acts like a duck. He’s a democrat.

  2. Whether a stroke of luck or genius Trump has pushed Pelosi into having to defend her worst in-house political enemies and thus positioning her party even more to the Left. Omar and AOC have combined favorables of 30%. It’s Trump in a walk in 2020.

    1. Trump wouldn’t be the first politician to slay himself with the jawbone of an ass. And these remarks skirt close to that (although I agree with most of what he said). However, Mr. Trump knows (as a former NBC employee) how potent the press are at deciding what Americans will think. He’s gambling that they’ve gone to that well once too often, and that’s a big gamble . Our country once voted for Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama, largely because the press told them to.

  3. I first discovered this blog about 10 years ago. It stood out among other blogs I read at the time because the comment section was people by thoughtful, intelligent, insightful people. Eventually, I kind of drifted away from it for a few years and when I finally returned I was appalled at the vitriol and hate. And this was before Donald Trump brought his dumpster fire to DC. It’s sad. Very sad.

    1. Sorry, but the change on this blog began during the Obama Hope & Change years. You know, because he was the great unifying president….not.

  4. It seems odd to me Prof Turley even wrote his article.

    Even stranger is now that he has he should have heard by now today that those 4 loony Congress gals are total American hating scum that are supporting multiple terrorist groups that are attacking the USA, IE: like Al Queada!!

    When is Prof Turley going to Denounce that Demonic Congress Trash & Apologise to Prez Trump, all of us supporters & all Americans that are denouncing their support for Violence & their nut job friends?

  5. From Gabbard’s website:

    tulsi2020.com

    Aloha friends,

    Our leaders have failed us — wasting trillions of dollars and countless lives in regime change wars and new cold war, bringing us ever closer to nuclear annihilation.

    As president, I will end this insanity.

    I will serve YOUR needs by investing in quality healthcare, a green economy, education, and so much more.

    Tulsi

    She needs 130,000 donors by Aug. 28th to be eligible for the third debate.

    Tulsi Gabbard is presidential. She’ll unite, not divide.

    1. Whoops, guess Tulsi will lose her support from righties here like kurtz who has already shown his hatred for America by claiming there are “real Americans”. Well there are “real Germans” and “real Portugese”, but there are no “real Americans”, a concept too difficult for our “blood and soil” Trumpsters.

      PS Rep Massey is black, and therefore most likely from older American stock than most of ours and certainly older than Trump’s.. Ain’t that a kick in the head?

      1. Tulsi’s going to compete with him an election, obviously she’s going to take exception to various sorts of things. this doesnt faze me. I still like her quite a bit.

        Trump’s remarks don’t bother me, however. If most Americans would get out and see the world a little, maybe interact with foreigners in their own spaces, instead of just our spaces where they are guests, then, they would understand the way normal people think a little better.

        Normal folks all over the world harbor nativist sentiments. Very typical of most humankind, and we should come to understand that a sense of distrust towards foreigners can be a healthy and normal attitude.

  6. There’s an interesting dynamic from these exchanges. The Democrat Party has become unmoored and moving radically left thanks in no small part to her freshman colleagues. The moment Pelosi efforts to drop anchor and put a stop to that leftward drift, along comes Trump to trigger Pelosi and her party go rescue her wayward lefties. This gives the appearance of the party moving even further left. Pelosi will once again attempt to drop anchor; her freshman extremists will drift away again; Trump will tweet again and the Democrats will go left again.

    Just grab some popcorn.

    1. Yeah Olly, that sure is a fine leader you helped elect. He’s really getting the nation’s business done and leading the free world to …… wait, where is he leading the free world?

      1. He’s really getting the nation’s business done and leading the free world to…

        You’re right, he has accomplished many things. As far as leading the free world, they are free to go wherever they want.

  7. REPUBLICANS FLATLY DENY TRUMP’S TWEETS

    After spending a day silently pretending that President Trump didn’t say what he just said, GOP reactions to Trump telling nonwhite congresswomen to return to the countries they came from are starting to roll in.

    And it’s clear they have no good answers.

    The first high-profile Trump ally to take a stab at explaining his tweets was his campaign’s rapid response director, Matt Wolking. Wolking took to Twitter to argue that Trump wasn’t actually telling anyone to go back to their countries, despite Trump having said exactly that.

    “Anyone who says the president told members of Congress to go back to where they came from is lying,” Wolking maintained. “He told them to ‘Then come back and show us how it is done.’ ”

    Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) also tried to pretend that Trump hadn’t said what he said. Harris said that Trump’s tweets were “clearly not racist” and that “he could have meant go back to the district they came from — to the neighborhood they came from.” Trump’s tweet clearly references the “countries” these members came from before telling them to “go back.” There is no ambiguity on that count.

    The first White House aide to weigh in at length was Marc Short, who serves as Vice President Pence’s chief of staff. He — rather remarkably — suggested Monday morning that Trump can’t be racist because he appointed a Chinese American transportation secretary, Elaine Chao; wife of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.

    Short was also asked whether he would acknowledge that Trump’s tweets were racist. “I’m not going to acknowledge that that is,” he said. “I’m not.” But he apparently isn’t going to directly dispute it, either.

    Another top administration official, acting U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services director Ken Cuccinelli, did his best to avoid the topic in a CNN interview. Cuccinelli eventually submitted that the tweets weren’t racist, but declined to explain.

    “You know, you’re going to have to ask the president about that,” he said.

    Sen. Lindsey Graham’s response, though, might take the cake. Graham (R-S.C.), who in different times in 2016 said Trump engaged in “race-baiting” and was “xenophobic,” went on “Fox & Friends” on Monday morning to offer Trump the subtlest of rebukes, urging him to “aim higher.” But Graham also viciously attacked Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Omar and the other women Trump was tweeting about as hating the United States.

    “We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of communists,” Graham said. “They hate Israel. They hate our own country. They’re calling the guards along our border — Border Patrol agents — concentration camp guards. They accuse people who support Israel of doing it for the Benjamins. They’re anti-Semitic. They’re anti-America.”

    The man who just literally called these women “communists,” “anti-Semitic” and “anti-America” and said “they hate their own country” turns around and says we shouldn’t engage in personal attacks and should instead focus on policy. These are all personal attacks. It’s difficult to think of a more discordant statement.

    Edited from: “Lindsey Graham’s And The GOP’s Initial Responses To Trump’s ‘Go Back’ Tweets Are A Mess”

    Today’s Washington Post

  8. Jonathan Turley: “As President, Trump does great disservice to his office and his country with such offensive statements. He should apologize to these women and to the country.”

    Hear, hear.

    1. I think that Trump will take that advice to heart and apologize in the near future. 😉😂🤣

    2. What? Is Prof Turley so stupid he doesn’t realize by supporting those women’s Lies about the ICE holding facilities he’s also indirectly endorsing the violent anti-American terrorist group Antifa supported by, academia, the old dying media like CNN, & DNC, etc….

      Prof Turley needs to immediately Apologise to Prez Trump, all of us supporters & all Americans for supporting Violence like the nut job that the Washington cops shot & killed as he tried to burn alive people ICE was holding!

      ( Ck the nut jobs manafesto on Infowars)

      You people are not getting many more chances at playing stupid. You can either pull you head’s out of your rearends & find some real news sources or academia, the DNC & the old media will force P Trump to invoke the insurrection act & use the military to shut down your violent azzes.

  9. JT: you do realize that Trump just put you (and Pelosi) in the position of defending AOC & Company, right? An internal poll done for Democrats that was leaked today shows that, among the coveted swing voters, 76% know who AOC is but her approval rating among those voters is 22%. Omar is known by around 56% of swing voters. Her approval rating among those voters is 8%. Still think Trump doesn’t know what he’s doing?

  10. This is a “racist” food fight: “Women of Color” in House hint at Nancy Pelosi being a racist; Trump defends Pelosi against “racist” claims from “Women of Color”; Trump spouts old “love it [U.S.] or leave it” rhetoric at “Women of Color”; lefty press accuses Trump of being racist; and for cherry on Sundae Trump accuses lefty media of being racist for going there. This is like an episode from the old Twilight Zone TV series. Playing the race card is a tactic that is way overdue to be retired.

  11. There is a battle within the Democratic Party between the “Old Guard” Democrats with some common sense and the Tlaibs, the Hyphen-Cortezs, the Sanders Socialists, the Sanders-like Socialists like Harris and Warren, etc.
    It’s not clear at this point which element within that parth will prevail.
    Any honest discussion of the polarization or the Balkanization if the electorate and of the political parties would note that.

  12. “Original Intent” – The American Founders on Immigration and Citizenship

    “…whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”
    ________________________________

    “The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”

    – Alexander Hamilton
    _________________

    “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected by a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?”

    “Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom? If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”

    – Thomas Jefferson
    ________________

    “There is no particular need for the U.S. to encourage immigration except of useful mechanics and some particular descriptions of men or professions. The policy or advantage of its taking place in a body (I mean the settling of them in a body) may be much questioned; for by so doing, they retain the language, habits, and principles (good or bad) which they bring with them.”

    – George Washington
    _________________

    “Emigrants from Scotland had typically brought with them certificates from the religious societies to which they belonged that testified to their good character.”

    – Rufus King
    __________

    Thrice iterated requirement for U.S. citizenship: “…free white person(s)…” as “original intent.”

    Naturalization Acts 1790, 1795 and 1802
    _____

    Federal naturalization laws (1790, 1795, 1802).

    “United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization” (March 26, 1790).”

    “Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…”

  13. Would the real racist like a cement-laden Antifa milkshake with her racecard?

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/nancy-pelosi-netroots-192943694.html

    Nancy Pelosi Emerges As Unexpected Villain At Netroots Nation

    PHILADELPHIA ― The chatter at Netroots Nation, a progressive gathering that attracts thousands of people each year, was expected to be on the rising influence of the left on the 2020 presidential election. But frustration with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, once considered an avatar of San Francisco liberalism, has emerged as a constant theme ― centered on her recent criticism of progressive members of her caucus.

    “She doesn’t act this way when Blue Dogs say stupid shit about other Democrats and about the party and constantly criticize the party,” said Markos Moulitsas, the founder of the popular liberal blog Daily Kos, referring to a group of conservative House Democrats. “For some reason, she’s singling out these four for a special brand of conflict. It doesn’t make any sense.”

    Progressive discontent toward the California Democrat has been simmering for months, with the feeling that the speaker has been putting the interests of the more conservative members of the caucus over the priorities of the left. She has pushed off pursuing impeachment of President Donald Trump and been slow to embrace ideas like the Green New Deal and “Medicare for All.”

    But it burst into the open when Pelosi gave an interview to The New York Times, dismissing the power of four of the biggest progressive stars in the House: Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.).

    The four women believed a House measure to provide emergency funding for the migrant crisis at the border didn’t provide sufficient restrictions on how the Trump administration could spend the money. They were further incensed when the House later passed the weaker Senate version of the bill, after moderates signaled that they would provide the votes to support it.

    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was not all that popular at Netroots Nation in Philadelphia this weekend. (Photo: ASSOCIATED PRESS)
    House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was not all that popular at Netroots Nation in Philadelphia this weekend. (Photo: ASSOCIATED PRESS)
    Omar said a vote for the bill was “a vote to keep kids in cages and terrorize immigrant communities.”

    “All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world. But they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got,” Pelosi said when asked about some of their comments, expressing her displeasure that they voted against the emergency funding legislation ― and then chastised colleagues who did back it.

    Omar, Pressley and Tlaib, along with Rep. Deb Haaland (D-N.M.), spoke on a keynote panel Saturday morning and received a boisterous standing ovation.

    “The women of color who entered Congress ― they’re more than four votes,” said Aimee Allison, founder of She the People and moderator of the panel. “For millions of us, [they] represent blood, sweat and tears for us to have representation. They represent the best of American democracy.”

    “And yet, if you’ve read the news, they’ve faced attacks all year from the right wing and from Democratic Party leadership,” she added to boos from the crowd.

    “As a young person ― I’m 19 ― I feel like I can relate to the four people we heard speaking today better than Nancy Pelosi, and it makes me angry that that is the leadership the Democratic Party is basically putting up,” Damen Alexander, an African-American political consultant from St. Louis, told HuffPost after the panel.

    Pelosi’s comments to The New York Times infuriated progressive members of the House and their allies and escalated the long-brewing spat. Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, tweeted that moderate Democrats might as well be members of the “Child Abuse Caucus” for supporting a weaker Senate version of the border funding.

    But moderates, too, were incensed by the public criticisms that their progressive colleagues were lobbing their way, implying that they didn’t support immigrant children and wanted to hurt them.

    A senior Democratic aide said there’s been long-standing frustration at the positions and comments of “the squad” ― as Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Pressley and Tlaib are known ― making it harder for the moderates to take positions they believe best represent their districts and will help them win reelection.

    Netroots has never been the friendliest group for Pelosi, generally being a crowd that likes to root for outsiders. (The last time Pelosi spoke at the conference was in 2013.)

    But the frustration with her this year was more pronounced than in the past. And many of the liberal activists here ― including some who supported her fight to become speaker when Democrats took back the majority in the 2018 elections ― are baffled as to why she and her leadership team are aggressively picking fights with the progressive members.

    Speaking at a panel on Friday, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), a co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, tried to defend the pragmatic governing philosophy she argued was behind Pelosi’s comments. But even she had to admit that the remarks were counterproductive.

    “I don’t think those comments were helpful to a broader picture of how we build progressive power in the House and what it looks like relative to overall Democratic power,” she said.

    Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) blamed Pelosi for the fact that, ultimately, a less progressive version of the border funding legislation ended up passing the House.

    “She is the leadership, so that’s where the responsibility rests,” he said during a Netroots discussion moderated by HuffPost on Friday, eliciting oohs and aahs from the audience.

    “The House has to carry its weight to restore the values of America. It failed on this occasion,” he added, noting that a Democrat-controlled House should not be passing legislation that’s a coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats.

    Jayapal said the Senate shares a fair amount of the blame since a majority of the Democrats in the upper chamber voted for the bill.

    Pelosi had chastised her caucus members behind closed doors this week to stop tweeting their intraparty grievances and had indirectly criticized Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff for going after Pelosi and the moderate members on Twitter.

    But on Friday, the official Twitter account of the House Democratic Caucus tweeted an attack on Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff. Chakrabarti, who is also a person of color, had criticized a position taken by Rep. Sharice Davids (D-Kan.) in a late June Twitter discussion, which the House Democrats’ account resurrected.

    “It’d be nice if everybody would just stop tweeting for a while,” Haaland, a freshman member and one of the first Native American women elected to Congress, told reporters after her panel Saturday morning.

    Former Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.), who was a favorite of the Netroots crowd, cautioned in a Washington Post op-ed on Saturday that Pelosi needs to learn how to work with this new class of progressive fighters, but also gave a defense of the speaker.

    “I came to Congress fighting with the old establishment, but within months I came to realize that Pelosi can work for us even as she works to protect moderates,” Edwards said. “I learned quickly that I could not fall on every sword.”

    Both sides have been noting the racial politics of the fight.

    Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have come to Pelosi’s defense ― upset that Ocasio-Cortez and her allies in the Justice Democrats are targeting one of its members in primaries.

    But Ocasio-Cortez has called out Pelosi for going after the four members, who are all high-profile women of color.

    Credo Action, a progressive group at Netroots, also noted the bad optics of Pelosi singling out these women.

    “We deserve better than white Democratic leaders who are willing to throw people of color under the bus to maintain their privilege,” Credo Action Co-Director Heidi Hess said. “Nancy Pelosi needs to stop trying to shame and silence the progressive women of color in her caucus, stop enabling the moderates who want to compromise with Republicans’ extremist agenda, and start leading her caucus with the urgency of someone who actually cares about the communities Trump is attacking every day.”

    While the presidential election is still 16 months away, there were also warnings from progressives that excessive criticism of their ilk could discourage young people and people of color from voting.

    “I think Pelosi needs to be very careful about making it seem she’s denigrating the very people that deliver us the young and people of color votes that we have such a hard time turning out,” Moulitsas said.

    This story has been updated to include Rep. Pramila Jayapal’s comment that the Senate shares the blame for passage of less progressive border funding legislation.

  14. TRUMP’S REFERENCES TO OTHER GOVERNMENTS..

    DESCRIBES WASHINGTON SINCE RADICALIZATION OF GOP

    “So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly …”

    Many would say the U.S. government is barely functioning in relation to how it ran 30 years ago. And arguably the 4 congresswomen in question are symptoms of that breakdown. We have reached a point in Washington where ‘compromise’ is seen as a weakness. Today’s representatives are inclined to ‘reject’ any compromise. Digging in one’s feet is now seen as the noble gesture. The influence of cable news networks is undoubtedly a factor.

    For almost 10 years, Republicans have promised to craft a healthcare plan superior to Obamacare. Candidate Trump promised a ‘fantastic’ healthcare plan. But he later confided
    that, “Nobody knew healthcare could be so complicated”. Trump’s surprise was laughable to anyone who has followed the healthcare issue. Libertarian fundamentalists have made healthcare vastly more complicated than it should be. Republicans can’t possibly get to the right of Obamacare and still have anything resembling a healthcare plan.

    During Obama’s presidency, most Republicans identified as ‘fiscal hawks’. They were deeply disturbed by gaping deficits and rising debt. The fiscal hawks kept screaming that Obama’s spending would ‘debase’ the dollar and cause runaway inflation. But strangely these concerns dissipated the moment Donald Trump took office. Trump’s only legislative achievement has been a tax cut for the wealthy that has surged the deficit and debt. Yet fiscal hawks have barely registered a peep of protest.

    The Trump administration has also taken steps to institutionalize crony capitalism. Just yesterday the N Y Times noted that Betsy DeVos’ Education Department has rolled back almost every Obama rule regarding For-Profit-Colleges. Statistics show, beyond a doubt, that For-Profits offer generally worthless educations. Few employers recognize degrees from For-Profits. What’s more, said colleges have abysmal dropout rates. Student loan defaults have been epidemic for these schools. Yet Betsy DeVos seems quite determined to bring these schools back to the Federal trough so that taxpayers can waste billions more.

    Trump has appointed crony capitalists to all federal regulatory agencies. The Department of Interior and Environmental Protection Agency are now run by former lobbyists of the very industries these bodies are supposed to regulate. Trump has mindlessly rolled back regulations to keep the coal industry solvent at a time when coal has become technologically obsolete. The Consumer Protection Bureau has totally watered down regulations regarding so-called “Payday Loans”; a practice that essentially amounts to legal loan-sharking.

    Last week Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta announced his resignation which Trump professed to regret. Acosta had become a lightening rod regarding his former job as prosecutor to infamous pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. It was widely believed that Acosta had brokered a sweetheart deal that allowed Epstein to work at his Palm Beach office while serving a jail sentence. Less reported was Acosta’s work at the Labor Department. It appears Acosta was caught between opposing forces. Trump crony capitalists have wanted the Labor Department to deregulate labor laws in favor of.. employers! And though Acosta wanted to be a good Republican, as Labor Secretary he felt at least a symbolic obligation towards the interests of working people.

    Therefore when Trump proclaims that 4 congresswomen should go back to their ‘corrupt’ and ‘dysfunctional’ countries it amounts to rank hypocrisy. Donald Trump, Republicans, and now ‘progressive’ Democrats, are working very hard to make this country corrupt and, or, dysfunctional.

    1. Very spot-on, as usual, Pete. Trump never had any health care plan, much less one superior to Obamacare. He wanted to do away with Obamacare because he is so jealous of President Obama and his accomplishments and popularity. Another leak from the Kim Darrough files is a memo that states that Trump did away with the Iran nuclear deal, not because it was bad, but because Obama accomplished it.

      The ironic thing about allowing student loan debt to soar without providing any relief, including relief to those students who didn’t know any better than to go to a for-profit, is that if there was some relief, including relaxation of the rules for hardship and reinstating loan forgiveness for public service, the economy would receive a massive boost. Former students could actually buy homes and new cars, consumer confidence would go up, and this would help everyone overall. However, the profiteers’ and passive investors’ needs come first, and they are allowed to use the IRS to grab former students’ tax refunds and to apply the proceeds first to late charges and interest, before any reduction in the principal balance. There is no statute of limitations, and almost no chance to discharge the loan in bankruptcy, unless it is a private loan. That is why many former students will never outlive their debt, which hampers their ability to live a decent life. The interest and late charges continue to accrue, so that a small debt becomes an ever-growing obstacle to any hope for financial freedom. Because many of these people left high school years ago and regretted not going on to college and therefore don’t have high school counselors to advise them, they don’t know that because these schools are not accredited, they won’t qualify to sit for licensure exams in nursing, for example, or other trades or professions that require certification or licensure. It is indeed a disgrace that people looking to better their lives through higher education are allowed to be defrauded in this manner.

      Did you hear the latest about Epstein? A search warrant uncovered an outdated Saudi Arabian passport with Epstein’s photo, but a fake name. What a “terrific guy”!

      1. Indeed, Natacha. Student debt could be a drag on the economy for years to come. And letting For Profits loose again is exactly the opposite of sensible action.

        1. If Bernie ( or a competitor) will promise to take a magic eraser and wipe out my mortgage and car loan and credit card debt, then I’m all in for that candidate.
          Why stop with just wiping out $1.5 Trillion of student debt?

          1. Tom, that student debt is going to be a drag on the economy for possibly decades to come. The Millennials might be paying well into their 50’s or beyond. For Millennials those expenditures are hampering new home and auto purchases. Millennials are also putting off marriage and children, trends that will have far-reaching negative consequences.

            Amid these negative trends, Trump’s Education Department is trying to bring back For-Profit Colleges which were disproportionately responsible for the student debt bomb. Apparently Republicans feel an obligation to defend any industry with ‘For-Profit’ in its name.

            But Trump’s Education Department has also rolled back Obama policies intended to make student loans easier to pay back. That is particularly true for teachers who were set to get various levels of debt relief. Perversely Trump’s Education Department is more concerned with serving the needs of Student Loan Middlemen, a faction no one honestly needs.

            1. I actually know someone who moved to England because he saw no other way to escape from the student debt merry-go-round.

            2. Peter,
              There is a general principal that when one takes out a loan, that paying back that loan is expected.
              Student loans are more difficult to discharge ( e.g., in bankruptcy) than some other types of loans, and I have some sympathy for students and parents saddled with that debt.
              But these are adults (mostly), knowingly racking up
              this $1.5 Trillion debt that Bernie is somehow going to make go away.
              This is as unrealistic as claiming that “MediCare for All’ will save families $5,000 a year on average.
              Both Howard Schultz and former Mayor Bloomberg have commented on these pie in the sky proposals that are unrealistic.
              These are fairly independent, non-partisan people who have some idea of what can and what can’t be done.
              Many of the Democratic candidates seem to be in a bidding war for this or that benefit that will add $Trillion in additional debt, unless accompanied by massive tax hikes.
              They’re not, for the most part, talking about realist ways of actually paying for all if these goodies, or the downside of forcing an additional 83% of the population into a MediCare system; a system that is already finanancially stressed and reliant on huge subsidies from general revenues and massive tax and premium hikes over the years.
              These proposals may “sound good” and be appealing politically, but they are virtually certain to tack on massive additional deficits and debt levels.

                1. It looks like several of the Democratic candidates are on board with Bernie’s MediCare for all plan.
                  I didn’t count all the hands raised in the second debate when the moderator asked who supported his plan.
                  Of course your not obligated to defend any of these candidates or their proposals; I never said that you were.
                  ( Or that you could).

                  1. Tom, I think we should strengthen Obamacare. There’s no point in throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

                    Nevertheless we’re probably heading for a single-payer system sometime in the future. For that reason Republicans were stupid to oppose Obamacare. Obamacare is the last free-market stop on the road to socialized medicine.

                    With regards to the student debt bomb, Trump’s tax cut to the wealthy could have paid off all that debt. What’s more, as a stimulus, student debt relief would have done a lot more good for the longterm economy. Trump’s tax cut was merely a kickback to the Koch Bros for all their funding of Republican campaigns.

                    1. “Obamacare is the last free-market stop on the road to socialized medicine.”

                      If you knew what a free market was and how Obamacare and the rest of the healthcare sector functioned you wouldn’t be calling it a free market. It isn’t even close.

                      Why don’t you define your terms?

          2. How about not allowing late fees and interest to be rolled over into the principal, with interest and late fees accruing on the larger balance ad infinitum? How about total disability from work, as established by Social Security Disability criteria, counting as “hardship”, and thus allowing the loan to be forgiven? How about meeting the usual bankruptcy debtor standards for loan forgiveness? How about reinstating loan forgiveness for people agreeing to public service after school, such as police, firefighters, teachers in high-risk schools, social workers, the Peace Corps and so forth, which DeVos took away? How about loan forgiveness after payment of all of the principal and a substantial portion of any actual interest (not the inflated rolled over interest and late fees), and after a period of, say, 10 or so years? How about no interest accruing while the student is still in school? All of these things have been proposed, and they are reasonable. DeVos cares more about the profits of passive investors and privateers than the former students. It is in America’s best interests to have a highly-educated work force. People shouldn’t be saddled with decades of loans they can’t pay back after getting an education.

            One other thing: because of the availability of these loans, tuition costs continue to skyrocket. It’s just like private health insurance–as long as there’s someone else to pay the freight, they keep jacking up the costs. There is no incentive to hold down costs.

            1. I skipped over the “20 questions’ part of your post, but I agree with your last paragraph that the availability of all of this money floating around has contributed to the huge increases in the cost of college.

    1. Let’s think about this. Democrats are calling Pelosi a racist and some say the United States is a terrible country.

      Did you ever think that Trump might be right and the two comments above are wrong?

  15. I’m surprised you didn’t provide the full set of comments/context Trump made. Had you done so, you’ll find it anything but offensive.

    1. Predictions were based on faulty state polling. National polling was pretty accurate. In any case, those planning on Trump repeating on his EC royal flush should stay away from Vegas.

      1. Anon1 ( or “JanF”, or “anon”) could put his/ her money where we his/ her mouth is and put a bet down with Ladbrokes or a similar offshore betting site.
        That would require an actual (single) identity and some real conviction on JanF/ anon/ Anon1’s part, so it ain’t gonna happen

        1. Tom confuses those who make bold predictions as if that wins an argument – I don’t do that, but it’s more common than not with his rightie buddies – with real odds – he earlier told us the betting odds on the election as if that meant anything other than the house getting equal bets placed. My business is risky enough, I don’t do predictions or bets, but if he thinks the 2016 outcome was a predictor of anything, and especially a repeat, he’s dumber than a rock and his family should take away his credit cards.

          The other thing Tom obviously does not understand is that in any contest as close and quirky as the 2016 election any number of factors could all be accurately described as decisive. Think about Tom. You’ll get it eventually.

          1. I always appreciate JanF ) anon/ anon1’s restating and distorting what I’ve written.
            The fact is that virtually all of the analysts and pollsters were dead wrong in their predictions about the 2016 election.
            It is not “rocket science” to figure that out, but for whatever reason, JanFanonanon1 seems to ignore that fact.

            1. No where have I offered that most expert analysis was correct on the 2016 election, though Nate Silver gave Trump a fighting chance to win. I have stated repeatedly and accurately that national polls were largely correct and as Silver has demonstrated, significantly impacted by the Deep State leader James Comey. Those disparaging the national polls always do so to buck themselves up on how they are meaningless and that Trump will win.

              If that makes Tom and others here sleep better at night, OK. Maybe try George Winston instead. More predictable.

              In the meantime, I don’t think anyone should be taking their lead on this subject from a guy who takes solace in betting odds as meaning anything other than how the house gets the most bets and irregardless of how expert those bettors are, or not understanding that in a close contest any number of factors reliably estimated to be larger than the margin can accurately be called decisive and/or determanitive.

              1. JanFanonanon1 has repeated his pet mantra about the accuracy of the polling, and pointedly ignores the fact that virtually every analyst and media outlet was dead wrong about the the estimates of the Electoral College results.
                There are numerous video clips of election day/early election night coverage showing just how wrong most forecasts were.
                The pollsters were mostly in the range of a 3-5% popular vote win for Hillary, so they were not wildly off the mark from the 2% actual popular vote lead she ended up with.
                It was the overly optimistic consensus and assumption that Hillary would easily win the necessary states’ Electoral College votes with plenty of room to spare that was wildly off the mark.

                1. Tom’s falsehoods and misrepresentations of my posts – you can read them above – are repeated here again without adding anything new. Whatever.

                  1. I’m sure readers will pour over every exchange we’ve had here and elsewhere😄…. JanF/ anon/ anon1 “recycles” virtually everything I ( and others) write, runs it through his/ her spin machine, then prints the fictionalized version of it.
                    And that: has been the case regardless of whatever alias JanFanonanon1 is using at the time.

    2. Yet Hillary still won the Popular Vote by a 2% margin. So it doesn’t like the polls were really all that wrong. Instead we had a fluke of an outcome where 80,000 people in just three states over-rode the will of almost 3 million.

      1. The presidential election prize and goal is to reach the majority (270 )Electoral College votes, and candidates are well aware of that.
        They are campaigning for that 270+ magic number, not for the nationwide popular vote.
        You might be able to find one out of ten analysts and pollsters who thought that Trump would win, but going into election night 2016, the strong consensus was that Trump had no chance.
        This wasn’t supposed to be even close; Hillary was going to win by a margin of 30-50-60 EC votes.

    3. BUT polls didn’t and couldn’t factor in Russian interference via untruthful social media postings and/or potential manipulation of computer-tabulated vote results, like it is believed happened in at least one Florida county. The polls were not wrong. Hillary did win the popular vote. To make sure this could still happen again, Republicans and Trump have done little to nothing about it. WHAT does that tell you?

      1. Natacha and others seem to have “factored” all of that in with their “analysis”😄😃😂🤣.
        They seem to know just how many votes “Russian interference” swayed, or Comey, or internalized miscoginy or one of 20 other excuses given for Hillary’s loss.
        And the fact that Trump visited the key states 49 times in the last month compared to Hillary’s 33 visits is somehow never factored in.
        There are a lot of unprecidented elements at work in the 2016 election and its aftermath, and I expected a certain amount of whining and complaining by the losing side.
        But to see this level of bitching and moaning and whining continue 2 1/2 + years after the election is friggin’ nuts.

          1. Tom, why are you stuck on the 2016 Election? Why not the 2018 Election?

            It amazes me that Trumpers keep bringing up the 2016 polls, then go ballistic when liberals note those polls were largely correct. Like we’re ‘not’ supposed to note the obvious..?? Like we’re supposed to pretend, along with Trumpers, that Donald won a miraculous victory..?? It was no such thing!

            While technically counting as a ‘victory’, an Electoral College Only result is not the least bit convincing as an actual mandate. Which explains why Trump has encountered waves of resistance since the day he took office. That’s to be expected when your victory comes with a big asterisk.

            1. Peter,
              I responded to the non-stop whining that a few people here engage in re the 2016 election.
              This level of “we was robbed” type of moaning and groaning has become an occupation for some who post comments here, always looking in the rear view mirror
              Save your sage advice for them.

              1. Yes, Tom is a trusted referee on which side of the political spectrum is becoming too obsessed with a inconsequential issues like who the president is, and especially those who respond to the triumphalist predictions that president’s backers issue as an answer to anything they can’t otherwise respond to. I know I count on Tom for both polling analysis and calling the strike zone fairly, no matter who’s up.

                Don’t you Peter?

                1. I speculated earlier if JanF/ anon/ anon1 was merely stupid or a liar or both.
                  He/ she works very hard to confirm that he/she is both.
                  Since there’s no sign in box below, this might post as anonymous.

  16. Democrats and the Media do not play a fair game. They and their media allies tells blatant lies and falsehoods all day long. They play dirty politics. They play to win at any cost. Barack Obama told us exactly how they think: “if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” Bingo.

    So Trump comes along and is giving the Dems a taste of their own medicine. If they bring a knife, Trump brings the big guns. He goes ‘there.’ Dems know they have met their match. Finally!!! a pull-no-punches fighter in the White House. The Dems don’t know which end is up. Good.

    1. No president – including Obama – has ever acted like Trump who runs the country like a reality TV show. He has no principles, and no program, and does nothing except play political gossip all day long. He cares for nothing except his own fame and turning our newspapers into Entertainment Tonight. How any self respecting human can applaud this is beyond me to the point of impossibility. It is a reflection on his followers that they have abandoned their own principles and any training toward good manners and honorable behavior because they take perverse pleasure in the thought that Trump is sticking it to their bogeymen. That’s all you got, besides a red ink tax cut which we’ll pay for, along with our kids for a decade or more. Leadership? Where? You better hope that the next Democrat in office doesn’t run the same game, but the bar once lowered is hard to pick up.

      1. oh, interesting! Say, how would a Democrat president stick it to his bogeyman?

        Throw the borders wide open for another 10 milion to invade? Since us racist old white guys need more diversity. Do tell! I’m all ears for what a Democrat president would do to straighten us crackers out.

        Slavery reparations, too, yes? how much per person do you guys want? paid directly to what bureaucracy?

      2. “turning our newspapers into Entertainment Tonight.”

        They are doing this on their own in a desperate push for readership in an online world. Clickbait pays more than ‘local girl wins spelling bee” news stories. Grocery stores would do it, too, if they could.

        1. Being the President and all, Trump gets covered for doing great things – still waiting – and for being an a.shole, an everyday occurrence. If you like Reality TV, he’s your guy. If you want someone serious about our problems – both knowledgeable and who GAS, he’s not. Might as well ask Dennis Rodman to lead.

Leave a Reply