I'm going by the polls WB, all of them that I've seen. That includes the Fox ones that Trump complains about. Have you seen any polls showing Trump beating Trump's political rivals?
1) It's very early in the polls, over a year before the election.
2) as we've discussed here before, the polls are done by liberals, and manipulat e the sampling by surveying a disproportionate amount of Democrats, to make the polls appear to favor Democrats more than they actually do.
3) Dukakis in 1988 was shown in polls to win by 17 points. How did that election actually work out?
4) Polls said Hillary Clinton would win in a "Blue wall" landslide in 2016, how did THAT election actually work out?
5) Trump voters are known not to trust Democrat pollsters and the liberal media, and are thus less likely to disclose their support of Trump to the media.
6) The New York Times, of all places, a few months ago ran an article citing the 3 pollsters whose models had most accurately predicted the 2016 election, and all of them show Trump winning in 2020.
7) Lou Dobbs cited a poll of over 300 corporate CEO's, and all of them were confident that Trump will win re-election.
8) in the last week, both Rep. Al Green and Rep. Nancy Pelosi have admitted that they are pursuing impeachment because they see Trump otherwise winning re-election, and it is an end-run attempt to prevent Trump's otherwise inevitable re-election.
Considering that Trump just got caught asking a foreign country to try to dig up dirt on his top rival [Joseph Biden] after freezing their military aid...
No, that's a twisting of the facts:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-u...eachment-frenzyhttps://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/why-trump-did-nothing-wrong-in-his-phone-call-with-zelensky/Trump has a three-year history of questioning foreign aid to countries, and screening it for corruption before releasing the funds, most notably denying aid to Pakistan.
And far from using witholding of aid to Ukraine for intimidation purposes, the Ukraninan government was
not even aware there was a delay of 30 days in Ukranian aid when that aid was again continued. It is another Democrat lie, to insinuate a connection to Trump's phone call and request from Zelensky for records regarding Crowdstrike, Burisma Holdings, the 2016 election and Russsia Dossier, and Joseph Biden and his son.
I above linked the complete transcript above of the Trump/Zelensky phone conversation. There were no threats, there was
no mention of witholding foreign aid to Ukraine.
I think he's aware that he's in trouble. Again if a democrat had abused his power in such a way you would be calling him a traitor. Or do you believe it's okay for a president to ask a foreign country to investigate political rivals?
It might give your opinion the slightest credibility if you didn't demonstrate complete disinterest in the facts regarding "abuse of power" and "treason" that is FAR more evident in
Democrat actions over the last few years:
1) Obama's above VIDEOTAPED secret conversation with Medvedev, where he promised Russia easier military terms after his re-election, after he successfully deceived the American people.
2) Obama's weaponization of the IRS to harass and intimidate Tea Party and religious conservative groups in 2010-2012, to prevent them from fundraising and successfully campaigning against Obama. AND harassing large Republican campaign donors. That allowed Obama by deceitful means to narrowly win re-election with 51% of the vote. As well as many key battleground districts where Obama mysteriously won with 100% of the vote, some even more than 100%.
3) Hillary Clinton's illegal private e-mail server, that allowed China and Russia to hack into her communications and know in real time every communication she had with the White House staff, State Department and Pentagon EVERY SINGLE DAY FOR 4 YEARS she was secretary of state.
And that Barack Obama (who alleged he didn't know about the illegals server) communicated with her all that time under a fake user-name (i.e., Obama's self-incriminating consciousness of guilt). That represents several counts of prosecutable federal crimes and high treason.
4) Hillary Clinton's selling of State Department access, in exchange for at least $150 million in donations by foreign governments to the Clinton Foundation. Again, multiple prosecutable federal crimes, and treason, selling out the United States government to foreign powers, variations of what Benedict Arnold was guilty of.
5) Corruption of FBI, DOJ, CIA, State Department, and other federal agencies, Deep State Hillary/Obama operatives, who sabotaged the FBI/DOJ investigation and prosecution of Hillary Clinton over her illegal e-mail server and her 33,000 deleted e-mails (
after they were subpoenaed by the FBI and Congressional investigators), and the same deep staters who manufactured a false evidence against Donald Trump.
That's 5 areas of "abuse of power" and "treason" you seem to have no interest in, with far more evidence to support them than the allegations against Donald Trump.
In the case of the "whistleblower" allegations, they (the CIA apparently, John Brennan protege Gina Haspel) changed the rules to allow second-hand knowledge and hearsay to make an allegation,
within the last few months. And incredibly, expanded whistleblower-triggered investigation to someone not even working in the an intelligence field position, but able to trrigger a backdoor investigation against the
President of the United States. In what appears to be the very first whistleblower case of this kind, against
anyone.
You don't see anything unusual about this?!?
1) an anonymous whistleblower
2) by his/her account, on hearsay evidence, not firsthand knowledge
3) for allegations against Trump still unknown
4) by a known liberal partisan with allegiance to one of Trump's Democrat 2020 opponents
5) with a very strange "whistleblower" report that seems assembled by a team of Democrat lawyers rather than by a CIA field agent.
You have a remarkable double-standard, M E M. That enables the Bolshevik tendencies of your party.
