Trump, Putin, prostitutes and polls

I’m not sure that Putin accusing others of being “worse than prostitutes” in a defence of Donald Trump is a great idea.

NZ Herald: Vladimir Putin: People who spread fake allegations about Donald Trump are ‘worse than prostitutes’

Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the outgoing US administration of trying to undermine President-elect Donald Trump by spreading fake allegations.

Putin described a dossier on Trump as part of efforts by President Barack Obama’s administration to “undermine the legitimacy of the president-elect” despite his “convincing” victory.

Here Putin has made allegations that are not substantiated.

Putin and Trump seem to be increasingly speaking the same sort of language.

Asked about the bombshell dossier which details Trump’s alleged sexual activities at a Moscow hotel, Putin dismissed it as “fake” and charged that people who ordered it are “worse than prostitutes.”

Republican opponents of Trump ordered the dossier, and it was later taken over by Democrats.

Putin also claimed that some now want to “stage a Maidan in Washington,” in reference to the alleged US role in organising protests in the main square of the Ukrainian capital, which chased the nation’s Russia-friendly president from power in 2014.

More unsubstantiated claims (as far as I’m aware).

Meanwhile another poll shows that Trump will start his presidency with awful approval ratings.

Trump will take office this week with an approval rating of 40 per cent, sharply lower than any incoming US president in recent history, a new poll shows.

The CNN/ORC poll showed Trump lagging more than 20 points behind the ratings of his three most recent predecessors and 44 points below that of President Barack Obama as he prepared to enter the Oval Office in 2009, CNN said.

In comparison, Obama had an 84 per cent approval rating ahead of his inauguration, Bill Clinton scored 67 per cent approval in late December 1992 and 61 per cent approved of George W. Bush’s transition in poll figures from January 2001, CNN said.

Trump brushes this off.

More unsubstantiated claims. Trump claimed the election itself was rigged until it turned around after James Comey’s intervention, which of course he didn’t claim was rigging.

There may be some great plan to revolutionise international relations with unprecedented co-operation between the Us and Russia – Russia has asked the US to attend at Syrian peace talks. And it may work, to an extent at least.

Can Trump pull a rabbit out of a ushanka?

Leave a comment

28 Comments

  1. Alan Wilkinson

     /  18th January 2017

    According to reports it was Jeb Bush’s team who first commissioned Steele to dig Russian dirt on Trump. Then the Democrats took it over, presumably when the Bushes passed it to them in a rather stunning act of political treachery against their own party.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  18th January 2017

      Enough fun for the day. I must get back to pushing paper to get the bureaucrats off my back. Can now see the tops of three desks. Big pile of paper still to sort.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  18th January 2017

        I’d better check other threads. Sounds to me like I’ve won another one somewhere.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  18th January 2017

          Yep. Thought so. God – that operation to subdue Green Force & then staying up all hours to watch Theresa yesterday really took it out of me. Went out like a light after lunch. Sorry I’m late. Hope I haven’t missed anything important.

          Reply
  2. Gezza

     /  18th January 2017

    (The pink hat – not the wearer)

    Reply
  3. David

     /  18th January 2017

    I watched the Putin press conference and was quite surprised at how funny he was, he was literally joking around with that selective quote about prostitutes, i think he called them ladies with lower morals not prostitutes but mentioned that Russiannones were the least bad.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  18th January 2017

      While I believe that prostitution in itself is a bad thing, I respect the women who do it enough to assume that they are not helpless victims who are too feeble to know that they are inevitably being exploited. Yes, some are, but so are many other workers. A friend was taken advantage of by an unscrupulous woman who was all affection before the wedding but didn’t bother after it and ripped him and his family off. A prostitute is (usually) honest, at least, she doesn’t pretend to be fond of the man whose money she is taking and he knows what it will cost. It’s a business proposition. Of course, some men are robbed by prostitutes, I know that. The woman who married our friend was a whore in all but name.

      Reply
  4. David

     /  18th January 2017

    as far as ratings go i dont know if you are aware PG but he starts work on Friday so might be a bit premature to write him off.
    Obama spent most of his presidency with shockingly low approval ratings, worse than Bush,s

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  18th January 2017

      Perhaps the Bushes passed those off to him as well. Mind you I think Trump will have his work cut out to soar far above 50% unless he can walk on water, bring world peace and double the US GDP for the next four years.

      Reply
  5. “Trump claimed the election itself was rigged until it turned around after James Comey’s intervention, which of course he didn’t claim was rigging.”

    Yeah Right. Keep pushing this meme Pete. Correlation is not causation. ‘Comey it was all down to Comey…. we thought we had bought him, he killed it then reopened it …. Bloody Comey’

    The Clinton campaign successfully lost the unloseable election by ignoring their people on the ground warning things were going wrong. Poor candidate, dreadful campaign and extremely poor campaign leadership

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  18th January 2017

      Trump did keep saying that this election would be rigged as they all were-until he won, then it hadn’t been, of course. He was going to challenge it blah blah blah-but he hasn’t.

      Reply
      • Not what I was referring to Catkin. I was referred to the whiny meme that Comey was the pivot point that lost the election for Hillary…he wasn’t and he didn’t cause he loss. Its all on her and her team and their tone deaf attitude to people they took for granted as “their” voters in “their” states.

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  18th January 2017

          You’re right in your assessment of her campaign failures but I think those emails – ‘losing’ them, the private server, ‘ forgetting’ just about every damning or embarrassing about them – & Comey ended up being pivotal to that whole mess – really stonkered her.

          Reply
          • Don’t agree Gezza. But we will never know will we with out polling all the millions who voted about whether it was the PIVOTAL moment of the whole campaign. Just one more feather on the camels back along with a myraid of other things.

            I think the critical thing was the cry of jobs, jobs, jobs coupled with a strong sense among a large section of voters that Hillary was corrupted and same old, same old…

            Reply
        • Both Clinton and Trump were flawed candidates running flawed campaigns. At the time Comey intervened Clinton was leading comfortably in the polls, they closed up significantly after that. When Comey then came back and said there was nothing to see it was probably too late in the campaign to make any difference, or it may have tipped support over the edge for Clinton.

          It was far from the only thing that decided the election but the timing couldn’t have been much worse for Clinton.

          It’s fairly obvious Comey affected things. It’s just impossible to know how much, and whether it was enough to have been the deciding factor in what ended up being a very close election.

          Reply
          • “leading in the polls” that’s a good line….. been proven wrong quite a few times recently…

            Reply
            • No it hasn’t. The polls ended up generally being not far off. Overall vote in particular.

              If she lost support late in the campaign the polls would have lagged that movement.

            • National polls are meaningless in a state by state election… didn’t pick the result and that is all that counts in polls Pete.

              Comey – he SHUT the enquiry down early and why did he do that? Hmmmmm

              Then his staff rebel and he reopens it before they embarrass him with things he would rather not see in the public domain…..

              If you want to believe it was Comey – go right ahead…

            • If you want to believe Comey had no effect, go ahead.

              When FBI Director James Comey told Congress on Oct. 28 that he was reviewing additional emails pertinent to the case of Hillary Clinton’s email server, Clinton had an 81 percent chance of winning the election according to our polls-only forecast. Today, her chances are 65 percent according to the same forecast. The change corresponds with Clinton’s drop in the national popular-vote lead: from a 5.7-percentage-point lead in our estimate on Oct. 28 to a 2.9-point lead now — so a swing of about 3 points against her.

              One advantage of having a model like ours that’s pretty quick to detect changes in the polls is that we can potentially make better inferences about the cause of polling shifts. And while it isn’t proof of anything, the pattern is at least consistent with a “shock” caused by a burst of negative news for a candidate, as opposed to a more gradual decline.

              In fact, the shift looks pretty similar to a period in July after Comey reprimanded but did not charge Clinton for her email server and testified before Congress about it. That period produced about a 2-point swing against Clinton.

              https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-comey-hurt-clintons-chances/

              As I said, some effect in a very close election but difficult to quantify.

            • “until it turned around after James Comey’s intervention” You didn’t say “some effect” you said “turned around ” after his intervention, as I quote at the start of this reply

  6. Alf Garnett

     /  18th January 2017

    [You can’t come back ignoring what you’ve been told. Abide by site protocols or forget it. PG]

    Reply
  7. I recall wondering at the extent of the anger I detected in US reports well before the campaign started, and tried to rationalise just what was happening. As it turns out it seems enough voters in the right states were so disillusioned with the ineffective Democratic Government of Obama, and the Democratic Candidate’s appeal as a clone of the Obama policy, lacked the opportunity or even the promise of real policy change, that the critical mass of voters were prepared to risk Trump as the only opportunity available for the desired change. We all now have to live with the consequences of their vote. The true test will be whether Trump can satisfy the demand for real change in the US. Just how much inertia is there in the US political and economic system – and by this I mean how easy will it be for Trump to get the Military/Industrial complex to accept radical change to the way they do business? Can Trump become a partner with State Politicians, an get their support for some of the changes he has been suggesting? These two areas of realpolitik seem to be the biggest questions at the start of Trump’s tenure. How long can he avoid being impeached given the significant mobilisation of anti-Trump forces at the start of his Presidency?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s