Hillary's delegate lead grows by 8; her total vote more than doubles Bernie's total.

[kstewart33]

Tonight, Hillary: 245,449 votes and 55 delegates; Bernie: 113,361 votes and 47 delegates.

Clinton's strategy remains intact.

[putitinD]

1. there are alot of big prizes ahead, that Bernie will win handily.

[Garrett78]

21. Which ones would those be?

Michigan? Florida? Illinois? North Carolina? Ohio? Washington? New York? Maryland? Pennsylvania? California? New Jersey? Those are the remaining states with 100+ delegates. Which do you think Sanders will win handily?

[putitinD]

91. probably all of them.

[Hortensis]

25. BUT, twice as many voters chose Hillary...

[BlueMTexpat]

33. You think that the popular

vote actually matters?

After all, they're Democratic voters. It's very strange that they might prefer the candidate who has been a dedicated Democrat for some 48 years because, you know, "GW Girl" in her teens.

She worked for Eugene McCarthy's campaign in 1968 and George McGovern's campaign in 1972. http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/04/12/hillary-clinton-six-things-to-know/ There is absolutely no question that she has been a Democrat since at least 1972.

But some are still hung up on the GW gig as well as other things that show her as less than perfect.

At least we admit that our candidate may have flaws. But we prefer her nonetheless.

[Hortensis]

50. Actually, many comments have suggested popular will

may be considered ignorable by many far-left-wing "revolutionaries" if it is not in support of their leader.

Although talk here by some of how they would force their wise will on the stupid "masses" in order to save them seems to have disappeared when they were called on it, I took it as another major clue to what differentiates far left radicals from liberals. Equality and government for the people mostly yes, but democracy by the people maybe not so much.

[BlueMTexpat]

52. Absolutely not! eom

[Lizzie Poppet]

57. Great way to win a (stacked) primary.

Even better way to lose a general election. 40% (and growing) of the electorate are independents who could care less about party branding. I'm one of them, a socialist. Hillary's been a Democrat for half a century? Whatever. I couldn't care less if a candidate has a "D" behind their name when they frequently vote against progressive measures (or in favor of non-progressive ones).

[FarPoint]

39. Ohio is strong for Hillary...

I'm confident she will make huge gains.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. Like these

HRC is + 29 in Florida:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_democratic_presidential_primary-3556.html

HRC is +21 in New York:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ny/new_york_democratic_presidential_primary-4221.html

HRC is + 19 in Pennsylvania:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/pa/pennsylvania_democratic_presidential_primary-4249.html

HRCis + 21 in Ohio:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/oh/ohio_democratic_presidential_primary-5313.html

HRC is + 19 in Illinois:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/oh/ohio_democratic_presidential_primary-5313.html

there are alot (sic) of big prizes ahead, that Bernie will win handily.

Like these:




HRC is + 19 in North Carolina:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nc/north_carolina_democratic_presidential_primary-5175.html


HRC is +14 in California:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ca/california_democratic_presidential_primary-5321.html

HRC is +19 In Michigan:


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/mi/michigan_democratic_presidential_primary-5224.html


HRC is +31 in New Jersey:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nj/new_jersey_democratic_presidential_primary-3443.html

[rhett o rick]

2. Hillary's strategy? You mean avoid issues and attack Sen Sanders character? Of course it

remains intact. It's all she's got.

[kstewart33]

4. Rhett, take a look at the thread titles in this forum.

Who's attacking who?

[rhett o rick]

82. My comment was about H. Clinton's strategy and I don't think she is posting in this thread.

H. Clinton herself does not discuss issues but prefers to attack Sen Sanders. Even when she won, while he congratulated her, she attacked him calling him a one-issue candidate.

[Nonhlanhla]

24. What an absurd thing to say

Hillary has treated Bernie with kid gloves.

Meanwhile Bernie's whole campaign rests on the character assassination of Hillary Clinton.

[Gwhittey]

27. Bull

Talking about how a Candidate has taken money from lobbyist and then change their mind on a issue once you haven taken money is not a attack it is talking about facts. Yes Facts go google Warren and Clinton + Credit card. Why did her opinion on TPP suddenly change during the campaign?
Telling the media that Sanders was not involved in Civil Rights and then using dog whistle words to imply he is racist is a Attack. All have to do is stop and think, did Bush do some thing similar vs John Kerry? That is Karl Rove 101 if your opponet can talk about issue that is relevant then lie about it and have others lie to change the story. Helps when media is at risk of losing billions in crony capitalism money.

[Nonhlanhla]

49. Yes, I'm well aware of the distorted picture of Hillary

that shapes the Bernie camp talking points, so no need to repeat them. It's not as if they're not repeated ad nauseam here every day. And I find it funny that you accuse the Hillary camp of swift boat tactics given the multiple times I've seen Bernie folks (campaign or supporters) blame Hillary when Bernie's camp has misbehaved. The Bernie camp response to their own data theft was positively Rovian, shifting the blame on Hillary. I found it absurd and very off putting.

I have, moreover, never seen the Hillary camp accusing Bernie of being racist. I've only seen several Bernie people making that claim.

[rhett o rick]

84. It was Black Lives Matter that pointed out “Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these

policies resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

Pointing out that she backed the IWar isn't an attack. Pointing out that she backs those that used the banking crisis to steal $5 trillion dollars, isnt attacking. Pointing out that she and her husband have amassed $150,000,000 in the last 15 years, most of which came from people and corporations expecting quid pro quo, ISN'T ATTACKING. It's pointing out facts. Facts that are not pleasant to those that worship the Clinton American Aristocracy.

[Nonhlanhla]

90. I don't have an issue with facts

I have an issue with distortions, which consists of various things that I see Bernie supporters (and the Bernie campaign to some extent) doing:
1. Never presenting the full context of her votes. E.g. the IWR vote was not a vote for unilateral attack, or proceeding before inspections were finished, but was rather aimed at forceful "diplomacy." She made a mistake there (and many of us Hillary supporters, myself included, are very critical of that vote), but the Bernie camp has proceeded to take that vote completely out of context and to paint her as a bloodthirsty warmonger. She is hawkish, to be sure - even us Clinton supporters know that - but the way you present her vote is one-sided and distorted. The same with the bankruptcy vote. You love to show Elizabeth Warren's interpretation of Hillary's support, and yet the picture has been clearly shown to be quite different, and indeed she did not vote for the final bill. So yes, to constantly distort her votes - that IS attacking. If you want more context on this, do your own homework.

2. Funny enough, you always find ways to contextualize Bernie's votes (rightly so) - e.g. he voted for the criminal bill (I forget its name) because the Violence Against Women issues was tacked onto it. I get that and therefore I have never attacked him for that bill. I even get why he has supported gun rights, although I find it deplorable. Yet you guys never include the same kind of contextualization when it comes to Hillary's votes.

3. Whenever Bernie's campaign or supporters do something wrong, you find ways to blame her for it. Date theft? Hillary's fault. Bernie supports harrassing Warren for not endorsing Bernie? A Hillary plot. Those are attacks.

4. The entire narrative against Hillary is based on the underlying "she's a whore who sold herself to the highest bidder" theme. I find that deeply offensive. I get that she has received money from corporations - so have almost all other politicians. That is unfortunately the name of the game at this time. But a lot of the her donations in fact come from individuals on Wall Street (not surprising given her history as Senator from New York), and are not necessarily corporate bribes. I have also not seen any evidence that she has ever voted in favor of legislation based on donations. By the way, are you even aware that Citizens United was all about stopping Hillary? And yet she is constantly accused of wanting Citizens United to continue. Too absurd.

5. The speaking fees issue? Doesn't bother me much.

6. The smearing of anyone who dares to endorse Hillary, including unions, and the racist attacks on African Americans for largely supporting her (racist because it basically takes the form of saying that African Americans are uninformed or do not matter since most of them live in red states). Those are attacks.

I recognize that she is imperfect. But I recognize that Bernie is also imperfect, something most Bernie supporters do not seem able to grasp. I know that she has at times gone negative on Bernie - but she has in fact shown remarkable restraint. Meanwhile all I see from Bernie's supporters, and indeed from the base narrative concocted against Hillary by the Bernie campaign itself, are negative attacks. Bernie, by the way, knows damn well that the writing is on the wall for his campaign. His chances of getting the nomination are very low at this point. The math is just not there. And yet he launched new negative attacks against Hillary this week. Why? Does he want the GOP candidate to win? Especially since that candidate is likely to be either Trump or Cruz, both of which are essentially fascists.

So yes, there is heck of a lot of negativity coming from the Bernie camp. You're just too blind to see it, and each time that it is pointed out, you claim that it is simply "facts." Well, even "facts" can be distorted and therefore become lies.

[Human101948]

30. Hillary is her own worst enemy...

Clinton’s top 10 cumulative donors between between 1999 and 2016 were, in descending order, Citigroup ($782,327), Goldman Sachs ($711,490), DLA Piper ($628,030), JPMorgan Chase ($620,919), EMILY’s List ($605,174) Morgan Stanley ($543,065), Time Warner ($411,296), Skadden Arps ($406,640), Lehman Brothers ($362,853) and Cablevision Systems ($336,288)

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jul/07/facebook-posts/meme-says-hillary-clintons-top-donors-are-banks-an/

[bkkyosemite]

58. And countries that torture people, cut women up, behead, kill,..like Saudi Arabia, etc...

[Human101948]

60. Can you explain your comment?

I don't get it.

[Jay Mohler]

69. You should contrast the difference.

One of the candidates is soaking those who can least afford it out of money that I am certain could be used better at home. The other is taking large donations from those that can easily afford it and saving those who can't the embarrassment. Now that I think about it, Hillary is a lot like Robin Hood. Thanks Hillary, you have always looked out for the little guy and gal.

[Human101948]

70. Which would be true if she were to institute programs similar to those that Bernie advocates...

Instead, she is advocating that we "Make America Whole Again."

Which means everything and nothing.

I think we will get almost nothing.

So you can be smug and clever but those who cannot afford will be able to afford it even less after eight years of incrementalism.

[rhett o rick]

83. Sen Sanders personally has never attack Clinton while she continuously attacks him.

Her latest attack was to call him a one-issue candidate which is ironic since she is a zero-issue candidate.

[riversedge]

37. It is Sanders who has been doing the negative campaigning against Hillary. Take a look at recent

headlines---Sanders slams. ..slam...slams...

[FarPoint]

41. Stong negativities from a new Democrat...

Directed at a Life long Democrat.... That does not sit well with Party loyalist.

[Human101948]

59. Yes, while Hillary surrogates do her dirty work...

WASHINGTON — As the Democratic primary moves into more diverse states, three black Clinton supporters laid into Bernie Sanders’ record on a conference call with reporters on Wednesday — casting the Vermont senator as a newcomer to black issues, interested now because he is running for president.
“There’s simply no comparison,” between the two candidates on the issues important to black voters, said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the whip of the Congressional Black Caucus, who called Clinton a “true friend” to the black community, focusing especially on her time in the Senate and her stance on gun control.
Jeffries said that Sanders has chosen to focus on black issues now that he’s running for president in the “twilight” of his political career. Sanders, Jeffries said, “has been largely missing in action.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/darrensands/black-clinton-surrogates-attack-bernie-sanderss-record-on-bl#.pbDep26nZ

[rhett o rick]

85. Headlines in media that have financially backed Clinton. The big corp-media giants have their money

and resources on Clinton. Calling Clinton out on her policies re. fracking and the TPP are part of the process.

[SidDithers]

76. "It's all she's got"...

She's got most of the delegates too.

Sid

[rhett o rick]

86. And most of the money. Money comes before helping those in poverty. She may buy the presidency

but we won't stop fighting the American Aristocracy that some blindly worship. We want to end the control of Big Money in politics and real Democrats would agree.

[SidDithers]

88. Wait. I thought Bernie was setting fundraising records last quarter...

Sid

[NurseJackie]

3. Math and time. Neither one is on Bernie's side.

Go, Hillary! We love you!

[riversedge]

38. Well said.

[Herman4747]

45. The American people love Hillary so much that...

they've given her a 54% unfavorable rating!

But the guy on the left in the picture below loves Hillary, since he knows his chances against Bernie are worse:



The guy on the right in this picture speaks glowingly of Hillary's accomplishments as Secretary of State:



Henry Kissinger on Hillary:

“She ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.”
“I’ve known her for many years now, and I respect her intellect.”
“She’d put me under a great conflict of interest if she were a candidate, because I tend to support the Republicans… Yes, I’d be comfortable with her as the president.”

And most of all, the girl in the photo loves Hillary, because Hillary ran through "sniper fire" just to greet her:



Your admiration for Hillary, NurseJackie, is breathtaking, but is it even more than your admiration for honesty?

[SunSeeker]

5. K & R

[dogman]

6. She started out 45 to 1, she's losing ground.

Looking at these numbers now is still reading tea leaves.

[kstewart33]

7. Bernie's running out of time.

If he hasn't made a big move in the delegate race by the end of March, he's done.

Dogman, my question is where is the Revolution that Bernie has repeatedly said must happen for victory and real change. Look at his numbers - he got less than half the number of Clinton's total votes. Really, when are people going to show up?

[dogman]

10. Exactly.

Revolution is hard work. It seems the young are more up to it. Hillary is the easy vote, the lazy vote. Many are happier to live the life they live and bitch about it than stand up for what is right. Isn't the point you get the government you deserve. Look at these red states and how they vote. Sadly it isn't just Bernie running out of time.

[kstewart33]

17. The Revolution needs to start now.

I think the main problem is that too many people are fairly satisfied with how they are doing. Look at the latest numbers among the Democrats. If I recall correctly the Washington Post released a poll this week wherein over 80% of those polled said they're fairly satisfied.

Unemployment is the lowest in many years; the recession is over.

That's the problem IMHO. I agree with you that the problems that Bernie runs on are real and should be addressed. But I'm not seeing the momentum beyond people in their late teens through mid 20s. Are you seeing it, for real? Look at the numbers that Hillary is pulling in. Tonight, she got twice the votes as Bernie.

Respectfully, I don't think the Hillary vote is the lazy vote. I like Bernie and respect him. I just believe that Hillary would be a better president.

[dogman]

18. We have a chance now, probably not later.

That is why I call it the lazy vote, it is a vote for the status quo. People previously voted for hope and change. Unfortunately they voted and went home. That is never going to result in change. Bernie has explained that at every stop. The voters in these red states have already lost the battle to make things better, they battle for their daily existence. If they don't cause change they will live as they do now and likely worse over time. All I really have to offer the cause is my vote. I would prefer that when the Primary arrives I will have a choice to vote for. I think the chance is now or never.

[Hortensis]

35. LOL. Given that revolution means destruction,

just maybe most Democrats are declining to be "destroyed" by a dysfunctional little movement. Above all, we're builders and innovators by nature. Bernie should have been talking to that, to building on what we are very proud to have achieved for America, but instead he dissed it and us and is losing big time to an opponent who is. That is NOT a coincidence.

Regarding those tiresome numbers, there are far more liberals in the party than radicals. Bernie should have done his math.

[dogman]

74. Destruction of apartheid and warmongering.

Revolution means change. The electorate bought into change the last two Presidential elections. Unfortunately after the election there was no follow up with the people, it was "go home, I got this". Just maybe Democrats are voting for their own destruction. It is inaccurate to say Bernie is losing big time. If there were far more liberals, Hillary and her centrist triangulation would not be accepted. The states Hillary is winning will not elect a Democratic President.

[Hortensis]

81. That's apparently going to be between them and us,

whoever "us" turns out to be, when the time comes. The far-lefters on this forum like to pretend that they had nothing to do with getting us in this mess, that even the conservatives don't have all that much to do with it because it was all the Democrats'/liberals' responsibility - and we turned corrupt and right-wing and failed the nation.

Well, only those far-lefters who couldn't vote 2 years ago had nothing to do with it. Most here have been eligible to vote for decades, and they own this mess just as much as anyone else, and given the willful ignorance, hypocrisy and lousy judgement constantly demonstrated by so many here, I'm guessing a lot more than some.

Here's news: "It's all your fault!" is neither a principled ideology or a workable plan for improvement.

[dogman]

87. You simply feed the centrists, they are not liberals.

There is little or no far left on this forum. You write like the MSM that claims both sides do it. Far right= neonazis and white supremacists, where is the equivalent on the left? Generally speaking, the far left does not even bother to vote at all. When is the last time you've seen a spokesperson for ALF or ELF or the Communist Party? Just more centrist triangulation driving the center to the right.

[mythology]

23. Not enough of them if the goal is a Sanders presidency

It's easy to talk about revolution but they really aren't showing up when it comes time to vote.

[Orsino]

92. Yeah. If Sanders can't quite turn the car around...

...he's definitely slowed it.

[AZ Progressive]

8. Her advantage stops after March 15

Enjoy it while it lasts...

[kstewart33]

9. How is that?

After FL, MI, and OH and with her super delegates, it's over.

[MillennialDem]

20. Superdelegates will back the winner of the delegate count. As for unpledged delegates, depends

how badly he gets smacked around between now and March 16th.

It will come down to him needing anywhere from 55% to 62% of the post March 16th delegates. In states that likely favor him.

[stevenleser]

66. And after Florida, Michigan and Ohio that won't be Bernie. It's already obvious with a 200

Delegate lead that Sanders would have a virtually impossible task to catch up. Each big state that Hillary adds to her winnings, and by large margins no less, like Louisiana yesterday, makes the impossible that much harder.

Hillary is going to win the remaining big 8-10 states by 10-30 points. That's more than enough to ensure she will have both more pledged delegates at the end and a massive popular vote victory at the end.

There is no path to the nomination or a majority of pledged delegates for Bernie.

[MillennialDem]

68. You can wait another week to see then. If she does win states like IL by 20 points then it will

be impossible for Bernie to win, I agree.

But we're not there yet.

[DrDan]

32. Ill and NC also . . .

[DCBob]

36. After March 15 we have a number of big delegate states that will go Hillary...

4/5/2016 Wisconsin
4/19/2016 New York
4/26/2016 Maryland, Pennsylvania
6/7/2016 New Jersey, California

With wins in these states Bernie cant possibly catch up.

[alcibiades_mystery]

62. Bernie may win Wisconsin

Any of the others would be a big surprise.

[Number23]

11. Be it delegates, super delegates or overall votes, somebody is whipping somebody else's behind

[comradebillyboy]

13. I do believe Hillary is kicking a little ass and

She's got the big mo in Michigan and Florida. Just don't see Bernie gaining too much ground on her. There aren't that many delegates in Idaho, Montana and the other red states that support Bernie.

[Number23]

14. Agreed. PR is coming up and I have a feeling it like Hawaii, DC and other states with massive

non-white populations will go big for Clinton.

[surrealAmerican]

31. Wrong metaphor.

Your candidate may well win, but this is no landslide. Nobody's getting their "behind whipped".

This could be a problem, come the general election.

[stevenleser]

67. After 1100 pledged delegates allocated Hillary leads by 200

That is ass kicking territory.

[Number23]

97. She is killing him in minority votes, overall votes, pledged delegates, super delegates and states

won.

If that's not a butt whipping, then nothing is.

[DesertRat]

12. K&R

[peacebird]

44. Cluster bombs, fracking, Libya, IWR, so much to LOVE in collateral damages

And the KINdNESS of war

[lunamagica]

15. K&R. YEEESSSS!

[azurnoir]

16. oh you mean the Clinton version of the Southern Strategy

we'll call it the Southern Strategy 2.0

[BlueMTexpat]

34. What does that even mean

unless it is a snark?

[oasis]

19. The email crap behind her, Hillary's on a glide path to the nomination.

[NurseJackie]

71. +1

[mhatrw]

22. Her strategy? You mean to win only the Deep South, then say it's over?

[DCBob]

29. She will win the following: Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Ohio, New York, Maryland, Pennsylvania...

and more.

[mhatrw]

72. OK, but she hasn't done better than eke out a tie in anywhere but the South yet.

Even with the entire corporate media and Democratic party apparatus doing everything possible to shove her down our throats.

My God, she's a terrible candidate.

[kstewart33]

73. MA? Bernie outspent, outstaffed, and outworked her, and she still won. nt

[mhatrw]

98. She got a virtual tie, only because the Democratic machine pulled out all the stops for her in

the Boston metro area!

And the same is true for Nevada, where she won only because Harry Reid, the union bosses, and the casino bosses pulled out all the steps for her in Clark County (Las Vegas metro area).

[DCBob]

89. If she has the entire corporate media in her pocket...

then my goodness, that is absolutely the person we want to run up against the GOP!

[oasis]

94. Makes sense to me. (eom)

[mhatrw]

99. LOL. They don't care as long as a sold out Demopublican wins. nt

[obamanut2012]

48. I didn't know the Rust Belt was the Deep South

Or NY or PA for that matter.

Egg on my face! Thanks for the early-morning geography lesson!

[BlueMTexpat]

26. There may be more delegates to

award from LA, so Hillary's total may even be higher.

By my count, only 45 have been allocated. LA has 51 delegates. But perhaps they are kept "in reserve" or something. ???

[DCBob]

28. Another big step to the nomination and then on to the White House!

[Human101948]

46. With 50% plus negative approval?

I don't think there is a history of anyone with such high negatives sweeping into the White House.

[DCBob]

51. Trumps is worse.

Also once this fake email scandal if finally over then her numbers will go back up.

[Human101948]

54. She has an advantage over Trump, not so much Cruz...

And if the email dies down there will be another well-orchestrated "scandal" that will revive the negative vibe around her. Thirty years of attacks by the right have taken their toll.

The other troubling aspect is that she will not create a surge of enthusiasm amongst Democratic voters because she has been around too long. The incrementalism she is offering just isn't very exciting.

[DCBob]

61. The GE matchups are meaningless at this point.

The fake scandals will no doubt continue but the public is beginning to get wise to it.. most could care less about Benghazi or her server or the Foundation.

I think enthusiasm will build as we get closer to November when the choice become stark...do we want our first lunatic President or our first woman President?

[Human101948]

63. I also dismissed the Idiot Son of GHW Bush in 2000...

and look what happened.

[DCBob]

64. Gore was a weak candidate and he ran a poor campaign.

Not using Bill was a big mistake.

[72DejaVu]

53. Wy did you have to go back two months to find that graphic?

Oh yeah, because the trendiness have reversed since then.

[Human101948]

55. I think you are mistaken...

POLL CHART
Hillary Clinton Favorable Rating
Currently tracking 373 polls from 40 pollsters Updated about 18 hours ago FAQ

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

Latest Polls

POLLSTER DATES POP. FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE UNDECIDED MARGIN
Gallup NEW! 2/26 - 3/3 A 41 53 - Unfavorable +12

[DCBob]

65. Shorten the time frame and it shows her favs getting better.

I think as the fake email scandal fades so will her numbers improve.

[peacebird]

40. 457 to 663, hardly an insurmountable lead. Bernie is doing extremely well!

[Adrahil]

75. He is significantly lagging his targets.

Your definition of "extremely well" is kind of odd.

Where will he make up his deficit?

[peacebird]

77. Between now and the convention.

[Adrahil]

78. So....

Something like this. Gotcha.

[peacebird]

80. Something like that

Or we get a whole lot of super delegates the day indictments are announced in any one of three open ongoing investigations.

[DCBob]

93. You and the GOP are desperately hoping for an indictment to take Hillary out.

Pathetic. You and the GOP will be very disappointed.

[Trust Buster]

42. Depending on wins in small caucuses in predominantly white states will not win the day

for Bernie. When Hillary wins Ohio, Michigan and Illinois to go along with Massachusetts, these states will conveniently be re-categorized as "southern states". LOL

[obamanut2012]

43. Bernie's wins were in Cornbelt Red States, too

No way we'll win Nebraska and Kansas in the GE. Wis the Cornbelt contests were at the end of the primary season.

[Broward]

47. A clear path to victory for the oligarchs.

[pandr32]

79. She is doing better than her target--winning!

[basselope]

96. Her strategy of giving away the country to President Trump.