It was published in the The Telegraph-Herald and Times-Journal (Dubuque, Iowa) on 24 March 1935. Under the title "Ex-President's Letter Makes Tongues Wage"
It consists of 938 words in 37 paragraphs.
First, Hoover served as President (March 4, 1929 March 4, 1933).
What is happening now with TFG seems reminiscence of that time period.
The letter by Hoover was a criticism of Roosevelt's New Deal.
Excerpts (Since it is not over 95 years old I don't believe I can include the whole article.)
Still Party Head
The following unless in quotes are rewritten from article.
One Republican senator stated, "I have no comment to make upon anything that gentleman might have to say."
Another Republican senator that had supported Hoover twice said, "I feel sorry for him. He once tasted power and failed. He dreams of coming back. It is only a dream."
Comments by Democrats
They generally agreed they would like nothing better than to see another Roosevelt-Hoover contest in 36.
"I want to talk about live subjects." he said, "not dead ones."
"Mr. Hoover certainly ought to know a sink when he sees one. for he led us into one."
Below are the Republicans that signed the fake elector documents. I included any additional detail about the person and what district they represented. Was not able to completely do that though.
Nancy Cottle (Chair)
Loraine B. Pellegrino (Secretary)
Tyler Bowyer (COO Turning Point USA)
Jake Hoffman (Representative Hoffman)
Anthony T. Kern
Samuel I Moorhead
Dr. Kelli Ward
Dr. Michael Ward
Signed also by 22 Republican state lawmakers
David J Shafer (Republican Party Chair)
Shawn Still (Secretary)
James "Ken" Carroll
Vikki Townsend Consiglio
Carolyn Hall Fisher
Hon Burt Jones (CJ Pearson - No Show)
Gloria Kay Godwin
David G. Hanna
Mark W. Hennessy
Mark Amick (Patrick Gartland - No Show)
John Downey (John A Isakson - No Show)
Cathleen Alston Latham
Brad Carver (Susan Holmes - No Show)
Kathy Berden (Chair)
Mayra Rodriguez (Secretary)
Marian Sheridan (MIGOP Grassroots Vice Chair)
James Renner (James Renner - No Show)
Ken Thompson (Terri Lynn Land - No Show - Former Secretary of State)
New Mexico (5)
Jewll Powdrell (Chair)
Deborah W Maestas (Secretary)
Anissa Ford-Tinnin (Harvey Yates - No Show)
Michael J McDonald (Chair)
James DeGraffenreid (Secretary)
Duward James Hindle III
Bill Bachenberg (Chair)
Lisa Patton (Secretary)
Tom Carroll (Robert Asher - No Show)
Sam DeMarco III
Christie DiEsposti (Robert Gleason - No Show)
Charlie Gerow (Thomas Marino - No Show)
Leah Hoopos (Lawrence Tabas - No Show)
Andre McCoy (Christine Toretti - No Show)
Suk Smith (Carolyn Welsh - No Show)
Kevin Harley (Lance Stange - No Show)
Andrew Hitt (At Large Chair)
Kelly Ruh (8 Secretary)
Carol Brunner (1)
Edward Scott Grabins (2)
Bill Feehan (3)
Robert F Spindell Jr (4)
Kathy Kiernen (5 Tom Schreibel - No Show)
Darryl Carlson (6)
Pam Travis (7)
Mary Buestrin (At Large)
Votes Trump won by in following states:
By less than 1%
Michigan -- 10,704
Pennsylvania -- 44,292
Wisconsin -- 22,748
Less than 5%
Arizona -- 91,234
Florida -- 112,911
North Carolina -- 173,315
Less than 10%
Georgia -- 211,141
Iowa -- 147,314
Ohio -- 446,841
Texas -- 807,179
Some or all of these states could be won by Biden.
In 2016, Hillary could had won any of the above states if the vote difference was 50% +1. As an example. she did not need all 10,704 votes that went to Trump to go to her. She only needed 5,353 of those votes.
There will be many that voted Republican in 2016 that either not vote, vote for Biden, or someone else. For the no vote or other vote Trump will have a negative 1 vote difference. BUT for any that vote for Biden that is a 2 vote differential. As an example. Trump 10 Biden 10 --> Trump 9 Biden 11.
You know if Trump saw this he would say Biden is stealing the votes.
Even though the outcome won't change the votes still need to be counted.
Clinton : 2,128,194
Others : 36,103
--Total : 3,817,713
Election Results on June 23
Clinton : 2,582,052 (+ 453,858)
Sanders: 2,137,532 (+ 484,116)
--Total: 4,762,629 (Increased 944,916)
1,506,952 -- Mail
717,862 -- Provisional
78,825 -- Other
2,303,639 -- Totals
Unprocessed ballots as of June 22
176,546 -- Mail
474,233 -- Provisional
29,699 -- Other
680,478 -- Totals
Total processed since June 13
1,330,406 -- Mail
243,629 -- Provisional
49,126 -- Other
1,623,161 -- Totals (678,245 not included in Democratic count)
1,741,297 -- Republican
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]32,399 -- American Independent
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]10,943 -- Green
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]22,971 -- Libertarian
[font color="white"]x,xx[/font]3,847 -- Peace and Freedom
1,811,457 -- Totals not including Dems
2,119,442 -- Republican
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]38,916 -- American Independent
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]13,607 -- Green
[font color="white"]x,x[/font]28,709 -- Libertarian
[font color="white"]x,xx[/font]4,669 -- Peace and Freedom
2,205,343 -- Totals not including Dems
393,886 -- Votes since June 12 not including Dems
284,359 -- Not included Numbers are totals of all 58 counties.
Ratio of the 1,623,161 processed votes
58.2% -- Democratic ballots
23.3% -- Republican ballots
00.9% -- Third Party ballots
17.5% -- Not included
60% of the remaining 680,478 unprocessed ballots is 408,286.
Rough split of remaining votes without knowing who benefits county by county.
Clinton: 329,351 -- Sanders: 351,127
Though Hillary supported her husbands trade agreements, as Senator of New York, the only trade agreement Hillary ever had the opportunity to vote on was CAFTA [Central American Trade Agreement]. Hillary voted *AGAINST* CAFTA. This important fact is often overlooked by the media and Im not sure why.
Let us also remember President Obama, Vice President Biden, *AND* Bernie Sanders evolved on gay marriage. Bernie officially evolved on gay marriage in 2009. For Hillary to be vilified for her gay marriage evolution more than her male counterparts is the very definition of sexism. It is also proof Karl Rove is hurting Hillary among the very people that should be enthusiastically supporting her:
It might be a good idea to bookmark this to help rebut accusations against Hillary Clinton.
But aspects of it began to unravel soon after it first went online. The first major change was this: It wasnt really Mrs. Clinton directly who was the focus of the request for an investigation. It was more general: whether government information was handled improperly in connection with her use of a personal email account.
Much later, The Times backed off the startling characterization of a criminal inquiry, instead calling it something far tamer sounding: it was a security referral.
The writers responsible for the inaccuracies were Michael S Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo.
NY Times Public Editor: Clinton Email Story Had "Major Journalistic Problems" That Damaged The Paper's Reputation
On July 23, the Times published a story by Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo claiming that two federal inspectors general had requested a "criminal" referral about whether Clinton had sent classified information via a personal email server. Over the next few days, the paper revised the story numerous times, pulling back on several of its main allegations. In the most recent version of the story, the criminal allegation has been removed, as has the impression that Clinton herself was personally under a probe.
Strike Two for Pair of New York Times Reporters
He had a pet peeve. "That the superdelegates haven't cast a vote yet. Neither have the pledged delegates. The pledged delegates are pledged to do that. Superdelegates pledged to do that too. By the way nobody has cast a vote."
The first group when not identified are delegates from states that have not completed their primary election.
Representatives (11 out of 173)
MT Steve Bullock
NJ Donald Norcross
GA Sanford Bishop
HI David Ige
IN Pete Visclosky
MN Betty McCollum
OR Peter DeFazio
TX Beto O'Rourke
WI Mark Pocan
CA Barbara Lee
FL Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Senators (4 out of 47)
MT Jon Tester
VT Patrick Leahy
Governors (2 out of 21)
Distinguished Party Leaders (4 out of 20)
GA Jimmy Carter
TN Al Gore
MD Joe Andrew
FL Kenneth M Curtis
There are 103 DNC members not committed out of 296.
On the other side of the age divide, Clintons lead was no less impressive. She led by 56%-32% among white voters over 50, 69%-16% among older Latinos and 64%-20% among older minority voters.
The same generational splits were visible when it came to gender: Clinton led by 33 points among women over 50 and by 31 points among older men. But Sanders led by 31 points among younger men and 25 points among younger women.
Clintons campaign has been careful not to over-emphasize the historic nature of her candidacy, but she is reaping some benefit nonetheless. Among likely Democratic primary voters, two-thirds of men had a favorable view of her, while 76% of women shared that view. (Three-quarters of both men and women had a favorable impression of Sanders.)
Younger voters tend not to turnout as older voters do. Voters over 60 tend to voted 70%.
Using only states and territories that have completed their elections.
Other : 1,409,811
Total : 29,990,756
Clinton : 13,368,151 (- 1,080,780)*
Sanders: 10,445,793 (- 3,686,221)*
Other : 439,979 (- 969,832)*
Total : 24,253,923 (- 5,736,833)*
* (vote difference between 2008 and 2016)
Profile InformationGender: Do not display
Current location: NE Indiana
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 48,597