-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
- Status
Anoregon
The flight plan I just filed with the agency list me, my men, Dr. Pavel here. But only one of you!
I'm still incredibly skeptical that Paul, Graham, or really anyone will disagree with Trump when it actually matters (IE, with their vote). It would only take a few holdouts siding with the dems to block some of these atrocious appointments, but they are going to remember their constituents don't want them to ever work with those dirty fucking liberals and come home to Jesus like they always do.
Truly the darkest of the dankest dank timelines.
At least we have the decency to bury him.
Freaking Newt Gingrich is at the front of his party again.
newshinycd
Member
I wouldn't put it past them to outright repeal the ACA without a replacement plan. I feel as if they ultimately won't and will blame Democrats or Obama for not being able to repeal it. The ACA groundwork started even before Obama was elected into office with the Healthy Americans Act (S. 334
Has the GOP even started on an actual bill for their "replacement" or is it just a bunch of bullet points on a memo?
It may just end up like the debt ceiling debacle. GOP will quietly back away from using it as a talking point and hope that their base forgets about repealing it.
Fragamemnon
Member
lord have mercy if the GOP tried to do a national ID card
RustyNails
Member
That will be the biggest expansion of federal government in years. Ryan will kill it in his sleep.
balladofwindfishes
Member
This would never, ever, ever pass, ever. Americans would NEVER go with this and the GOP would fracture their base over this because it would be a massive government overreach.
Paul certainly will disagree with Trump on foreign policy/civil liberties stuff. He just got reelected so he doesn't have to deal with any backlash for six years.
Dominican Power
Member
Paul Ryan is a POS.
Ok guys so I've been reading up on the Supreme Court and how it amends or overrules previous court decisions. My concern is specifically Roe v. Wade. The right case needs to come up and be accepted to be considered by the courts, correct? So if neither of those things happen, it's safe even with a super majority conservative court?
excelsiorlef
Member
All it would take is a law specfically tailored to trigger a Supreme Court trial.
It won't happen until they get a second new SC judge though, the numbers aren't there so long as the Kennedy Swing Firewall is still in place
But after that all bets are off imo.
Also nuke the filibuster and game over.
There is no reason to be optimistic about the Supreme Court except if everyone holds on until 2020.
UltimaPooh
Member
Again. All nominees and lower judicial appointments only need a simple majority.
Legislation and Supreme Court nominees need a super majority to break any filibuster.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
It can. We said trump will never be elected.
Stop saying that it will never happen.
It is happening
Randolph Freelander
Member
Still with this fantasy world where Republicans pay a political price for anything.
They block Obama at every turn, get rewarded with the House. The take the nation to the brink of default multiple times, get our credit rating reduced, shut down the government, and get rewarded with the Senate. They nominate an unqualified, infantile bully who runs on a campaign of racism and xenophobia and get rewarded with the Presidency.
They can repeal the ACA on January 20. They'll keep the house and Senate in 2018, probably expand their margins. If it doesn't happen 3 days before the election, it might as well not happen.
They block Obama at every turn, get rewarded with the House. The take the nation to the brink of default multiple times, get our credit rating reduced, shut down the government, and get rewarded with the Senate. They nominate an unqualified, infantile bully who runs on a campaign of racism and xenophobia and get rewarded with the Presidency.
They can repeal the ACA on January 20. They'll keep the house and Senate in 2018, probably expand their margins. If it doesn't happen 3 days before the election, it might as well not happen.
The Court usually proceeds cautiously, but it can ultimately do what it wants, when it wants (when cases are brought).
They don't care. They're so drunk with power right now that they're going to govern with a shoot first and ask questions later mentality. I have no confidence in them to do anything remotely practical even if it hurts them.
They're almost at a point where if they keep winning elections they can flirt with amending the constitution. Dems cannot afford to keep losing.
This isn't just a dark period for the US. There's a disturbing far-right political wave blanketing the western world.
metalslimer
Member
I don't see what good a national Id does the GOP.
The process of getting them all out would take years and cost a lot of money and time. I could see their own voters being annoyed.
The process of getting them all out would take years and cost a lot of money and time. I could see their own voters being annoyed.
RastaMentality
Banned
I'm really scared about a proposed English as Official language bill being passed too. Hopefully California can properly protect people from this shit.
IggyChooChoo
Member
I despise Rand Paul and McConnell but I am their constituent. Do you think it would help if I harassed their offices about holding the line on deficits? That seems to be the big potential fault line to exploit, right?
Who's in Presidency determines a lot. Average Joe doesn't get why nothing gets done because (broad generalisation) Average Joe doesn't understand branches of government. So, nothing passing during Obama's second term is Obama and the Dem's fault - he's a Democrat, and he's president, and they're in charge, right? But nothing getting better when Trump and the GOP are in charge means it's Trump and the GOP's fault. Because they're in charge.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
If the prevailing wisdom becomes that the Supreme Court is ready to overturn Roe v Wade, a case will be presented in short order.
It's a benefit in identifying "illegals" and legally keeping them out of jobs (think an SSN card with a picture being required to work) but it's a drawback when it comes to voting. Unless states don't recognize the national ID as a voting ID if it lacks an address, in which case, there's no much of a drawback.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Yes
This is how it works. We've been used to the last 8 years. But once the GOP is in full power 100% of the responsibility falls to them. There is nobody they can successfully point the blame at.
They are held accountable when they're actually in charge. That's how it works. The populace holds the president's party accountable for the country.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
I'm trying to think about and identify the unrecoverable actions that Trump cannot be allowed to accomplish (ignoring the impact of the election itself on culture/politics). You could fill a library with all the damaging things Trump could do, but as I see it, there are only three major problems that cannot be easily reversed but which Trump has said he plans to do.
Having the court swing back to 5-4 sucks but we've been there for a long time and Kennedy still crosses the line frequently enough. If you don't want ties then the closest you can get to balance is what we had, someone has to be the minority. What's disastrous is that Trump will likely replace Ginsburg and Breyer if he gets two terms. The good news is that this is preventable because it's unlikely they will die/retire in the next two or four years, so liberals will have multiple elections to try to take back the Senate/Presidency.
In terms of climate change the world is finally starting to work together and now here comes Trump to throw a wrench in the whole thing. The good news is that China has signaled its willingness to pressure Trump on this point (and on trade as well), and I am optimistic that the global community will be able to convince Trump not to derail existing agreements. Will he move quickly on enacting those agreements? No, but it's not like global warming denial was a centerpiece of his campaign like immigration or trade, so I expect him to be more willing to let it go forward.
I'm not trying to say he wouldn't or couldn't do a whole host of other terrible things, but in terms of long-term damage and inability to correct/reverse them, I think these are the worst outcomes we're looking at.
- Climate Change
- Supreme Court
- Economy
Having the court swing back to 5-4 sucks but we've been there for a long time and Kennedy still crosses the line frequently enough. If you don't want ties then the closest you can get to balance is what we had, someone has to be the minority. What's disastrous is that Trump will likely replace Ginsburg and Breyer if he gets two terms. The good news is that this is preventable because it's unlikely they will die/retire in the next two or four years, so liberals will have multiple elections to try to take back the Senate/Presidency.
In terms of climate change the world is finally starting to work together and now here comes Trump to throw a wrench in the whole thing. The good news is that China has signaled its willingness to pressure Trump on this point (and on trade as well), and I am optimistic that the global community will be able to convince Trump not to derail existing agreements. Will he move quickly on enacting those agreements? No, but it's not like global warming denial was a centerpiece of his campaign like immigration or trade, so I expect him to be more willing to let it go forward.
I'm not trying to say he wouldn't or couldn't do a whole host of other terrible things, but in terms of long-term damage and inability to correct/reverse them, I think these are the worst outcomes we're looking at.
excelsiorlef
Member
Exactly
There's going to be something that the GOP tries to pull in the next 4 or maybe 8 years that a lot of people get pissed off at like what the Progressive Conservatives in Alberta Canada tried before they got kicked out of power(one of the thing they tried to do was that they tried to get rid of a political party in a legal way and voters got pissed off at them). Even stephen harper and the conservatives tried stuff with their majority government from 2011-2015 that pissed people off.
whyamihere
Banned
fucking lol on both sides
fucking lol on both sides
What a bunch of muppets.
fucking lol on both sides
So trump's win changed people's perceptions about the economy. Lol.
Randolph Freelander
Member
Y'all have more confidence in the electorate than I do. I had a little confidence before, but then Trump happened.
In an unbalanced world where the right wing doesn't need to worry about facts, it seems so hopeless. You have Fox News and friends punching hard at the left, and you have mainstream media trying to equivocate. The scales are tilted.
In an unbalanced world where the right wing doesn't need to worry about facts, it seems so hopeless. You have Fox News and friends punching hard at the left, and you have mainstream media trying to equivocate. The scales are tilted.
It may not make it through to a decision for a couple of years, but that's peanuts in Court time.
Plus there are probably a number of big cases "ready to go" on a variety of topics on both sides which were awaiting the election and a nominee.
So what happens when the economy doesn't get better?fucking lol on both sides
Or alternatively, gets better without actually bringing in the jobs everyone was talking about?
They should leave Obamacare exactly the same and just called it Trumpcare.
Why? 7 million voters that voted for Obama that didn't vote this time still exist. Swing voters that hate the "Clinton" name still exist. I'm less worried about the electorate and more with the representatives they've given power.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
It doesn't matter what actually happens to the economy as a broad concept.
If people lose their jobs, they will be upset.
The economy has been recovering very nicely for 8 years and yet many think it is in the dumps. A big shock is all that will change embedded opinions.
Nazgul_Hunter
Member
At the very least this would give the Dems a HUGE opening to make gains in the house in 2018; provided they get their shit together (still tbd imo).
excelsiorlef
Member
It'll take time but that's all it'll really take once the court is stacked
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Fox News: "Obama recession?"
The fact that Hillary won the popular vote is proof the electorate isn't hopeless.
If (more like when) Trump fucks up on one of his campaign promises, he will lose some support, enough to tip the scales. Bush Sr won on a massive landslide and then the electorate completely turned against him when it turned out he actually couldn't stop new taxes.
excelsiorlef
Member
Veritigo_X
Member
This is really good. I'm going to print a few to hang up, though there are a TON of flyers in my area (which is great).
Other Poligaffers should hang some up too.
Rand Paul was probably the most civil person at the debates, and I doubt there's any love lost between him and Trump.
This will 100% happen but in the event of a recession people are still going to expect the Trump administration to fix things (which they won't). There are a lot of low-information voters that voted for Obama and Trump that will swing back if things go south because they're the type who blame the government for everything regardless of parties. We have over two hundred years of people blaming the government as evidence.
Yes, do it. We have to use every tool at our disposal and elected officials hate having angry consitituents.
Did not know this.
Source? I'm not disbelieving, just interested in seeing the numbers.
"We have this new, big, beautiful plan ready to replace Obamacare. What a disaster that's been. The name of this new plan is the Affordable Care Act. It's going to be amazing people. Believe me."
- Status