Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

No they can.

McConnell isn't saving the filibuster because he doesn't have the vote. He's keeping it because that's his only defense against the bat shit crazy house. Don't fall for this narrative that some principled GOP senators are saving the filibuster because of some ideal.

The filibuster doesn't apply to the House. Most Republican senators also probably agree with what's coming out of the House. What is keeping the filibuster alive is that there is a small segment of Republicans (McCain, Hatch, Graham) who are not in step with the rest of the Republican Party, and see the need to side with the Democrats occasionally. The filibuster's survival depends on these Republicans continuing to see the Democrats as allies more often than they see them as opponents. This will not happen if the Democrats abuse the filibuster - there are, after all, a fair amount of things Trump and McCain probably agree on. If the Democrats try blocking those too often... they'll find themselves with no blocking power at all.

The GOP is going to try to incrementally enact a regressive agenda because the blowback will be too severe otherwise. Don't give them a inch. If they nuke the filibuster out of frustration, let's see how privatizes Medicare plays in the midterms.

The freedom caucus still exists and their agenda will destroy the GOP. Block everything and see if McConnell has the guts to give the freedom causus free reign.

This is just accelerationism - "make them fuck everyone and they'll all vote for us". When did we start accepting this as a credible theory in this thread?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Does Ruth have to recluse herself from any Trump administration cases due to her comments made a few months ago?

 

[Anoregon]

Does Ruth have to recluse herself from any Trump administration cases due to her comments made a few months ago?

I'm more concerned about her actually staying on the bench the next 4 years.

 

[Pyrokai]

I'm more concerned about her actually staying on the bench the next 4 years.

Yep......she should have retired in '14.

 

[faisal233]

The filibuster doesn't apply to the House. Most Republican senators also probably agree with what's coming out of the House. What is keeping the filibuster alive is that there is a small segment of Republicans (McCain, Hatch, Graham) who are not in step with the rest of the Republican Party, and see the need to side with the Democrats occasionally. The filibuster's survival depends on these Republicans continuing to see the Democrats as allies more often than they see them as opponents. This will not happen if the Democrats abuse the filibuster - there are, after all, a fair amount of things Trump and McCain probably agree on. If the Democrats try blocking those too often... they'll find themselves with no blocking power at all.



This is just accelerationism - "make them fuck everyone and they'll all vote for us". When did we start accepting this as a credible theory in this thread?

I know there is no filibuster in the house. The filibuster will keep the houses agenda from going to a vote in the Senate.

I disagree that this is accelerationism. Blocking the regressive GOP agenda isn't accelerationism, it's our party fighting for its ideals.

At the end of the day there is atleast a couple of GOP senators that won't vote for privatized Medicare and other batshit crazy ideas. Right now they can hide behind the dem filibuster. Once they vote no, they'll get primaried. It's a net win for us and the GOP still gets to enact their more moderate agenda.

I don't want accelerationism, I want us to stop fighting scared. There are huge fissures within the GOP, it's easy to be united in opposition, much harder to be united in governance.

 

[Plinko]

I know there is no filibuster in the house. The filibuster will keep the houses agenda from going to a vote in the Senate.

I disagree that this is accelerationism. Blocking the regressive GOP agenda isn't accelerationism, it's our party fighting for its ideals.

At the end of the day there is atleast a couple of GOP senators that won't vote for privatized Medicare and other batshit crazy ideas. Right now they can hide behind the dem filibuster. Once they vote no, they'll get primaried. It's a net win for us and the GOP still gets to enact their more moderate agenda.

I don't want accelerationism, I want us to stop fighting scared. There are huge fissures within the GOP, it's easy to be united in opposition, much harder to be united in governance.

This. All of it. It is time the democrats started playing politics. I want them to use the filibuster every chance they get.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

-all podcasts currently ruined because they are either depressingly post-election, naively pre-election, or actual election podcasts

-decide to listen to something really old instead

-randomly select episode of Dead Authors Podcast from 2012 with Nick Kroll as Jorge Luis Borges:

"So I was reading something from your leader, Donald Trump.."
[audience laughs]
Paul F Tompkins: "Well I would hesitate to call him our *leader*..."

-delete podcast app, cancel electricity

 

[Deleted member 231381]

This. All of it. It is time the democrats started playing politics. I want them to use the filibuster every chance they get.

If you think this is playing politics, you don't understand how to play politics. If the Democrats use the filibuster on *everything*, even small things, it will be eliminated for the next Senate session. Then, Trump and co. can put something absolutely horrific stuff through in 2018, and we really are fucked. If the Democrats pick their battles and make sure they always manage to use the filibuster on something where they can pick off a moderate Republican to go with them, the filibuster can survive until 2018. In 2018, the Democrats can then block everything, and hope they retake the Senate for 2019 so they aren't at risk of losing it again.

I'm not saying don't use the filibuster. I'm saying: be very careful when you use it. It needs to be used on the big stuff, and we need to make sure it is still around to be used in 2018. The filibuster survives only so long as moderate Republicans feel they need us. If we go nuts with it, they'll pick Trump over us. The Democrats are not in the same strategic position as the Republicans were; they can't expect to just mirror old Republican strategies and have them work.

 

[Ether_Snake]

Call me crazy but I increasingly feel that a coup is becoming likely in the US.

Imagine you are at te CIA or NSA and you know Russia is financing or influencing people like Duke, Flynn, etc., and the president. Let's say you are mounting a case with proofs, to start leakig this info the media and other agencies. You would know damn well that your time is running out and that eventually some folks would crack down on your department. Once the head appointee is replaced, it's all over, it would be nearly impossible to break other than wait for another party to win, and in this scenario anything goes, the elections might be completely rigged from here on out.

All of this is very possible right now. Everything is falling into place. The question is would any agency act to prevent that? Would the Pentagon?

I would not put the probabilities to zero anymore. I think it's actually likely if the nominations aren't balanced.

 

[faisal233]

Call me crazy but I increasingly feel that a coup is becoming likely in the US.

Imagine you are at te CIA or NSA and you know Russia is financing or influencing people like Duke, Flynn, etc., and the president. Let's say you are mounting a case with proofs, to start leakig this info the media and other agencies. You would know damn well that your time is running out and that eventually some folks would crack down on your department. Once the head appointee is replaced, it's all over, it would be nearly impossible to break other than wait for another party to win, and in this scenario anything goes, the elections might be completely rigged from here on out.

All of this is very possible right now. Everything is falling into place. The question is would any agency act to prevent that? Would the Pentagon?

I would not put the probabilities to zero anymore. I think it's actually likely if the nominations aren't balanced.

There will be no coup, that's crazy.

If there is something truly damaging, I can see that suddenly being leaked. But it will most likely be used to blackmail trump against going against our interests.

 

[richiek]

Anyone know if this is actually possible to carry out?


A Fair Election? Serious, Hard-to-Explain Questions Arise About Trump Vote Totals in 3 Key States
Voting rights advocates are scrambling to see if recounts are feasible in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

 

[studyguy]

Coup? Nah.

Severely partisan beyond... way beyond what we had before already? Sure.

 

[Frank the Great]

Call me crazy but I increasingly feel that a coup is becoming likely in the US.

Imagine you are at te CIA or NSA and you know Russia is financing or influencing people like Duke, Flynn, etc., and the president. Let's say you are mounting a case with proofs, to start leakig this info the media and other agencies. You would know damn well that your time is running out and that eventually some folks would crack down on your department. Once the head appointee is replaced, it's all over, it would be nearly impossible to break other than wait for another party to win, and in this scenario anything goes, the elections might be completely rigged from here on out.

All of this is very possible right now. Everything is falling into place. The question is would any agency act to prevent that? Would the Pentagon?

I would not put the probabilities to zero anymore. I think it's actually likely if the nominations aren't balanced.

I mean, no one gives a fuck that Russia and the FBI colluded to anoint Trump.

No one cares about any of this.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

I really want Obama to appoint Garland in the recess appointment.

Fuck the GOP. He needs to do this to save our country. The Supreme Court will be all the worse if he doesn't.

I also hope the 3 oldest Justices can hang on for four more years.....I just.....I am so afraid : (

Couldn't Trump just overturn the pick once he is sworn in?

 

[The Chosen One]

Also, when did Ed Shultz move over to RT? I haven't paid much attention to lefty media in a long while, but, I did used to listen to his show when I had Sirius. I know he went to MSNBC at some point and got dumped. But Russia Today? Jesus.

He's on Russian tv? Wow yeah he's really fallen off.

 

[Blader]

I read this somewhere else and I can't remember where or by who, so I'm just going to steal it and give anonymous credit to the original writer:

The problem with the inevitable scandals that emerge out of Trump's administration, whether due to his advisers, cabinet appointments or Trump himself (likely all three) is that Trump has no shame. He exhibits absolutely no shame, never admits wrongdoing, never accepts culpability or takes action to correct it. So what if Jeff Sessions is a KKK grand wizard? So what if Michael Flynn is taking money from Erdogan which influences U.S.-Turkish policy? So what if Pompeo wants to place all Muslim-Americans in a federal registry?

The media can call him out on it, Congressional Republicans can pretend to criticize it (or more likely, dodge the controversies entirely), Democrats and advocacy groups can scream into the void about the horror of it all. But Trump will never back down, will never force his people to resign, will never express blame or regret. His personality is incapable of it. He's going to absorb all that shit and press on it, deriding the attacks as false or the works of a failing liberal media or whatever else. As long as Congress and now the Supreme Court remain under conservative control, there are no mechanisms for recourse to hold Trump and his team accountable.

 

[boiled goose]

I really want Obama to appoint Garland in the recess appointment.

Fuck the GOP. He needs to do this to save our country. The Supreme Court will be all the worse if he doesn't.

I also hope the 3 oldest Justices can hang on for four more years.....I just.....I am so afraid : (

Obama should do this.
Fuck tradition. The GOP already crossed the line by not appointing a justice for so long.

 

[Frank the Great]

I read this somewhere else and I can't remember where or by who, so I'm just going to steal it and give anonymous credit to the original writer:

The problem with the inevitable scandals that emerge out of Trump's administration, whether due to his advisers, cabinet appointments or Trump himself (likely all three) is that Trump has no shame. He exhibits absolutely no shame, never admits wrongdoing, never accepts culpability or takes action to correct it. So what if Jeff Sessions is a KKK grand wizard? So what if Michael Flynn is taking money from Erdogan which influences U.S.-Turkish policy? So what if Pompeo wants to place all Muslim-Americans in a federal registry?

The media can call him out on it, Congressional Republicans can pretend to criticize it (or more likely, dodge the controversies entirely), Democrats and advocacy groups can scream into the void but the horror of it at all. But Trump will never back down, will never force his people to resign, will never blame or express regret. His personality is incapable of it. He's going to absorb all that shit and press on it, deriding the attacks as false or the works of a failing liberal media or whatever else. As long as Congress and now the Supreme Court remain under conservative control, there are no mechanisms for recourse or hold Trump and his team accountable.

Agreed. Trump's support is not going anywhere. It's difficult to imagine how ANY scandal could cause him to lose his supporters.

The upside is that Trump will be unable to win over any new supporters due to the constant scandals. Most of the country already hates him due to his behavior and if he keeps up the act, that won't change. Put up a better Democratic candidate in 2020 (someone who isn't historically disliked), and we have a real shot at a wave election.

 

[bigwinnerx]

He's on Russian tv? Wow yeah he's really fallen off.

The worst bit of this is that the TVs at the local 7-11 (Northern Virginia) have commercials from RT playing on them and that's how I found out about it.

Apparently Jesse Ventura and Larry King are there, too. What a mess.

 

[tedrotheredro]

What facts do we have on Russia's involvement with the cabinet members and the election? No speculation, just the facts.

Need I say more?

 

[Abinash117]

What facts do we have on Russia's involvement with the cabinet members and the election? No speculation, just the facts.

Flynn is really the only few that really is kind of for Russia, and probably was the one to convince him. Mike Pompeo as neoconish attitudes. Really doesn't like Iran and Muslims, and has criticized Russia in the past. But what they all share is a dislike towards Iran which is interesting.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Anyone know if this is actually possible to carry out?


A Fair Election? Serious, Hard-to-Explain Questions Arise About Trump Vote Totals in 3 Key States
Voting rights advocates are scrambling to see if recounts are feasible in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Alternet? Never heard of them

 

[BiggNife]

Agreed. Trump's support is not going anywhere. It's difficult to imagine how ANY scandal could cause him to lose his supporters.

The upside is that Trump will be unable to win over any new supporters due to the constant scandals. Most of the country already hates him due to his behavior and if he keeps up the act, that won't change. Put up a better Democratic candidate in 2020 (someone who isn't historically disliked), and we have a real shot at a wave election.

Yeah, this is the one upside. Trump's favorability is already at 43% and it's not going to go up.

I agree that most scandals probably won't hurt his base much. What WILL hurt him is if a) he can't get midwest jobs back and b) we go into a recession. And both of those things will most likely happen, so the pieces fall into place for 2020.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Yeah, this is the one upside. Trump's favorability is already at 43% and it's not going to go up.

I agree that most scandals probably won't hurt his base much. What WILL hurt him is if a) he can't get midwest jobs back and b) we go into a recession. And both of those things will most likely happen, so the pieces fall into place for 2020.

C) If any of a or b happens blame obama.

 

[DEO3]

Everyday I wake up and I still can't believe this is happening.

 

[gutter_trash]

What facts do we have on Russia's involvement with the cabinet members and the election? No speculation, just the facts.

asking questions?

 

[kirblar]

We are going to see a ton of fillibusters rights out of the gate on the Cabinet nominees.

 

[Grief.exe]

C) If any of a or b happens blame obama.

Blame the black man.

The last 70 years of Republican politics in a nut shell.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

That's some tasty looking bread in front of Jill Stein.

Spoiler

That's Stein, right?

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

Have to admit, transparent chairs are pretty cool

 

[kirblar]

That's some tasty looking bread in front of Jill Stein.

Spoiler

That's Stein, right?

Of course.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Blame the black man.

The last 70 years of Republican politics in a nut shell.

Why not? It's been done recently as of 4 years ago with gas prices rising due to the economy collapse of 2008

 

[Totakeke]

If you think this is playing politics, you don't understand how to play politics. If the Democrats use the filibuster on *everything*, even small things, it will be eliminated for the next Senate session. Then, Trump and co. can put something absolutely horrific stuff through in 2018, and we really are fucked. If the Democrats pick their battles and make sure they always manage to use the filibuster on something where they can pick off a moderate Republican to go with them, the filibuster can survive until 2018. In 2018, the Democrats can then block everything, and hope they retake the Senate for 2019 so they aren't at risk of losing it again.

I'm not saying don't use the filibuster. I'm saying: be very careful when you use it. It needs to be used on the big stuff, and we need to make sure it is still around to be used in 2018. The filibuster survives only so long as moderate Republicans feel they need us. If we go nuts with it, they'll pick Trump over us. The Democrats are not in the same strategic position as the Republicans were; they can't expect to just mirror old Republican strategies and have them work.

I have no strong opinions one way or another, but why are you talking like nuking the filibuster is something we must avoid and democrats should be held hostage to that.

 

[Gotchaye]

I have no strong opinions one way or another, but why are you talking like nuking the filibuster is something we must avoid and democrats should be held hostage to that.

Well, because the filibuster is the only tool the Democrats have to stop 50 Republicans in the Senate from doing whatever they want.

There's no hostage here. Either the Democrats filibuster what they can get away with and block some things or they try to filibuster everything and they end up blocking nothing. If a majority of Republicans in the Senate think the Democrats are being more annoying than useful then the filibuster's gone and the Democrats lose what influence they had.

 

[Totakeke]

Well, because the filibuster is the only tool the Democrats have to stop 50 Republicans in the Senate from doing whatever they want.

There's no hostage here. Either the Democrats filibuster what they can get away with and block some things or they try to filibuster everything and they end up blocking nothing. If a majority of Republicans in the Senate think the Democrats are being more annoying than useful then the filibuster's gone and the Democrats lose what influence they had.

Hence the accelerationism argument. GOP can't blame anyone anymore if there's no filibuster in place. There's no scapegoat for them to use if that's gone.

I'm not arguing for it, but I haven't seen that idea been thoroughly debunked, and we are here where some of that theory is going to be tested.

 

[Rebel Leader]

Jeff Sessions accepts Attorney General nomination

 

[B-Dubs]

Jeff Sessions accepts Attorney General

I think this was one of the things written about in Revelations. It was somewhere between the meteor and the seas turning to blood.

 

[Zackat]

Jeff Sessions accepts Attorney General

😭😭

 

[Veritigo_X]

Jeff Sessions accepts Attorney General nomination

Stay safe out there everyone... :/

 

[thepotatoman]

Gallup posted a new favorability poll yesterday. It's 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable. Up from 34% favorable before election.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/197576/trump-favorability-trails-presidents-elect.aspx

For comparison, here are Gallup's first approval ratings after each new president is inaugurated:

Reagan - 51%
Bush Sr. - 51%
Bush Jr. - 57%
Nixon - 59%
Carter - 66%
Obama - 67%
Eisenhower - 68%
Ford - 71%
Kennedy - 72%
Johnson - 78%
Truman - 87%

 

[Carpe Libertatem]

Gallup posted a new favorability poll yesterday. It's 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable. Up from 34% favorable before election.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/197576/trump-favorability-trails-presidents-elect.aspx

For comparison, here are Gallup's first approval ratings after each new president is inaugurated:

Reagan - 51%
Bush Sr. - 51%
Bush Jr. - 57%
Nixon - 59%
Carter - 66%
Obama - 67%
Eisenhower - 68%
Ford - 71%
Kennedy - 72%
Johnson - 78%
Truman - 87%

So do a good chunk of the people who voted for him disapprove? Or different methodology in terms of people asked, I guess.

Either way, this is laughably bad since it's supposed to be one of a president's high point.

 

[jtb]

The GOP senate would be smart to keep the filibuster intact. Keeps the blood off of their hands, and I think they know it. The cost will be steep, though... SCOTUS (obviously) at minimum

 

[htttpwwwyahoocom]

It's 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable. Up from 34% favorable before election.

Appoints an anti-Semite, white supremacist as chief strategist and his approvals go up 8 points. Good grief.

Probably will jump up another 8 points with KKK Sessions, Torture Pompeo, and Russia's favorite general Flynn.

 

[Frank the Great]

Gallup posted a new favorability poll yesterday. It's 42% favorable, 55% unfavorable. Up from 34% favorable before election.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/197576/trump-favorability-trails-presidents-elect.aspx

For comparison, here are Gallup's first approval ratings after each new president is inaugurated:

Reagan - 51%
Bush Sr. - 51%
Bush Jr. - 57%
Nixon - 59%
Carter - 66%
Obama - 67%
Eisenhower - 68%
Ford - 71%
Kennedy - 72%
Johnson - 78%
Truman - 87%

But did they poll the silent majority.

 

[Mike M]

Appoints an anti-Semite, white supremacist as chief strategist and his approvals go up 8 points. Good grief.

Probably will jump up another 8 points with KKK Sessions, Torture Pompeo, and Russia's favorite general Flynn.

Christ, this fucking country. I just fucking can't deal.

 

[Frank the Great]

So do a good chunk of the people who voted for him disapprove? Or different methodology in terms of people asked, I guess.

Either way, this is laughably bad since it's supposed to be one of a president's high point.

Many who voted for him don't like him. They just hated and feared Hillary more (white privilege, lol). These voters can be recaptured.

Appoints an anti-Semite, white supremacist as chief strategist and his approvals go up 8 points. Good grief.

Probably will jump up another 8 points with KKK Sessions, Torture Pompeo, and Russia's favorite general Flynn.

Just Republicans coming home and being happy that they won everything. 42% is basically the base.

 

[eBay Huckster]

fwiw that's a smaller post-election bounce than Obama, who went from 60% immediately pre-election to 70%

 

[teiresias]

Appoints an anti-Semite, white supremacist as chief strategist and his approvals go up 8 points. Good grief.

Probably will jump up another 8 points with KKK Sessions, Torture Pompeo, and Russia's favorite general Flynn.

Probably has more to do with people who support him actually "approving" since he managed to win. Approvals prior to the election baked in some supporters thinking he was losing. I doubt these appointments are registering with most people, frankly. Still horrible for a president-elect at this point anyway.

 

[Gotchaye]

Hence the accelerationism argument. GOP can't blame anyone anymore if there's no filibuster in place. There's no scapegoat for them to use if that's gone.

I'm not arguing for it, but I haven't seen that idea been thoroughly debunked, and we are here where some of that theory is going to be tested.

I mean, sure, if you want the Republicans to pass whatever they want, then obviously you don't care about the filibuster.

 

[Averon]

I can see Trump going into 2020 with approvals in the 30s. At that point I wonder if the establishment GOP primary him.