Joe has literally been in politics continuously for decades.Joe is probably just joking around.
He'll be close to 80 by then.
Tossing this in here since I imagine its of interest to this thread:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html
Basically, Republican elector has decided he won't vote for Trump, and unlike another recent example, won't chicken out either - he'll cast it for someone else.
per Politico, it's Kasich Club.MCMULLINMENTUM
IT HAS TO BE
The odds are probably about 0% that this comes to anything but hey, 0% odds are paying off pretty well this year.
However the GOP has majorities in 30 of 50 state delegations, so it will almost certainly come to nothing anyway.
per Politico, it's Kasich Club.
‏@wpjenna
Donald Trump's dinner plans: The 21 Club (again) with his wife, three oldest children and son-in-law.
Yawn. Tossing his vote at someone like Kasich does nothing but absolve his conscience while doing absolutely jackshit to do anything in real life. Like all the anti-Trump folks in Utah who voted McMullin, actively choosing not to take the action that would best deny the office to the person they hate.Tossing this in here since I imagine its of interest to this thread:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/o...-cast-my-electoral-vote-for-donald-trump.html
Basically, Republican elector has decided he won't vote for Trump, and unlike another recent example, won't chicken out either - he'll cast it for someone else.
That's not what's happening. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/electoral-college-rogues-trump-clinton-232195Yawn. Tossing his vote at someone like Kasich does nothing but absolve his conscience while doing absolutely jackshit to do anything in real life. Like all the anti-Trump folks in Utah who voted McMullin, actively choosing not to take the action that would best deny the office to the person they hate.
per Politico, it's Kasich Club.
I'm not sure how I feel about Democrats somehow giving Kasich the presidency. Maybe in the short term that's better than Trump, but it feels like it'd be terrible for the party in the longer term.
I'm not sure how I feel about Democrats somehow giving Kasich the presidency. Maybe in the short term that's better than Trump, but it feels like it'd be terrible for the party, and consequently America, in the longer term.
Yup.It's better for the country even if it's not good for the party.
It's better for the country even if it's not good for the party.
I guess...Trump is a near guarantee for long term harm than kasich could ever do.
I guess...
It'd be like Democrats straight up dying for Republicans' sins. Without a god to bring them back to life.
I'm not sure how I feel about Democrats somehow giving Kasich the presidency. Maybe in the short term that's better than Trump, but it feels like it'd be terrible for the party, and consequently America, in the longer term.
Doesn't matter.
We asked Republicans to put country over party and vote for Clinton over Trump.
When it's our term to put country over party, I would hope we'd do the same.
Trump saw the word "Urban" and was like "Yo where's my one black friend."WTF does Ben Carson know about housing and urban development?
WTF does Ben Carson know about housing and urban development?
Atleast it tastes better than trump vodkaKasich club sandwich
He grew up in a urban areaWTF does Ben Carson know about housing and urban development?
Doesn't matter.
We asked Republicans to put country over party and vote for Clinton over Trump.
When it's our term to put country over party, I would hope we'd do the same.
I suppose I would have to fall on that side, but damn it feels bad.between Trump and Kasich, at least Kasich knows he'd better off maintain stability than trying to cram his ego into international relations.
Pretty sure it's Toffany.Poor Tiffany.
Fuck. All.WTF does Ben Carson know about housing and urban development?
WTF does Ben Carson know about housing and urban development?
http://www.npr.org/2016/12/05/50442...son-to-run-hud-his-life-says-longtime-adviserNPR said:MARTIN: Well then let me ask you to flesh out some of Dr. Carson's resume. We, of course, know about his medical career, very successful surgeon. But what in his background prepares him for this particular post?
WILLIAMS: His life growing up in subsidized housing, growing up in poor communities, understanding what happens, that you can go into the communities and build houses all you want. In 10 years they could disappear if you don't have jobs and if you have the skills to take those jobs, if you know that opportunities to create jobs in those communities, he understands that vocational and technical skills are very important. And he also understands that a lot of people who may have an opportunity for these jobs, they have felony records. They have - they don't pass drug tests. And there are a lot of things that we just don't talk about enough that keep people from taking opportunities. And to Dr. Carson's understanding of education through the Carson scholarship, and he understands of how health is involved and - including mental health with people and opportunities and their self-esteem because they feel they lack opportunities.
His medical career has given him an extreme foundation. And also he's never been disconnected from these inner cities and these people who live these lives. Dr. Carson may have aspired to become a world-renowned pediatric surgeon and a presidential candidate, but he's never lost the human touch with people. And so when you have those kind of experiences and people that advise you and remind you and talk about issues and what works, he brings that experience with him to this position.
That's because "libertarians" vote with their wallets.I've been noticing that A LOT of "libertarians" voted for Trump. Which is funny considering that he's authoritarian. I've been kinda rubbing it in old people's faces that we can finally get rid of social security and medicare (while secretly and internally hoping for UBI some day) but now I can finally rub it in libertarian's faces that libertarianism is finally dead.
On January 3, 2017, Democrats will hold the majority in the Senate for a few minutes, until the newly-elected Senators are sworn in. Biden could convene the Senate in those few minutes and call for a vote. The majority could then suspend the rules and vote in Merrick Garland.
The key here is that VP Biden would have to be willing to convene the Senate and recognize Senator Dick Durbin instead of Mitch McConnell. Durbin moves to re-nominate Garland, and Senate Democrats then vote to confirm him. They will have a quorum for those few minutes.
It's bold. Garland would be confirmed by 34 Democrats and no Republicans.
This was my first reaction but then you remember that Republicans shut down the government and won the next two elections and I think I'd like to see Democrats have a spine here.yeah, that won't cause a shitstorm or anything
Yeah sure
Yeah sure
that would totally hold up
This was my first reaction but then you remember that Republicans shut down the government and won the next two elections and I think I'd like to see Democrats have a spine here.
Reality check
- Joe Biden isn't running in 2020
- The electoral college will select Donald Trump
- Garland will never be in the SC
- Podesta has a sex dungeon in his basement
they would. and people would protest for like 3 days and forget about it.My first reaction was, "This is ridiculous."
My second reaction was, "Republicans would totally do this if the situation was reversed."