So he's either secretary for a couple of months before launching his campaign or doesn't run at all.
-
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
whyamihere
Banned
There are also other Republicans in Montana to run.
RustyNails
Member
Wait you're right. It's the other way around
I was under the impression that was an option so I was spending the DMs. UGH!! Well good thing we had this conversation otherwise I'd have been a dead fool.Will it even matter if he raises a billion dollar?The recent US election and a few elections in the last couple of years in other countries like Canada have shown that a candidate or a political party can raise a ton of money and still lose.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Good thing for us, none of them have the same appeal as a congressman.
Tester will basically be running against a generic R, whoever his opponent is if not Zinke.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Why would anyone reasonable reinstall people who helped cause problems and failed their way up into positions of power? People are tired of incompetence and catastrophic mistakes by the current establishment.
The answer to your question is so obvious, whether you agree with it or not, that I have to assume this isn't a sincere question.
shinra-bansho
Member
They're both pretty lacking so far as track record of accomplishment and becoming noteworthy despite that.
TheLaughingStock
Member
If we pretend the Obama administration tried to clean house in terms of personnel, then failed to clean up the mess left by ideologues within the Clinton and Bush administrations...you think people would reinstall the same people who made egregious mistakes? Many Americans are gullible but give people a bit more credit.
Have you guys seen this?
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-electors-lessig-232598
I don't know how reliable Lessig's word is, but it makes me wonder, if something major happened like giving the electors that intelligence briefing, Trump could actually be blocked. 20 faithless electors would already be unprecedented and this is 2016.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-electors-lessig-232598
I don't know how reliable Lessig's word is, but it makes me wonder, if something major happened like giving the electors that intelligence briefing, Trump could actually be blocked. 20 faithless electors would already be unprecedented and this is 2016.
I really shouldn't be getting my hopes up, there's probably a better chance of Trump having a heart attack before the inauguration.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Oh my.. I never would think even double digits would be possible
Only 6 days left though.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Enouch for trump to do something with in that time frame
Right, if they don't do it soon it's probably too late. Either that or they're planning to do it the day before so any outrage will be fresh and unlikely to be mitigated by Trump.
Update on my dad (Hardcore Republican, "Constitutionalist")
Loves every pick on Trump's cabinet. When asked and pressed on whether Trump has made a single mistake since election night,
"Not yet."
Cited Tillerson's connection to oil and Russia as good things, calling him the "as qualified as any other Secretary of State we've had" due to his 35 years in international business.
When I responded by calling Clinton the most qualified presidential candidate ever, he asked, "what experience," mockingly, then brushed it off.
So yeah, while I won't say all of his voters are loving this, but there are certainly some out there that are.
Loves every pick on Trump's cabinet. When asked and pressed on whether Trump has made a single mistake since election night,
"Not yet."
Cited Tillerson's connection to oil and Russia as good things, calling him the "as qualified as any other Secretary of State we've had" due to his 35 years in international business.
When I responded by calling Clinton the most qualified presidential candidate ever, he asked, "what experience," mockingly, then brushed it off.
So yeah, while I won't say all of his voters are loving this, but there are certainly some out there that are.
GregLombardi
Member
The realization that business interests significantly conflict with the interests of society in general, when it comes, will be glorious and apocalyptic at the same time.
The horror.
exmachina64
Banned
Both of them need to win elected office; people gave up on Castro because it doesn't look like he's going anywhere in that regard.
There certainly are, sorry you have to deal with that.
And for some, that realization will never occur.
Let's not forget, there are many in society that would love for there to be no safety net and for society/government to be run as a business.
GregLombardi
Member
Oh no, it will be realized. When everyone has lost all their wealth and ability to survive at the expense of business. Whether that comes in the form of a terrorist attack, an economic attack, or in just a complete collapse of the world economy, it will be realized. It will just be completely inconvenient for basically everyone.
exmachina64
Banned
Eunuchs for Trump
radios shipping overview
Member
I guess there's a sizable portion of the population that needed to have this demonstrated for them, because lately they've shown that they've got short and/or selective memories about this kind of thing. Hopefully people will figure it out before 2020 (or 2018)...
JesseEwiak
Member
They'll just blame the immigrants/Muslims/women/liberals/elite and line up behind the guy with the biggest guns.
Got the Shakes
Member
Wait. Trump actually said he thought he was going to lose because the polls said he was behind? I thought he didn't believe in polls?
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...m=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-politics
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...m=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-politics
Pretty sure a lot of who you're talking about have already arrived at this conclusion, but they see it as a feature, not a bug. They're just trying to get themselves into that business class that can exist distinctly from society and general social risk.
As long as Bernie doesn't do something crazy, this shouldn't happen. But even if it does, the focus should be on 2018 and Reps/Senate 2020. The Dem base needs to be woke to how much outsize power the legislative branches wield, especially when partisan politics and outright hatred are used to block things that are an objective good.
Genuinely, if you're worried, donate to good causes and look at volunteering at your local DNC office.
(Side-note: Wife is applying for a job in Washington DC. If she gets it, I'm volunteering for the Dems like a fucking shot.
)Day before seems a) like a good tactical maneuver, and b) likely considering how much shit is piling-up. Not that I consider it a likely scenario, no matter how much I want it, but day before is the time to do it.
Plus, 2016 seems to be the year of whattheactualfuck surprises, so... *crosses fingers*
Lord_Byron28
Member
Wait Trump is said to be considering Fiorina for director of national intelligence? I somehow missed this bit of news. With each Trump pick it gets more depressing as he goes with the worst candidates possible for the positions.
It's like he's asking to get kicked the fuck out of office lmao
That's kind of scarily believable. It's a much bigger story to have been kicked out rather than voluntarily stepping down because it was going to cut into business too much.
Lord_Byron28
Member
Given how terrible his cabinet picks are. I can't imagine how horrifying his SC nominations will be. Republicans better just confirm Garland. He is a moderate pick and even now they have to be starting to realize how much worse Trump's picks will be.
What???
The GOP is loving the trump picks, they won't accept anything less than Scalia 2.0
Officerrob
Banned
You cannot believe anything Trump says at any point. Before, now, whatever
Aaron Strife
Banned
"Gave up" on Castro because he's stuck in a deeply red state with no easy way to ascend. The HUD position seemed like an attempt to fix this, but he always looked better on paper than in practice.
Granted, Kander was also stuck in a deeply red state - and came very close to winning in a year where the top of the ticket got blown out by nearly 20 points. If Castro pulled it off in Texas he would easily shoot to the top of most peoples' shortlist.
My position is quite clear, if a candidate in the Democratic Party wants to be taken seriously they need to have won a statewide race, specifically Senator or Governor. Kander is great, but if he never rises above Missouri Secretary of State, oh well.
Beer Monkey
Member
Regarding the SC, the Republicans are looking for three things first, as they have to get them to avoid losing their power as the nation's demographics shift. They are going to be looking at retaining power as their top priority.
1) Reduce the number of immigrants. (blacklists for "muslim" countries)
2) Make it harder to vote. (think voter id).
3) Make votes from liberals count less (think gerrymandering)
Whoever Trump nominates for the Supreme Court will help them here. Garland will not.
Out of self-preservation, I am certain almost all of them care more about these three things than any kind of climate change position, abortion rights, and so on. They'll kiss Trump's butt if it will help them hold power longer.
Officerrob
Banned
This is all good, until conservatives take control of the Supreme Court...
benjipwns
Banned
The local ones?look at volunteering at your local DNC office.
(Side-note: Wife is applying for a job in Washington DC. If she gets it, I'm volunteering for the Dems like a fucking shot.
Obama has been appointing lower court judiciary throughout his office, and let's remember that cases need to be kicked-up the court system, right? Also, the interesting thing about the Oklahoma decision there is that it was ruled unconstitutional at both the State level, and at the Federal level.
Not saying there's nothing to worry about, obviously, but it's not as simple as just appointing an anti-abortion SCOTUS judge. Even a conservative-leaning member may not feel the law can be changed, depending upon the specific argument and case presented.
Yeah? Not looked to deeply into it just yet (don't see much point until she gets offered the job), so will see.
benjipwns
Banned
Easy, the Democrats can just raise a billion and a half and...oh...
Lucky Forward
Member
Bernie Sanders Shows A Trump Voter How They Actually See Eye To Eye http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-town-hall_us_5850445de4b0bd9c3dff2d91
And yet she voted for Trump. I guess this is what a complete lack of critical thinking skills has done to a large portion of the adult population. This is so depressing yet infuriating at the same time. How can you be so fucking stupid?
And yet she voted for Trump. I guess this is what a complete lack of critical thinking skills has done to a large portion of the adult population. This is so depressing yet infuriating at the same time. How can you be so fucking stupid?
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Soory, i was on my phone andbi hate the keyboard
Carpe Libertatem
Member
Yeah? Not looked to deeply into it just yet (don't see much point until she gets offered the job), so will see.
You should probably look into the Virginia or Maryland party. In the District itself.. just make sure you volunteer during the Democratic primary because that's the actual election. And the two independent city council members are only independent because the city bans the council from having the council be made up entirely of one party (so the independents are Democrats who run as Independent)
In other words, the Democratic Party is basically the only party in DC. Trump only got 4% of the vote there. But it's close proximity to VA and MD means you can volunteer there.
balladofwindfishes
Member
Anything good that lingers from Obama = Trump's amazing policy
Anything bad that Trump does = Obama's failed policy
Welcome to the next four years.
It won't stick, though. It never does.
Carpe Libertatem
Member
In the short term maybe (even then I'm skeptical - his approval ratings are still great) but in the long term I have a strong feeling he will be loved.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Well, it was only tried on a white presidents before.
balladofwindfishes
Member
I'm not really sure how future presidents can retroactively make popular presidents into bad presidents.
The only instance I can think of, of a president who was popular in his term and then kind of faded away, and people starting rethinking if his presidency was actually good was Clinton, but even so, future presidents had nothing to do with that.
In any case, it's usually the opposite. Presidents look better when the future president messes up. For example, Trump is going to make Bush look good because given the choice between W or Trump, I'm pretty sure most people would pick W.
- Status