-
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 |OT9| The Wrath of Khan!
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
Black Mamba
Member
Exactly. A significant portion of these people think their take home pay goes then when they enter a higher tax bracket...
Tranqueris
Banned
For some reason the "HUNT DOWN AND KILL TERRORISTS" part made me laugh so much.
nature boy
Member
He'll be fine once the Trump movement is defeated bigly.
yup, Cruz will be untouchable with the "i told all you assholes" when Trump posts the worst pop vote beating in a GE in a LONG time.
If other politicians can't see this outcome right now, they deserve to stay behind him
Felix Lighter
Member
Cruz getting buried before his speech can ever pay off would be wonderful. The Trump crowing will be annoying but well worth it.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Don't get me wrong, I know exactly what "Make America Great Again" means, but Trump and Republicans (specifically baby boomers) are always harping on the fact about how much better the country was economically back in the day.
What I'm saying is you can look no further than Reagan's tax cuts. And while Democrats are always hammering Trickle Down Economics as being ineffective, I never hear anyone bring up what tax rates used to be when this country arguable had its biggest booms and became a global superpower.
the primary isn't this year
Basileus777
Member
If by untouchable you mean that he will be a regional candidate hated by everyone other than evangelicals or movement conservatives, then sure. Cruz alienating the Trump base is a death knell to him ever winning a Presidential primary, not that he had a particularly good chance before.
Felix Lighter
Member
Yeah, oops, I just read that. 2018, Cruz will be cleansed by then.
VendettaRed07
Member
People won't care if it's out of her control. She has positioned her self to be against it. If it passes it will be a broken campaign promise before she even gets in office. Very few people believe her opposition to it is genuine. It's like campaigning on bringing down gas prices and then claiming unforseen factors were at play when it doesn't go down. Don't campaign on something if you really can't influence it.
And when your biggest issue with the voters is your trustworthyness and this notion that you will "do and say whatever it takes to get elected", giving lip service to anti-TPP sentiments just to give the face of party unity is arguably worse than being upfront about it now. And if it won't be a factor in 2018 and I'm exaggerating how it will come into play two years from now then not opposing it shouldn't be the type of party fracturing issue this election, which it already arguably is because the current sitting democratic president supports it.
By 0.1%.
The Trump base will be completely marginalized by an embarrassing destruction in the GE. He won't have a chance in 2020 anyway as I assume more sane people will be on the ballot, but the Trump base will not pick another winner, so they are inconsequential
Basileus777
Member
40% of the Republican base that votes in primaries isn't disappearing in 4 years. Another Trump won't win in 2020, but that voting bloc will be there.
Sounds like the type of bold leadership this country has been looking for.
It's bad politics if trying to win a GOP Congressional primary this year, but the payoff to winning a future presidential presidential primary is uncertain. I don't think anyone can make any hard predictions about the future of Trumpism. In four years Trump could easily be remembered as the idiot loser who RUINED EVERYTHING with a name as toxic as GW Bush.
I really want this to be true, and I do think that it will pass in the lame duck, but I don't share your optimism that it will be forgotten. People are still bitching about NAFTA.
Basileus777
Member
It depends on who the candidate is really. A more mainstream Republican could benefit from denouncing Trump, but Cruz has such a narrow path that already relies on dominating deep red states where Trump is popular that I don't see putting himself out there as an obstructionist to Trump as a smart move.
But really I'm mostly reacting to the idea that some have about how Cruz is some political genius because of the convention. He's not a favorite in 2020.
Oh god, give it to me.
If this happens we might see the most progressive shift in policies in 40 years...or we will see complete shut down as Republican Representives and Senators fillibuster.
whyamihere
Banned
Doomed by .1%
If Hillary gets a D senate and D house, the filibuster dies.
PantherLotus
Professional Schmuck
I mean, seriously.
Felix Lighter
Member
Well, I doubt there will be much of an attempt to reach across the aisle this time around if the Dems gain control of Congress. Big mistake for Obama. If he would have only known what was in store for him from the Legislative branch.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
I mean, seriously.
Wolf: "wow Clinton is only up by an average of 8 points, the democrats must be extremely concerned about this dead heat heading into tonight."
whyamihere
Banned
I mean, seriously.
Dead heat.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
Fenderputty
Banned
We had a chance to kill it before and didn't, right? Not sure why we would now. Seems like both sides like to keep it as a check for when a party has control of all three.
What are the chances of a House swap anyway? I know the Senate is the much better chance.
We'll get a Republican "Sit In" without a doubt.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Razor tight!
I mean, seriously.
Basileus777
Member
The Republicans would scrap it the moment they controlled the Presidency and Congress. The check won't work.
Basically the Democrats need to win the overall vote by a large enough margin to overcome the gerrymander and Trump is making that a possibility.
If the Dems take the Senate and House, they better just ram through everything they can at a breakneck speed. The GOP made gains is the midterms by saying nothing has gotten done and everything sucks despite the policies of the Dems being blocked at every turn.
They need to push through everything they can to at least ensure that the country will feel the effects of their policies and so that they can campaign on them in the midterms.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
Woah I decided to go look up the Colin Powell endorsement from 2008 and he mentions Captain Khan in it?
Beer Monkey
Member
Can you imagine exactly this happening?
1) Tim Kaine, as presiding officer of the senate, moves that the Senate declares the senate rule that rule changes can be filibustered is unconstitutional.
2) The senate passes the motion by simple majority.
3) The senate changes the filibuster rule by simple majority.
4) Republican tears.
Felix Lighter
Member
Different Khan.
"Stand by for our Key Race Alert in just a moment. WOW look at how close it is in Texas. It is far to early to tell. LOOK it just changed again, still VERY close."
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Getting rid of the filibuster is probably not a good idea until 2020 when redistricting happens. The Democrats don't want to abolish the filibuster then get stuck on the wrong side of it.
the 2020 House elections are so important to do well in. IMO they'll define America's direction politically for decades.
the 2020 House elections are so important to do well in. IMO they'll define America's direction politically for decades.
Because Obama was naive and thought he could work with the GOP with an overwhelming mandate.
Hillary was right about this approach in '08 and got vindicated. She won't make the same mistake.
Bingo. It almost died under Bush.
Beer Monkey
Member
Which is why the Supreme Court is so important. They can check and balance the House, and redistricting rules themselves.
campfireweekend
Member
Does anyone know if we can still count on these senate democrats to vote for TPP when the time comes and/or if Tim Kaine's replacement will be for it?
It kills me that Boxer isn't supporting it, especially since it's a bill which you couldn't argue hurts California and is very likely to greatly help it.
This is why I'm pessimistic the filibuster will ever leave. There's always something on the horizon that's too important to give it up for.
Fenderputty
Banned
Thanks for that Graph. I know I've seen it in here, but for some reason I thought that only applied to the senate and that the house was generally considered out of reach. Having control of all three could be huge for those first two years.
And yes ... I'm a pessimist regarding getting rid of the Filibusterer.
And yes ... I'm a pessimist regarding getting rid of the Filibusterer.
Kaine hasn't resigned.
VendettaRed07
Member
They would have done it anyway, as we've already seen. We can't not do something out of fear of Republican retaliation, because as we've seen, they don't need legitimate precedents or reasons for doing anything. They'll jump the gun and imagine scenarios where what they are doing is a response to.
Basileus777
Member
Kaine's vote in the lame duck would be an issue as if he voted for it would be tied to Hillary.
Assuming Clinton wins and the vote happens in a lame duck session, he may very well resign ahead of the vote to prevent tying it to the new administration.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I guess I'm not too sure how I'd feel about axing the filibuster. In principle I'm all for it, but I think there is something noble about demanding a broader consensus for significant reform legislation. It only falters when there are bad actors in the minority party as there are now.
As it is, it's hard to pass something like ACA. But once it's law, it's even harder to get rid of it. It can be frustrating but it might actually just be a good thing.
As it is, it's hard to pass something like ACA. But once it's law, it's even harder to get rid of it. It can be frustrating but it might actually just be a good thing.
Basileus777
Member
Obstruction has hurt this country so badly that I can't really think the filibuster is a great tool for democracy.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked