-
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.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
IggyChooChoo
Member
Perjury? Conspiracy? Obstruction? I am very interested to hear where Mueller lands on those.At a minimum, leaving multiple meetings of his FS-86 forms.
Edit: Oh, I see. You edited in a "nothing matters anymore" at the end. Can you please just not post if all you're going to contribute is "nothing matters" complaints?
skullmuffins
Banned
FWIW@McFaul
Michael McFaul Retweeted Michael Weiss
I've been told that Congressman Rohrabacher invited her to the hearing. Someone should confirm with his office. He also is anti-sanctions.
Yeah, someone should probably follow up on that...
Sam Stein‏
@samstein
Congressman's office denied this to me on record. Said they met her at film the night before. But she showed up (1st in line) herself. (edit: the film would be the Magnitsky Act film screened that day. The director is seated behind her)
Edit: Hmm, okay
You don't say...@McFaul
Michael McFaul Retweeted Michael Weiss
I've been told that Congressman Rohrabacher invited her to the hearing. Someone should confirm with his office. He also is anti-sanctions.
Yeah, someone should probably follow up on that...
https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/why-the-presidents-campaign-shouldnt-focus-on-inequality/
The evidence is on the internet, if you bother to look for it.
Galston published that in May 2012, before the 2012 election, but his post-election 2012 retrospective analysis had the following points, pointing to class messages being key to Obama's win in Ohio, and he predicted a move towards such issues could help the GOP:
There is evidence, however, that the white working class embraces a more populist brand of conservatism than they were offered in 2012. When asked about the principal causes of the slow economic recovery, for example, 48 percent blamed off-shoring, versus only 27 percent of white college educated voters.Despite their belief that government is providing too many social services, 54 percent think that government should do more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. And when they directly experience government action that benefits them, they often support it; a majority of white working class voters in the Midwest (but not nationally) favored the auto bailout.
Prior to the 2012 presidential nominating contest, some conservative intellectuals were urging a turn toward populist conservatism and wanted to nominate a candidate who would be a credible messenger for that creed. Such a move might well have helped among white working class voters, especially in the Midwest. It is not clear, however, whether populist positionsfor example, the rejection of off-shoringwould have been acceptable to the business-oriented portion of the Republican Party.
...
Obamas reelection may signal the emergency of a new progressive coalition comprising African Americans, Latinos, women, young people, professionals, and economically populist blue collar whites, a nascent new majority that pushes an activist government agenda to expand economic opportunities and personal freedoms for all people.
...
Evaluations of the states condition played an important role. While only 40 percent of Ohioans thought that the country was headed in the right direction, 51 percent felt that way about their state, including 47 percent of the white working class. The auto bailout was an important piece of their overall assessment.59 percent of Ohio voters favored that step, the same as voters nationally. But 60 percent of Ohios white working class voters supported in, compared to only 48 percent nationally.
Other issues leaned in the same direction. Forty-four percent of Ohios white working class voters saw off-shoring as very responsible for the countrys economic problems, compared to only 33 percent of those with college degrees. Sixty-two percent of white working class voters favored raising taxes on people making more than $250 thousand per year; 51 percent supported the Dream Act; 60 percent thought that the government should do more to reduce the gap between rich and poor; 50 percent believed that increasing taxes to pay for public investments was a better path to growth than was the lower taxes/smaller government alternative.
Attitudes toward Obama tracked these views on issues. Fifty-one percent of Ohios white working class voters had a favorable opinion of the president overall. 58 percent thought that Obama better understood the problems of poor America; 50 percent thought that Obama cared more about people like them, versus only 37 percent for Romney.
He's not wrong though. Where is his legal problem? He clearly "omitted" this meeting on the requisite disclosure form, and nothing matters.
Seriously...if you're just going to do this whole Eeyore routine, why even come here?
I would categorize those issues in the follow up are populist economics, not inequality. And Trump did indeed leverage them.Galston published that in May 2012, before the 2012 election, but his post-election 2012 retrospective analysis had the following points, pointing to class messages being key to Obama's win in Ohio, and he predicted a move towards such issues could help the GOP:
https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/885169250884870144
Steve Kornacki‏
@SteveKornacki
Follow
More
Monmouth NJ gov poll:
Murphy (D) 53%
Guadagno (R) 26%
AntraxSuicide
Banned
3 points over 50 is a great mark to hit this early.
Nobody likes Christie here and its going to show in the general election.
Even in the conservative counties people aren't going to run to the polls to vote for his successor.
skullmuffins
Banned
http://www.thedailybeast.com/source-house-to-introduce-senate-passed-russia-sanctions-bill
Seems the WH didn't water it down. We'll see how the vote goes.Source: House to Introduce Tough Russia Sanctions Bill
The text of the bill was prepared by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the aide said, adding that it will likely have bipartisan cosponsorship and support. The Senate bill was approved 98-2, but a procedural hiccup stalled the process in the lower chamber. The bill being introduced in the House is identical to the Senate-passed bill, which was flagged for a blue-slip issue whereby legislation dealing with revenues must originate in the House.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
http://www.thedailybeast.com/source-house-to-introduce-senate-passed-russia-sanctions-bill
Seems the WH didn't water it down. We'll see how the vote goes.
The veto is going to be lit.
Zachary Warmbrodt @Zachary
Big news in banking: Trumps nominee to chair the FDIC has asked the White House to withdraw his nomination because of family issues
A lot of these nominees sure do have a lot of "family issues".
RustyNails
Member
I swear if the next Governor of NJ turns out to be a corrupt bag of shits (looking at you Murphy), it should take over Illinois' infamy of being the most corrupt state.
Rauner may be a rightwing business freak, but at least he runs a clean ship.
Rauner may be a rightwing business freak, but at least he runs a clean ship.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
http://www.thedailybeast.com/source-house-to-introduce-senate-passed-russia-sanctions-bill
Seems the WH didn't water it down. We'll see how the vote goes.
Better be a veto proof majority
A lot of these nominees sure do have a lot of "family issues".
"I'm not risking my political carer on this shit"
BoogieWoogie
Banned
http://www.thedailybeast.com/source-house-to-introduce-senate-passed-russia-sanctions-bill
Seems the WH didn't water it down. We'll see how the vote goes.
Good to hear.
StopMakingSense
Member
A lot of these nominees sure do have a lot of "family issues".
Family issue i.e. family going 'Are you fucking kidding me?'
I would categorize those issues in the follow up are populist economics, not inequality. And Trump did indeed leverage them.
Please explain how these items do not focus on inequality:
54 percent think that government should do more to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor
Sixty-two percent of white working class voters favored raising taxes on people making more than $250 thousand per year
60 percent thought that the government should do more to reduce the gap between rich and poor
The central thesis of Galston's op-ed that inequality was not useful was based on polls that said:
What drags down our economy is an ever-widening gap between the ultra-rich and everyone else. That message ranked dead last; only 45 percent of respondents said that it would make them more likely to vote for the candidate who articulated it.
...
But only 46 percent said that about the third strategy: reduce the income and wealth gap between the rich and the poor.
Its clear that Ohio voters had a significant deviation with national attitudes, about a 10-15% gap compared to the national surveys on issues of inequality.
BobTheFork
Member
Better be a veto proof majority
Where does it go after a veto. If it's the same the Senate will be on lockdown. The house, not so much.
KirbYuuYuu
Member
A lot of these nominees sure do have a lot of "family issues".
These people are leaving because their wife's face is bleeding! WEAK!
DJT
skullmuffins
Banned
Has to pass with 2/3 of each chamber to override the vetoWhere does it go after a veto. If it's the same the Senate will be on lockdown. The house, not so much.
BlastProcessing
Member
Follow up to the laying of hands pic. Trump just did an interview with Pat Robertson for the 700 Club. So this is their new strategy.
BobTheFork
Member
One then the other, or both at once?Has to pass with 2/3 of each chamber to override the veto
2/3 of the house will be hard to do.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Has to pass with 2/3 of each chamber to override the veto
I really really want him to veto. He vetos and it'll be about as flat an admission as it gets that Russia owns him.
Autodidact
Banned
I love these scenarios where he can't win. If he signs the bill, the new sanctions will make Vlad angry. If he vetoes it, the ~~~OPTICS~~~ will be horrendous, especially given last week's meeting and this week's stories.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
One then the other, or both at once?
2/3 of the house will be hard to do.
Not if it has bipartisan support like the article says. It'll get 100% of Dems and it's hard to think after it was 98-2 in the Senate that it can't get at least half the Republicans in the house
Autodidact
Banned
Honestly, his best outcome in a sea of bad outcomes would be for the bill to pass the House with a 2/3+ vote the first time around. He could say, "I would veto it, but there's no point."
I doubt he thinks that way, though.
I doubt he thinks that way, though.
I mean - isn't this the truth? Why do people assume that it's the outcome I want. I just see no evidence to the contrary.At a minimum, leaving multiple meetings of his SF-86 forms.
Edit: Oh, I see. You edited in a "nothing matters anymore" at the end. Can you please just not post if all you're going to contribute is "nothing matters" complaints?
Also - Trump won't veto this.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/source-house-to-introduce-senate-passed-russia-sanctions-bill
Seems the WH didn't water it down. We'll see how the vote goes.
Imagine if his first veto is on Russia sanctions haha. How would Fox spin it?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
I mean - isn't this the truth? Why do people assume that it's the outcome I want. I just see no evidence to the contrary.
There's literally no reason to post nihilist comments every day, multiple times a day.
You're right - I guess I have to re frame my frustrations. Just feel like the line just keeps getting pushed without rerecussions, and this has been happening since Sessions has lied under oath. Keep wondering where the actual breaking point is.There's literally no reason to post nihilist comments every day, multiple times a day.
Follow up to the laying of hands pic. Trump just did an interview with Pat Robertson for the 700 Club. So this is their new strategy.
At the risk of seeming condescending, god damn are religious people in America gullible. It seems like they don't really examine anything, they just take your at your (current) word, no matter how vague or milquetoast, no matter your past words or actions.
Is it that they're gullible? Or that maybe their religion is a fucking facade.At the risk of seeming condescending, god damn are religious people in America gullible. It seems like they don't really examine anything, they just take your at your (current) word, no matter how vague or milquetoast, no matter your past words or actions.
BlastProcessing
Member
Imagine if his first veto is on Russia sanctions haha. How would Fox spin it?
Trump takes a bold stand protecting the Office of the Presidency from external petty meddling. In a strong move that, hopefully signals the end to the latest petty Washington powerplay, Trump put a halt to Congress's attempts to wrest control over foreign policy from the White House. Led by Democrats, Congress once again attempted another financially motivated power grab. Thankfully Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer's latest attempt to line their own pockets failed miserably.
Something like that.
You're right - I guess I have to re frame my frustrations. Just feel like the line just keeps getting pushed without rerecussions, and this has been happening since Sessions has lied under oath. Keep wondering where the actual breaking point is.
There were huge repercussions to Sessions' perjury. AG's don't often recuse themselves. Mueller's special prosecution is a direct result of Sessions getting caught lying. Sessions' recusal was the beginning of the end for this administration.
When trump said his son was being transparent did he mean ghost like? Flush white with terror?
You kidding me, fam?Family issue i.e. family going 'Are you fucking kidding me?'
They just lie.When trump said his son was being transparent did he mean ghost like? Flush white with terror?
AntraxSuicide
Banned
Is it that they're gullible? Or that maybe their religion is a fucking facade.
Yeah, most evangelicals aren't actually religious. It's just cultural to them to look out for the "other" around them.
Trump takes a bold stand protecting the Office of the Presidency from external petty meddling. In a strong move that, hopefully signals the end to the latest petty Washington powerplay, Trump put a halt to Congress's attempts to wrest control over foreign policy from the White House. Led by Democrats, Congress once again attempted another financially motivated power grab. Thankfully Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer's latest attempt to line their own pockets failed miserably.
Something like that.
Not enough "shouldn't we try to be really diplomatic to everyone"
You're cherry-picking the parts that focus on inequality out of a list of items that are part of a greater whole consisting of populist economic messaging. Yes, inequality is part of that messaging, but as we saw in this past election, it's far from central as a concern to many of these voters, as a super-rich New Yorker picked up the Economic Populism mantle alongside racism and narrowly got to a victory lying his ass off.Please explain how these items do not focus on inequality:
The central thesis of Galston's op-ed that inequality was not useful was based on polls that said:
Its clear that Ohio voters had a significant deviation with national attitudes, about a 10-15% gap compared to the national surveys on issues of inequality.
In fact, the main takeaway you can likely take from '08, '12 and '16 is that lying your ass off to these voters is probably the best strategy. (Obama going after Hillary on NAFTA in the '08 primaries, as an example) They want simple answers to complex problems that do not challenge their status quo. But those simple answers don't exist and their status quo is not sustainable.
The message from the initial focus group testing was that Income Inequality was a very bad headline message, and that still stands. You can include it as part of another message, but if you try to run on it as a primary message, you're likely to follow in the footsteps of OWS.
Is it that they're gullible? Or that maybe their religion is a fucking facade.
I don't mean the crooked religious "leaders" that just use fake Christianity to line their pockets, I mean the regular people. Then again, to follow such transparent con-men would indicate Trump is exactly the kind of obvious crook they would inexplicably trust with their life and believe is a saint.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Honestly, his best outcome in a sea of bad outcomes would be for the bill to pass the House with a 2/3+ vote the first time around. He could say, "I would veto it, but there's no point."
I doubt he thinks that way, though.
He'd still veto. When Putin threatens him with Pee-Pee tape, he'll just say he did everything he could to stop it.
You're cherry-picking the parts that focus on inequality out of a list of items that are part of a greater whole consisting of populist economic messaging. Yes, inequality is part of that messaging, but as we saw in this past election, it's far from central as a concern to many of these voters, as a super-rich New Yorker picked up the Economic Populism mantle alongside racism and narrowly got to a victory lying his ass off.
In fact, the main takeaway you can likely take from '08, '12 and '16 is that lying your ass off to these voters is probably the best strategy. (Obama going after Hillary on NAFTA in the '08 primaries, as an example) They want simple answers to complex problems that do not challenge their status quo. But those simple answers don't exist and their status quo is not sustainable.
The message from the initial focus group testing was that Income Inequality was a very bad headline message, and that still stands. You can include it as part of another message, but if you try to run on it as a primary message, you're likely to follow in the footsteps of OWS.
The problem being that if their problems cannot be solved without significant change, not forcing them to confront that simply kicks the can down the road.
Of course, it's not as though the Midwest will die with a bang, more with a slow whimper like the decline of coal country.
You're right - I guess I have to re frame my frustrations. Just feel like the line just keeps getting pushed without rerecussions, and this has been happening since Sessions has lied under oath. Keep wondering where the actual breaking point is.
the breaking point is when Trump is no longer valuable to the GOP.
AntraxSuicide
Banned
the breaking point is when Trump is no longer valuable to the GOP.
Which we're getting close to. His Republican approvals are close to Dubya's right before the death spiral. I think the Trump presidency is going to play out like Bush's second term.
RumbleHumble
Banned
Is it that they're gullible? Or that maybe their religion is a fucking facade.
Organized religion in America is mostly on the decline among white voters*, having been destroyed by the very political alliances it made to get more powerful. The moment organized religion became inconvenient is the moment the Republican Party began trying to undermine the organizations of many religions. Growing up Catholic, I'd see time and again "hardcore" believers and followers of the Church discount the teachings of their leaders because they were "irrelevant" to the real world (the War on Terror in particular). But Americans are still attracted to organized religion. For many, the Republican Party is that new religion.
*and definitely not on its deathbed, because what kind of dumbass would say that?
RumbleHumble
Banned
Is there anyone worse than Steve King? The guy proposed using food stamp and Planned Parenthood funds to build a border wall.
It's hard to say considering the race to the bottom we've seen with the Republican party lately, but there's no one I've heard so blatantly racist and terrible as him.
Imagine if his first veto is on Russia sanctions haha. How would Fox spin it?
Did you hear about the uranium Hillary sold Russia?
nature boy
Member
I guess we can expect more oppoium in the next couple of days
- Status
- Not open for further replies.