-
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 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
How A False Conspiracy Theory About The Russian Lawyer Who Met With Don Jr. Spread To Trump
Buzzfeed runs through all the far-right conspiracies surrounding Veselnitskaya. These guys are duuuumb.
Buzzfeed runs through all the far-right conspiracies surrounding Veselnitskaya. These guys are duuuumb.
Dangansona
Member
Had a good moment just now. I read to my stepdad that Pew poll about republicans seeing colleges as bad for the country and my mom brought up the cry rooms at the university. I've been hearing this from the more right members of the family too long and I snapped. So I went and looked it up.
Nearly all the results on Google are unsurprisingly Fox news articles. Even though I hated to do so I gave one of them a click and saw it was Cornell that was the real offender. And it wasn't a cry room, it was a cry-in. And it wasn't organized by the university (no shit), but by students.
So then I looked up the Cornell news article about it. It was 50 students. The undergraduate class of Cornell is over 14,000 students.
So it was 50 out of 14,000 students organizing a single event the day after Trump won. And yet Fox News has managed to spin this far too successfully as college student liberals are a bunch of pussies. Scary shit.
Did we get an eyeroll?
Nearly all the results on Google are unsurprisingly Fox news articles. Even though I hated to do so I gave one of them a click and saw it was Cornell that was the real offender. And it wasn't a cry room, it was a cry-in. And it wasn't organized by the university (no shit), but by students.
So then I looked up the Cornell news article about it. It was 50 students. The undergraduate class of Cornell is over 14,000 students.
So it was 50 out of 14,000 students organizing a single event the day after Trump won. And yet Fox News has managed to spin this far too successfully as college student liberals are a bunch of pussies. Scary shit.
Did we get an eyeroll?
So don't nominate Booker.
Tulsi should have ran a better campaign.
This is nonsensical. There is no circumstance under which Trump will be removed from office via impeachment earlier than the 2020 election.
Acknowledging the political reality and allocating the scant resources we have at our disposal efficiently isn't luxury, it's the exact opposite: it's survival.
I don't believe in chasing a fantasy. And if you truly believe that our democracy is already irreperably broken, then impeachment is far more of a fantasy than winning in 2020.
By that logic, the only way to remove Trump is through extralegal means. You might endorse that. I don't.
Random Human
They were trying to grab your prize. They work for the mercenary. The masked man.
So he seems to be unwilling to pay his legal fees himself. Who saw that coming?
ugaboga232
Member
Doesn't that suggest Trump and co think that RNC are involved in this as well? And that if they don't defend Trump et al, they will be in big stuff too?
Too much claude is bad for your brain kids
If I believed those two numbers were both accurate I guess I would agree with you.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
"what happened to the reelecton funds?"
Trump's legal team....
Trump's legal team....
I mean, you're kind of hitting on the point here. If you believe there is nothing that could possibly happen that would lead to Trump being impeached, why wouldn't he just invite Russia to fix the election to make sure he and the GOP just win landslide victories?
In the universe in which Trump can never get impeached no matter what, I don't understand why you would have any faith in the 2020 elections at all. That seems logically incoherent.
tedrotheredro
Member
Guy never pays his bills. He'd take directly from the treasury if it were even possible. He has to settle for funneling taxpayer money through his businesses any chance he gets.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I'm telling you guys, Montana Senate 2020 could be a barn burner, Daines (R) vs. Bullock (D). Bullock is term limited and I wouldn't be surprised if there's significant pressure on him to get in, especially with Tester having run the DSCC before.
Other than that, GA, CO, NC, ME if Collins retires, possibly IA. Hoping Begich jumps into AK. Depending on if AHCA passes and who votes for it, we should put up a fight in LA, AR, WV too. Dunno who - maybe Mitch Landrieu in LA.
Other than that, GA, CO, NC, ME if Collins retires, possibly IA. Hoping Begich jumps into AK. Depending on if AHCA passes and who votes for it, we should put up a fight in LA, AR, WV too. Dunno who - maybe Mitch Landrieu in LA.
TheLaughingStock
Member
I hope he/she is not implying that. Many whites who were so angry last year ought to have been in a better mood. And minorities ought to have been in a worse mood. Therefore, I wouldn't characterize it as white people knew better.
You know during the Great Recession, white households lost far less wealth than blacks & hispanics. And in terms of the recovery, external factors alongside steps the Obama administration took produced a pretty good economic situation if you're white. Ignoring long-term trends and future prospects of course.
However, for minorities who tend to be in bad shape relatively speaking vs. whites and who were absolutely devastated by the crisis I mean my god. They were preyed upon by mostly rich whites, THEN when many of those victims applied for Obama's foreclosure programs they were rejected. Sad stuff...
Profits soaring, folks being traumatized by law enforcement, white-collar criminals getting a major pass, government payrolls shrinking, and so on. You know everybody seemed to get a lot of help except the kinds of people who needed government the most. Therefore, when I look back at 2016 it's interesting why so many minorities liked the status quo candidates while so many whites wanted to shake things up. Very strange.
Arkansas' is one of those states that's probably gone forever (or at least until the political system changes).
Kentucky, ironically, is possible given their love of healthcare reform, but it'd be a short-term thing. Arkansas and the Plains states are like the states that are probably never coming back under all but the strangest of circumstances.
Also interested in seeing where the fault-lines appear in the Democratic caucus in 2020. We all know who's probably running, but how would the base coalesce around each candidate?
2008 was sort of a "past v future" primary, with Clinton representing her husband's past of the party and capturing his more favored demographics (old, white working class, moderates) while Obama represented the future (activist left, youth, and minorities). 2016 was "social vs economic" with Clinton now representing the parts of the party that cared more about social issues (moderates, African Americans, feminists) and Sanders on the more economically-minded edge of the party (activist left, youth, white working class).
So where will the division be? Are we doomed to relitigate the social vs economic divide, or will something else emerge?
Like, umm, don't you typically figure out how to pay for retaining legal services beforehand?
Maybe they should have the billionaire at the center of all this pay for the necessary legal representation. Just an idea.
StopMakingSense
Member
Oh god he's extorting the RNC.
Autodidact
Banned
Good. He should do anything that sours them on him and increases the threat of a primary challenger should he still be around in 2020.
Mr.Shrugglesã
Banned
Well, they probably partook, so pay your tab brehs.
Tranqueris
Banned
I think that eye roll shit more than anything else, got me to quit CNN completely. I think if Anderson Cooper and others wanted to stop having these crazy people on the air they could probably cause some sort of ultimatum or threaten to switch to another network. Instead we just get Anderson Cooper rolling his eyes and looking annoyed day in and day out instead of actually doing something, anything.
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
We're six months into the most scandal and legal jeopardy ridden whitehouse in history , one month into its investigation- and there's a massive new scandal literally every day -and you jumped from impossible to impeach all the way to imaginary assassins. I hope you're trolling because if that's your current belief basket it's a little bare.
And there are elections in 2018.
Elections are a pre-requisite to impeachment. The current composition of Congress will not impeach Trump. Full stop. If impeachment is ever on the table, it will require a different composition of Congress.
So at that point, it's just order of operations. Every impeachment scenario requires some form of fair elections occurring. If you believe impeachment is a possibility, that means you must believe fair elections are also a possibility. One is directly contingent upon the other.
Your fatalistic "we will never have elections again so we must impeach" logic is a complete nonsequiter. If the problem we face is unfair elections, impeachment (another instrument of the very institutions you're saying have been irreperably damaged) is not a solution to that problem.
Republicans will not impeach Trump if they think they are not at risk of losing their seats. It's a Catch-22.
If there will never be fair elections ever again, then the possibility of impeachment is 0.0%.
(sorry quoted the wrong post by accident at first)
Who is responsible for impeaching the President? That is the only factor at play in whether or not Trump is impeached, let alone removed from office.
I don't think this is true. But it's not super relevant since the argument I'm making in this case is about your logical incoherency.
That's not my argument. I think my argument was very clear: if nothing Trump does can possibly result in his impeachment unless he and the GOP lose an election, why wouldn't he just use his position as President and his alliance with Russia to fix our elections so he cannot lose?
If you believe Trump can't possibly be impeached no matter what, you should also, logically, believe he can't possibly lose his presidency or his majorities in elections. He has the power to influence that! The only thing that would stop him would be the fear of consequences, and you've ruled all of those impossible.
The rumors about Trump possibly firing Mueller began to float in mid-June. Could the discovery of these emails have possibly triggered them? I remember these rumors just came out of nowhere, really.
I don't mean to be a dick Pigeon, you're one of my favorite posters here (really!), but I guess I'm confused because you substituted some vague ivory tower ad hominem in place of an actual response to my original post?
I suspect we're probably in agreement here, but we're talking around each other through endlessly circitous logic.
Let's start from the top: What is your scenario under which Republicans would ever impeach Trump? And why is that more likely than fair elections in 2020?
(Bonus Q: What in their decision calculus would change from their current position of not impeaching Trump?)
I suspect we're probably in agreement here, but we're talking around each other through endlessly circitous logic.
Let's start from the top: What is your scenario under which Republicans would ever impeach Trump? And why is that more likely than fair elections in 2020?
(Bonus Q: What in their decision calculus would change from their current position of not impeaching Trump?)
whyamihere
Banned
I have significant more faith in the decentralized integrity of our election system than of Republican senators choosing to remove their party's president.
That's not an outlandish position.
That's not an outlandish position.
BlastProcessing
Member
I mean, it should be pretty obvious Trump has no actual money and wants everyone else to cover his bills.
Futurevoid
Member
So the "election integrity" commission posted up public comments they've received via email:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/wh...nts-received-june-29-through-july-11-2017.pdf
There's some fun ones in there.
You can also join the fun by sending comments to:
ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/wh...nts-received-june-29-through-july-11-2017.pdf
There's some fun ones in there.
You can also join the fun by sending comments to:
ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov
Same. Really can't see Republicans impeaching a president after what they had to endure with Nixon.
Aaron Strife
Banned
They got Republican Jesus six years later, I don't know what they're complaining about.
You Know Nothing
Member
So the "election integrity" commission posted up public comments they've received via email:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whi...ly-11-2017.pdf
There's some fun ones in there.
You can also join the fun by sending comments to:
ElectionIntegrityStaff@ovp.eop.gov
This one really speaks to my soul.
My personal nightmare scenario isn't that the 2020 elections won't be fair. Oh, we'll definitely have to deal with a Russia that's even smarter about hacking us than they were in 2016, and an administration that won't quietly fight them but instead quietly aid them. But I don't doubt that the process itself will be fair. And oh, we'll also have to deal with legal voter disenfranchisement that will likely be more sophisticated and targeted than 2016, but excusing all of that I don't doubt the process, as it is on paper, will be fair.
No, my nightmare scenario is a more dangerous version of what would have happened last year, had Hillary won. Trump flat out refusing to accept the results. Only this time, he's doing it from the white house, with an enslaved Republican Party and a nationalized propaganda machine in Fox News/Sinclair ready and willing to turn whatever he says into the truth. And another nuclear world power with it's own formidable propaganda network that will no doubt be willing to side with him.
We already know, today, that Trump will do anything BUT acknowledge a loss. We'll see how far he's willing to go with that.
Sleep tight, folks.
No, my nightmare scenario is a more dangerous version of what would have happened last year, had Hillary won. Trump flat out refusing to accept the results. Only this time, he's doing it from the white house, with an enslaved Republican Party and a nationalized propaganda machine in Fox News/Sinclair ready and willing to turn whatever he says into the truth. And another nuclear world power with it's own formidable propaganda network that will no doubt be willing to side with him.
We already know, today, that Trump will do anything BUT acknowledge a loss. We'll see how far he's willing to go with that.
Sleep tight, folks.
This is possible!
I think there are a number of things that would lead Republicans to impeach Trump, but, specifically, I think that if Republicans start seeing their base react to the Trump news, or become worried about an electoral backlash that doesn't run through their primary base (harder to know, for them), they will be forced to act on removing him. I think the Republicans are more or less aware of this, and it explains their unseemly haste to pass bills.
So, for example, I think that if Trump attempted to fix the elections, the Republicans would be forced to remove him. For that reason, I don't believe that fair elections are less likely than impeachment.
The question of what would move Republicans to begin rejecting Trump is more difficult. Vox touched on this issue today in an interview with the editor of National Review, which I think is worth reading: https://www.vox.com/2017/7/13/15958...ussia-collusion-republican-party-david-french
Note that this doesn't constitute a condoning of their choices. I think they're quislings, collaborators, and arguably traitors, as a party. But this is my analysis of their perspective.
I would like to restate my question to you again, in the hopes that you will also respond to it: if you believe that it is impossible for Trump to ever get impeached by this Congress, what do you think could or will stop him from fixing the elections?
So then what's to stop Trump from just canceling the elections since there's evidence of attempted fraud and it's obviously the Democrats to blame?
BoogieWoogie
Banned
True. It's scary but then again......
I just realized that no one has ever posted an interview with Mueller before, so I found one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbgJ1Wxi5Sc
whyamihere
Banned
🙄
So why bother posting if you have nothing to add
whyamihere
Banned
Because you're become unnecessarily pedantic about this to the point of being really frustrating to talk to.
neurosisxeno
Member
This fall, on ABC; How to Spark a Political Insurrection!
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked