It's disproportionate and having a second house with actual power is insanely dumb.What's everyone's problem with the Senate now? They got plenty of problems but aren't they a little less insane than the House in general?
Are you attacking the left for this?
You think this talk exists without the left and sanders run last year?
"When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you dont blame other thingsComey, Russiayou blame yourself, Schumer told The Washington Post. So what did we do wrong? People didnt know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.
BUT BUT IT WAS RUSSIA.
Lmao, Schumer out here.
Holy shit. Scaramucci's interview with Tapper was an unbridled disaster. The whole thing is worth watching. Anybody who thought that he would smooth talk this administration into a better place was straight up wrong.
Single-payer is dead on arrival in the United States at this point. It just isn't happening, and democrats would be foolish to run on it in 2018 because the tax hikes alone would drive people to the polls and could cost them the House takeover.
"When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you dont blame other thingsComey, Russiayou blame yourself, Schumer told The Washington Post. So what did we do wrong? People didnt know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that.
BUT BUT IT WAS RUSSIA.
Lmao, Schumer out here.
Scarramucci is a chump. Good lord, why would Trump have this clown as his communications director? Is it because he kisses his ass?
I think we have divergent opinions on what Schumer is saying in that quote. He is not saying that Comey or the Russian interference didn't affect things. He is saying that when you fail, you focus on the things you can personally change first. He is talking about messaging. He is talking about perception.
You might have noticed that the only Democrats who spend much time talking about Russia are the ones on committees that have a responsibility to protect this country from outside attack. That is their jobs and it is what they are going to do. Every other Democrat has been completely focused on policy messaging. Every special election that has happened has also focused on policy. We have to be able to do both. We have to be able to acknowledge that we suffered a completely unprecedented and serious attack and we have to still fight the old fight as well.
If you are going to try to use that strategy to score cheap points on your bizarre ignore Russia campaign, well, I can't stop you. Like I said, I think we are just going to interpret things differently.
Scarramucci is a chump. Good lord, why would Trump have this clown as his communications director? Is it because he kisses his ass?
I think we have divergent opinions on what Schumer is saying in that quote. He is not saying that Comey or the Russian interference didn't affect things. He is saying that when you fail, you focus on the things you can personally change first. He is talking about messaging. He is talking about perception.
You might have noticed that the only Democrats who spend much time talking about Russia are the ones on committees that have a responsibility to protect this country from outside attack. That is their jobs and it is what they are going to do. Every other Democrat has been completely focused on policy messaging. Every special election that has happened has also focused on policy. We have to be able to do both. We have to be able to acknowledge that we suffered a completely unprecedented and serious attack and we have to still fight the old fight as well.
If you are going to try to use that strategy to score cheap points on your bizarre ignore Russia campaign, well, I can't stop you. Like I said, I think we are just going to interpret things differently.
"When you lose to somebody who has 40 percent popularity, you don't blame other things—Comey, Russia—you blame yourself," Schumer told The Washington Post. ”So what did we do wrong? People didn't know what we stood for, just that we were against Trump. And still believe that."
BUT BUT IT WAS RUSSIA.
Lmao, Schumer out here.
No, I agree. But I've seen a lot of people lean on Russia as the reason for the loss, instead of trying to analyze what Hillary did. I literally just had this back and forth here yest.
Just nice to see the party leadership get it.
Do you exist here just to downplay Russia?
How is reposting a Schumer quote downplaying Russia?
I can think Russia poses a threat generally to the USA, without thinking their interference, as opposed to domestic reasons / items within Hillary's camps control, were the reason for the L.
No, I agree. But I've seen a lot of people lean on Russia as the reason for the loss, instead of trying to analyze what Hillary did. I literally just had this back and forth here yest.
Just nice to see the party leadership get it.
I totally miss Schumer saying But But Russia... that was you.
Russia was a reason.... You seem to want to pretend like it wasn't
How is reposting a Schumer quote downplaying Russia?
I can think Russia poses a threat generally to the USA, without thinking their interference, as opposed to domestic reasons / items within Hillary's camps control, were the reason for the L.
I've never said it wasn't a reason. I've said that it gets outsized importance, relative to her loss.When you lose to the most unpopular presidential candidate in history, its should barely even register in the conversation when discussing how the loss happened / how to address that in the future.
I've never said it wasn't a reason. I've said that it gets outsized importance, relative to her loss.When you lose to the most unpopular presidential candidate in history, its should barely even register in the conversation when discussing how the loss happened / how to address that in the future.
I've never said it wasn't a reason. I've said that it gets outsized importance, relative to her loss.When you lose to the most unpopular presidential candidate in history, its should barely even register in the conversation when discussing how the loss happened / how to address that in the future.
Congemi, 60, a Republican long-shot in St. Petersburgs mayoral race, seized headlines at Tuesdays forum with his invective, which was laced with Barack Obama references and suggestions about Florida-to-Africa flight plans.
Mr. Nevel, you and your people talk about reparations, he said, mentioning Jesse Nevel, a white campaign opponent who heads a group calling for reparations for African Americans. The reparations that you talk about, Mr. Nevel, your people already got your reparations. Your reparations came in the form of a man named Barack Obama.
He added: My advice to you, if you dont like it here in America, planes leave every hour from Tampa airport. Go back to Africa. Go back to Africa. Go back!
Scarramucci is a chump. Good lord, why would Trump have this clown as his communications director? Is it because he kisses his ass?
Russia is obviously a huge deal that deserves attention, but Dems really blew it. They should've wiped the floor with Trump enough to overcome the outside influence.
At this point communications director doesn't matter, because this administration is literally asking someone to turn a turd into a supermodel.
There's no spinning Trump, and to even attempt it is to make a fool of yourself.
I don't know who could successfully do that job at this point.
I dont even know what point you're trying to make, You're just trying to make sure people know that Russia was only the #2 or #3 biggest reason the dems lost in 2016, what difference does it make? It's a fucking problem and we need to take steps to make sure it doesnt happen again.
I'm not trying to make a "point" - I actually was just very encouraged by that quote / feel like maybe the party is getting it.
I've said that it gets outsized importance, relative to her loss.
My vision for the Senate would be a body of vastly reduced responsibility that would have veto power over laws and presidential appointments (so sort of the opposite of where now they have to *approve* those things, now they would have to have a 2/3rds majority to be able to override other branches of government as a safety valve).
And it would go back to being state-government appointed. A body representing the states rather than the people, such that if 2/3rds of the states object to something even if the House or the President want it, then it does not happen.
Making it state-government based would also let you skip a step in the Amendment process, as an amendment could pass like an impeachment now: majority of the House plus a 2/3rds vote in the Senate.
The House would be proportional representation, but on the state level, allowing for the two Big Tent parties to break off (so instead of Democrats, you'd have Democrats, Labor, an Afro-American party, and a Hispanic party, and instead of Republicans you'd have Republicans, Evangelicals, and White Nationalists, plus an expanded role for Greens and Libertarians, the latter moreso than the former due to stronger appeal out west).
Working my way through the Tapper interview, and it was the same bullshit. He flat out said he would side with whatever Trump says.
Are you attacking the left for this?
You think this talk exists without the left and sanders run last year?
Scaramucci having to call Donald Trump Jr a "political neophyte" and implicitly, repeatedly resort to claiming that ignorance is an excuse is hilarious.
If it ever goes back to that Republicans would control 64 Senate Seats since they control both chambers in 32 states.
Yep. Sanders kick started this talk and didn't shy away from his principles during the elections.
What if -- get this -- what if the reality of the current situation (the collapse of American democracy and the rise an unchecked authoritarian) is not in fact a singularly describable issue where we have to pick one of: Hillary's incompetence and messaging, Russian interference, Democratic infighting, voter suppression, campaign financing and corruption, gerrymandering, social justice, social justice backlash, Literally All White People, both-sides ism in responsible media, the equally eye-rolling and sinister cynicism of conservative media, and/or depressed voter turnout slash disconnected publics?
Like, maybe talking about one of these doesn't mean all of the others aren't relevant? Crazy, I know. Every time I see one person dismissing Russia because Hillary, dismissing Bernie because voter turnout, dismissing Fox News because both sides-ism, dismissing X because of Y and on and on ... I dunno. Democracy dies with every one of these stupid little arguments.
And none of this bullshit started with either Hillary, or Bernie, or Russia, or Trump.
(i firmly believe if you address any one of the above in whole or in part Hillary is probably president today.)
Bernie's legacy is going to be -- at the very least -- single payer. Wouldn't be too surprised if his obituaries call him the father of modern American healthcare.
So what changed in the last 48 hours that is making the GOP force a vote on health care on Tuesday? I'm confused here. This thing was dead last week. Did that depressing democratic voter turnout report play a role here? I've been out of the loop and am genuinely seeking what the issue is.