• 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 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
I guess tomorrow would be the day that Democrats can go for that infinite amendment proposal filibuster.

That might get the parliamentarian to rule Democrats out of order, but they should at least try, given the stakes. Who knows, maybe they can stall it out to the point of McCain needing to go back home.
 

Ecotic

Member
Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!
 
Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 2m2 minutes ago

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken a VERY weak position on Hillary Clinton crimes (where are E-mails & DNC server) & Intel leakers!

I am speechless
 

Ecotic

Member
Yeah, speechless, that's the word. I don't see how Jeff Sessions doesn't resign today. Your boss is trashing you publicly.
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
Oh boy I'm up at 3am with insomnia now I can watch him shitter tweet in real time
 
Just wow...

He really is setting up Jeff Sessions to be fired/resign.

His timing is once again terrible because the Senate is about to have a vote on healthcare today. Sticking it at Sessions right now probably isn't the best idea.
 

barber

Member
I like how he rants in prime time Europe. It is perfect "fun", during the day we have his rants and during the nights we have the oppo droppo.

Edit: I started rewatching "House of cards" and i must say "Arrested Development" is more similar to the current situation than that.
 
Just wow...

He really is setting up Jeff Sessions to be fired/resign.

His timing is once again terrible because the Senate is about to have a vote on healthcare today. Sticking it at Sessions right now probably isn't the best idea.

He wants the Muller investigation gone and he wants a fall guy to do it
 
D

Deleted member 1159

Unconfirmed Member
Just wow...

He really is setting up Jeff Sessions to be fired/resign.

His timing is once again terrible because the Senate is about to have a vote on healthcare today. Sticking it at Sessions right now probably isn't the best idea.

It might be th point, to take attention off it...but that's assuming some method to his madness
 

watershed

Banned
Trump wants Sessions to resign. He is trying to make his working life unbearable. I just hope the way Trump is handling an old congressional republican will sway whatever waivering republican senators that are left to vote no on healthcare. No sensible republican should be trying to hand Trump a victory.
 
Trump wants Sessions to resign. He is trying to make his working life unbearable. I just hope the way Trump is handling an old congressional republican will sway whatever waivering republican senators that are left to vote no on healthcare. No sensible republican should be trying to hand Trump a victory.

Yup.

Make Session Resign.
Install someone who doesn't have to recuse from Russia probe.
????
Profit.
 

UberTag

Member
I have to think that Sessions would have resigned immediately following the NYT interview if it was going to happen. He won't be shamed into quitting because of Donny's daily Twitter rants.
 

GrapeApes

Member
Yeah, speechless, that's the word. I don't see how Jeff Sessions doesn't resign today. Your boss is trashing you publicly.
Sessions don't care about public perception. His desire to fuck over minorites is greater than any embarrassment he might feel from Trump. Trump's going to have to fire him. Sessions know Trump's a pussy when it comes to actually firing folks.
 
Can we just appreciate that, as one of the biggest senate votes of his term is gaining momentum, he's sucking all of the air out of the room with a twitter rant about Sessions.
 
Is there any solid evidence that slogans make a difference?

Also i predict Fox is going to be pushing the "Trump didn't fire sessions, he resigned. Dems hysterical?" graphics.
 
Is there any solid evidence that slogans make a difference?

Also i predict Fox is going to be pushing the "Trump didn't fire sessions, he resigned. Dems hysterical?" graphics.

Yes, they work. Anything catchy works, it makes people remember you. An attachment is formed. These kinds of things help sway indecisive, low information voters.
 
I think slogans work for specific campaigns, not parties. You need that face behind the message who sells it and that people believe in.
 
Joe thinks republians wouldn't approve a Trump lackey for AG LOL

As far as the messaging, i think being able to get 30-60 second ads out, quickly explaining what the end of neutrality would mean for internet users, and showing how the democrats are trying to protect the people while the republicans are trying to protect ISP profits is the type of messaging they need. There's also a huge misconception that Republicans have good economic policies despite them being a disaster, i think they should also hammer that point home as well. "Republicans spent trillions to destabilize the middle east, Democrats spent trillions to give healthcare to tens of millions of american's".

A slogan isnt going to communicate that message, although im very new to politics so im probably totally wrong.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
He is going to get someone in there that will fire Mueller, and the GOP still won't do a thing.

I wonder if he actually is losing it enough to where he's going to get someone in who actually tries to prosecute Hillary and take the heat off him.
 
Delete your account.

GqRQIon.gif
 
Yeah, no. Thanks for the direct order, though.

Well then try and bring some discussion instead of endlessly asserting that "Trump is going to do X and no one will stop him." It's not helpful or interesting, it's just frustrating honestly. We've been over this again and again with the health bill, saying that THE BILL IS GOING TO PASS and just keep saying it week after week until a bill eventually actually passes because Republicans figured out how to play QWOP and stumble over the finish line.
 
McCain isn't making a trip back to DC for a vote they would lose. That is my simple calculation on why MTP will pass. Pence will cast tie break.

Collins and Paul will vote No.
 
I think slogans work for specific campaigns, not parties. You need that face behind the message who sells it and that people believe in.
Yeah, and for midterms? The only one I remember that's even close is A Contract with America and that was 23 years ago, and they may have had a different slogan anyway.
 
DFk1q1SVwAA34c6.jpg:large


But seriously, this is very troubling times for the US. Not sure what will come out of this.

Nothing.

The founders/constitution actually took into account that you can have a scenario like this. They did not consider that along with such a President we would also have a Senate and Congress that is totally toothless.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Yes, they work. Anything catchy works, it makes people remember you. An attachment is formed. These kinds of things help sway indecisive, low information voters.

I think a good slogan helps, while a bad slogan doesn't hurt.

It's like the opposite of a VP choice, where a good VP does nothing, while a bad VP can hurt.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Well then try and bring some discussion instead of endlessly asserting that "Trump is going to do X and no one will stop him." It's not helpful or interesting, it's just frustrating honestly. We've been over this again and again with the health bill, saying that THE BILL IS GOING TO PASS and just keep saying it week after week until a bill eventually actually passes because Republicans figured out how to play QWOP and stumble over the finish line.

Oh please. I was still in the process of editing when I accidentally hit post, and that's aside from the fact that we all have plenty of in-depth conversations in here. Enough of your backseat modding.

Also, if you could please point to a recent instance of me just saying this health care bill "is going to pass," I'd appreciate it. Ballad and I had this conversation weeks ago where I changed my tune into thinking it wouldn't pass.

Finally, even in defense of those who ARE saying the bill is going to pass: how is that any different than those who insist it won't?
 
McCain isn't making a trip back to DC for a vote they would lose. That is my simple calculation on why MTP will pass. Pence will cast tie break.

Collins and Paul will vote No.
So Murkowski will vote yes? Nothing suggests she will. Paul has a better shot at voting yes than her.

McCain isn't just voting on healthcare, he's voting on Russian sanctions and some other items.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
So Murkowski will vote yes? Nothing suggests she will. Paul has a better shot at voting yes than her.

McCain isn't just voting on healthcare, he's voting on Russian sanctions and some other items.

Right, and I still think people need to differentiate between a motion to proceed and the actual bill. It is by no means guaranteed that the bill would pass after the MTP was agreed upon.
 

Chichikov

Member
Nothing.

The founders/constitution actually took into account that you can have a scenario like this. They did not consider that along with such a President we would also have a Senate and Congress that is totally toothless.
The founding fathers didn't want parties, they specifically warned against the formation of them.
They also created a system that made them inevitable.

And as I repeat ad nauseam, the defense mechanism against such fuckery is alive and well, it's just that the GOP don't want to use it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom