• 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.

kirblar

Member
Because as we all know, it's perfectly fine to have left-wing dictators driving their countries into a downward spiral of poverty, hunger while seizing dictatorial control. But only left-wing ones, because those are the "good" ones.

(this is not fine, excusing them because they support your ideology makes you the political equivalent of a Paterno-era Penn State apologist.)
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
President Trump has outpaced his immediate predecessors when it comes to having his choices for federal judgeships confirmed.

The Senate this week approved a fifth Trump nominee, placing Trump on a faster pace for approvals than either President Barack Obama or President George W. Bush.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...l-nominee-confirmed-outpacing-obama-bush.html

Hey guys, let's keep adhering to purity tests and taking "principled" stances, rather than actually, you know, winning elections that have ripple effects through all aspects of government, especially certain ones that would fuck us over for the next FIFTY YEARS.
 

Maengun1

Member
Trump tweeted for civil unrest when Obama won re-election.

Honest question, how long before he tweets the same as president?


I would guess by the end of this year at the earliest and end of next year at the latest


If Trump leave the presidency under any circumstances BUT after two full terms and being succeeded by another republican (which ...uh...isn't likely or god help us all) then he will be telling his supporters to riot in the streets as he goes.
 
and the GOP does have 4 more legislatures than the 34 listed: Montana, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina.

So they could do it now if they wanted to. They won't because a Convention would be chaos that no-one would be able to control and god knows what would come out of it.


hopefully no one tells trump. dude will whine about it incessantly
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
I find it more a possibility for trump to just say I PARDON EVERYONE SO LETS MOVE ON than him to fire sessions and try to get Muller out.
This.

Edit: it won't work but I expect him to. then it's like "okay we will just release a report of everything you did anyway. And still prosecute the state crimes"
 

Blader

Member
It's really annoying to see leftist thinkpieces and twitter threads crying about how Clinton megadonors are already lining up to anoint Kamala Harris as the 2020 nominee. Motherfuckers, I was on the Kamala train months before these Clinton donors did shit!

Harris is probably in the best position to take the left flank of the notables who are clearly running, but I think she has three key weaknesses, which are:

1. The Mnuchin funding issue.
2. Her track record as AG.
3. Her lukewarm healthcare stance.

All of those can be relatively easily fixed. If she avers big money donations and announces she won't be using a PAC, comes out as substantively in favour of singlepayer, and talks criminal justice reform, she can play off the former as not knowing better (as it's broadly speaking a single incident) and the latter two as 'evolutions', but they're relatively understandable ones.

Her history isn't as developed as Gillibrand, who comes across as a snake oil saleswoman, nor does she have ties quite as difficult for the left to swallow as Booker or Patrick. It's a good position to be in.

Kamala is lukewarm on health care? Gillibrand is a snake oil saleswoman?!

We'll get New Jersey too.

Other targets for trifecta flips:

Maine (governorship + 1 seat in the State Senate)
Colorado (1 seat in the State Senate)
New Mexico (governorship)
Nevada (governorship)
Vermont (governorship)
Illinois (governorship)
Maryland (governorship)
Massachusetts (governorship)
New York (State Senate, hard due to IDC fuckery)
New Hampshire (governorship, State Senate and State House - seems like a heavy lift but the State House is notoriously swingy due to being so large)

Win all of those and we go from having 6 trifectas (8 in November, hopefully) to 18. All Clinton states. The other two - Virginia and Minnesota - have Dem governors with full GOP legislatures. VA could flip its state house this November and MN in 2018, but the State Senate isn't up in VA until 2019, and MN in 2020. In both instances, Democrats would just need to pick up one seat, assuming the Lt. Governor in Virginia stays a Democrat. MN just one seat would give us the majority.

We're not getting the MA governorship. Baker's approval ratings are like 70 percent now and the only time I've seen anything resembling a large anti-Baker sentiment was during the Muslim ban protests when people were chanting "Where's Governor Baker?" And he's done a good job of putting daylight between himself and Trump ever since (e.g. Planned Parenthood, climate alliance). He's going to coast through re-election.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
It is something not uncommon with some left wing groups, but I never understood why. I try to chalk it up with some form of anti-establishment, but it doesn't seem always true.

There's a long history of Trotskyists and other anti-authoritarian lefties siding with some really nasty people. During the Cold War, socialists who opposed the Soviet Union often support the country's enemies. DSA founder Michael Harrington supported the Vietnam War with the naive hope that toppling the authoritarian North Vietnamese government would allow a libertarian socialism to rise from the ashes. Anti-Soviet socialist governments, like Maoist China and Albania under Enver Hoxha, actually supported the CIA-backed jihadists who later became the Taliban.

Even though the USSR is 25 years dead, divisions still exist between Marxist-Leninists and Trots/Democratic Socialists. Today's MLs generally support authoritarian governments who reject American imperialism, while Trots/DemSocs recognize that countries like Russia, Iran, and Syria can be just as oppressive as the USA. This causes the two types of leftists to fight each other almost as bitterly as leftists fight liberals, with MLs often accusing other socialists of being "social imperialists" or liberals in disguise. You'll even see folks on twitter arguing that Chapo Trap House is a CIA tool meant to promote imperialism in the American left.

Western leftists should just avoid picking sides in faraway conflicts. The war in Ukraine, where fascists can be found on both sides, has no good guys. Projecting our own ideological disputes onto faraway civil wars isn't productive.
 
We're not getting the MA governorship. Baker's approval ratings are like 70 percent now and the only time I've seen anything resembling a large anti-Baker sentiment was during the Muslim ban protests when people were chanting "Where's Governor Baker?" And he's done a good job of putting daylight between himself and Trump ever since (e.g. Planned Parenthood, climate alliance). He's going to coast through re-election.

My addled red-state mind can't understand why these blue states elect Republican governors. They'll blather about a Republican being a check on a Democratic legislature, but in Massachusetts, Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both chambers. So what was the point? If they really want something passed, they can bypass Baker entirely.
 
My addled red-state mind can't understand why these blue states elect Republican governors. They'll blather about a Republican being a check on a Democratic legislature, but in Massachusetts, Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both chambers. So what was the point? If they really want something passed, they can bypass Baker entirely.

in Massachusetts' case, midterm electorates really don't like Martha Coakley
 

Toth

Member
So at this clan rally he's holding, did he just introduce the switching governor by making fun of his weight? He kept saying large, large, large.
 

Blader

Member
My addled red-state mind can't understand why these blue states elect Republican governors. They'll blather about a Republican being a check on a Democratic legislature, but in Massachusetts, Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both chambers. So what was the point? If they really want something passed, they can bypass Baker entirely.

Democrats in the legislature prefer having a Republican governor to play the game with, and I'm sure most voters probably don't even know if or when Dems have veto proof majorities anyway.

Martha Coakley was also a bad candidate who shouldn't have been run in the first place.
 

kirblar

Member
My addled red-state mind can't understand why these blue states elect Republican governors. They'll blather about a Republican being a check on a Democratic legislature, but in Massachusetts, Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both chambers. So what was the point? If they really want something passed, they can bypass Baker entirely.
Because in a blue state, the "middle" shifts accordingly, just like R states elect conservative Dems.

Also, because unpopular governors like O'Malley can leave an annoyed electorate in their wake.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
IKamala is lukewarm on health care? Gillibrand is a snake oil saleswoman?!

Kamala has not come out in favor of medicare-for-all (but there's reason to believe she might), so it's reasonable to say her healthcare positions can use some work.

This just isn't very remarkable because most Democrats are even less open to any kind of single payer. Most Democratic officials are more conservative than their constituents, because we have a political system that does not adequately represent the policy desires and material needs of the American people.

We should all have qualms about certain aspects of Kamala's record, but she's definitely a step in the right direction in ways Booker or Biden would not be.
 
Trump tweeted for civil unrest when Obama won re-election.

Honest question, how long before he tweets the same as president?


I would guess by the end of this year at the earliest and end of next year at the latest

Well the right is already talking about hiw this is all a coup d'état. Which is pretty damaging to the country, because while unlikely it could lead to a rival war.
 

sphagnum

Banned
honestly I hadn't even read that article or knew that it was A Thing since I don't have a Twitter account, I was just making a quick response.

so oops on me
 
My addled red-state mind can't understand why these blue states elect Republican governors. They'll blather about a Republican being a check on a Democratic legislature, but in Massachusetts, Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both chambers. So what was the point? If they really want something passed, they can bypass Baker entirely.

White people in blue states get conned easily by moderate darling governors.
 
Because in a blue state, the "middle" shifts accordingly, just like R states elect conservative Dems.

Also, because unpopular governors like O'Malley can leave an annoyed electorate in their wake.

There is a lot of this. Take the recall of Gray Davis and election of Schwarzenegger. You see the same thing in reverse in red states, see Louisiana.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
If the woman wins the Democratic nomination in 2020, does she pick a woman as VP, or is that a nonstarter at this point?

Average person doesn't give two shits about the VP. Only political junkies care. They pick whoever best pacifies the wing of the party that didn't win. If that's a woman, that's a woman.
 
Murkowski is locking in a pro forma Senate schedule according to reputable twitter sources.

No recess appointments...

Hell, if Trump fires Sessions I doubt they ever confirm any replacement he nominates. Not this year, at least. It'll be acting AG Rosenstein and then if they fire Rosenstein it'll be acting AG Rachel Brand and so on.

Trump has painted himself into a corner and his world is shrinking rapidly and his ability to act on any matter that touches this investigation is going to get more and more restricted.

Also if Trump tries to fire Sessions or Rosenstein you can bet that Kelly steps down.
 

Blader

Member
Hell, if Trump fires Sessions I doubt they ever confirm any replacement he nominates. Not this year, at least. It'll be acting AG Rosenstein and then if they fire Rosenstein it'll be acting AG Rachel Brand and so on.

Grassley pretty expressly said that Judiciary would not take up any AG confirmations this year if Trump fires Sessions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom