• 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 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zolo

Member
My thought is that while the Kaepernick movement has suffered a lot of signal loss in the last week, what happened is much better than what could've happened (like the GOP-donating NFL owners closing ranks and making anyone who knelt know that they'd suffer the same fate as Kaep).

Yeah. I think this is what Trump expected to happen, and he's upset it isn't which is why he's also rambling about it being made a rule to stand.

Then, he saw the people standing in protest and tried to claim that, so as to eke out some kind of win in the situation.
 
Is anybody else starting to think that our president might be a deranged fascist?

Most people, many on this forum, too, are going to be fine and dandy with that as long as people don't do anything that upset their daily life.

"Nothing is affecting me at the moment so I don't get why all these uppity antifas/nfl'ers/protesters are interrupting me ability to pretend nothing is wrong!"
 

Zukkoyaki

Member
Thankfully, he's also a fucking moron.

Could you imagine if he were a smart deranged fascist?
That's the most terrifying thing about this presidency to me. What happens if (or when?!) A capable lunatic gets elected? Hopefully when Trump is gone the country doesn't forget how fucked up the GOP really is the way they did with the Bush administration.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Well I think despite his derangement Trump's cabinet was pretty run of the mill evil. Mnuchin, Price, Pruitt, etc. These people are more than capable of inflicting tremendous damage. And they have and will.

I just think that legislatively we had no idea how wacked out the party is.
 
Well I think despite his derangement Trump's cabinet was pretty run of the mill evil. Mnuchin, Price, Pruitt, etc. These people are more than capable of inflicting tremendous damage. And they have and will.

I just think that legislatively we had no idea how wacked out the party is.
Yeah, any area where Trump and his cabinet have 100% control over has been shit. Anything that needs legislative approval? lolno.

Guessing there won't be a push to repeal Obamacare in the next three hours so we can pop the champagne for that I suppose.

Good news for House recruitment, we might actually have a decent candidate for Utah's 4th congressional district in Salt Lake City Mayor Ben McAdams. Presidential-wise, it hasn't been much better to us than the other three districts, but Jim Matheson held this district through 2014, and Mia Love isn't a particularly strong incumbent (probably because a black woman, even a Republican one, is a hard sell to most Mormons, not that anyone will acknowledge what makes her a weak candidate in a state like Utah).

http://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...sidering-a-run-against-mia-love-for-congress/
 

Ogodei

Member
Thankfully, he's also a fucking moron.

Could you imagine if he were a smart deranged fascist?

The issue is that dictators usually need to consolidate power before they get to the derangement stage. The smart ones start smart and then go crazy. The ones that burn out in a half-assed attempted coup are the ones that were nuts from the jump.
 
Yeah, any area where Trump and his cabinet have 100% control over has been shit. Anything that needs legislative approval? lolno.

Guessing there won't be a push to repeal Obamacare in the next three hours so we can pop the champagne for that I suppose.

Good news for House recruitment, we might actually have a decent candidate for Utah's 4th congressional district in Salt Lake City Mayor Ben McAdams. Presidential-wise, it hasn't been much better to us than the other three districts, but Jim Matheson held this district through 2014, and Mia Love isn't a particularly strong incumbent (probably because a black woman, even a Republican one, is a hard sell to most Mormons, not that anyone will acknowledge what makes her a weak candidate in a state like Utah).

http://www.sltrib.com/news/politics...sidering-a-run-against-mia-love-for-congress/

Yeah, I observed once that Love represents an R+13 district but has never received more than 54% of the vote - an extremely weak performance relative to the district's PVI. A Democratic wave might put her in genuine danger... just not for all the right reasons, as you say.
 

Teggy

Member
May just be Claude Taylor nonsense but a number of rumors on twitter that Assange is getting kicked out of his hole.
 

Not really. Paul Ryan is just a incompetent/phony intellectual empowered by the media to pursue his agenda. And he's being punished these days to a certain degree for being dumb and morally wrong. Media can only spin so much for him.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
yeah but did hillary excite you
That’s a pretty personal question.

Edit:
Starting? I feel like that came and went more than a year ago.
*McBane that’s the joke.gif*

True story I was SO excited to vote for Hillary to be this country’s first woman president that I wouldn’t let my son fill in the bubble by her name because goddamnit I was going to vote for her. I let him fill in Kamala’s bubble for senator instead.
 
Holy shit, Ben McAdams is legit great and if he's willing to run against Mia Love, that's a great sign.

Love's district hates her for being a black woman so she's tried to rebrand/remake herself as a moderate on non-abortion issues, but I don't think it will take.
 

Hubbl3

Unconfirmed Member
Oh my god what is this

This can't be posted enough.

quote-i-ll-tell-you-what-s-at-the-bottom-of-it-if-you-can-convince-the-lowest-white-man-he-lyndon-b-johnson-107-70-60.jpg
 

Seven years after Republicans first started targeting her in ads, Pelosi is a little less toxic but not any more popular. According to the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll, 25 percent of voters have a favorable view on her and 43 percent have an unfavorable view.

Looking good!
 
Only took two years for Paul Ryan to achieve Pelosi numbers.

Just accept that there will never be a popular Speaker and move on.

I'm just offering my view as someone who still sees these things from the outside. At some point Democrats have to move on too, from the leaders who have hung onto power in your party for decades at your own expense. It took a shocking Clinton loss for the Clintons to finally relinquish that power, we'll see what happens in 2018.
 
He, or anyone new, would have a lot more don't know/not sure opinions. Which is preferable to 14 years of pent up hatred.

25% favorable + 43% unfavorable = 68% of the electorate that gives a shit either way.

Nearly a third still couldn't care less, undermining your point about the protracted hate campaign against Pelosi having any demonstrable effect.
 

Mizerman

Member
Only took two years for Paul Ryan to achieve Pelosi numbers.

Just accept that there will never be a popular Speaker and move on.

Yep. It's naive to think otherwise, especially in this day and age. The whole "oh, but such and such who replaces such and such won't be as unpopular from the get go!" means jack shit.
 

Wilsongt

Member
America is so fucked with Trump and his crew at the helm. I know it's only for 3 more years, but the elecorate is full of fucking idiots who refuse to give Democrats enough time to reverse and fix Republican mistakes.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
This week's Political Gabfest with Ross Douthat and Ruth Marcus is so damn insufferable. From acting like Bob Corker is some moderate darling, to pleas for everyone to just get along, to "both sides"ing the Kaepernick protests. I had to turn it off at that point.

If neoliberal moderates want to be liked, maybe get better commentators who don't constantly have bad takes on everything.
 
With Price resigning, I have to ask, has Trump just given up on nominating people to fill positions? Seems like he got bored of it and just gave up.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Wait, Price resigned? Man, there's always so much going on.

It's incredible how many people have quit from Trump's administration now.
 
I'm just offering my view as someone who still sees these things from the outside. At some point Democrats have to move on too, from the leaders who have hung onto power in your party for decades at your own expense. It took a shocking Clinton loss for the Clintons to finally relinquish that power, we'll see what happens in 2018.
I don't even necessarily disagree with the idea of Pelosi stepping down, it's just the next question is "who?" If the alternative is Tim Ryan, no thank you.

I just feel like Pelosi's unpopularity, in terms of actually preventing Democrats from winning seats is overstated. A lot of people will point to Georgia's 6th, but that was an election that basically generated presidential turnout and the worst we did was match Clinton's numbers. People seem to forget its move left was on the backs of many Romney-Clinton voters, and even then it still went for Trump. And our candidate had several flaws of his own.

Ultimately I don't think Pelosi will be a very effective boogeyman when her party is completely out of power, and on top of that Trump is going around talking about how great she is. What she could be though is a very effective Speaker, so even if we could replace her with more of a blank slate leader for a few months it wouldn't be worth the trade off.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Are Steny Hoyer or Jim Clyburn any good? As the second and third in current democratic house leadership I'd imagine they'd be in position to take over, though both are nearing 80 years old. It's kinda weird that Dick Gephardt and his first whip are both still younger than any of the current top 3 ranking democratic representatives. Doesn't seem like they're setting up great for Pelosi's exit like that.
 
Are Steny Hoyer or Jim Clyburn any good? As the second and third in current democratic house leadership I'd imagine they'd be in position to take over, though both are nearing 80 years old. It's kinda weird that Dick Gephardt and his first whip are both still younger than any of the current top 3 ranking democratic representatives. Doesn't seem like they're setting up great for Pelosi's exit like that.
Yeah, if I had any critique of the current Dem leadership it'd be that they don't seem to be doing much to prep for the next generation. Similar to everyone assuming Clinton would be the nominee meant we didn't have a bench for 2016.
 

Maengun1

Member
Pelosi is amazing. Possibly the most effective/talented politician currently operating.

I'm also in the camp where I don't have an issue with the idea of her stepping down per se (she's obviously getting up there in years!) but not for someone who isn't even 10% as good as her.

And I also don't really give a crap about the power of ~attacks~ against her. Remove Pelosi from the picture and replace her with someone else, and:

1) the GOP will STILL talk about Pelosi, anyway
2) the smear machine will immediately start up on the new person, give it 6 months to a year and they'll be as hated as she ever was

I know this sounds similar to defenses of Clinton last year, but it's still true IMO.

The party does need to be building up new blood though.
 
Some of you put way too much stock into the power of an individual in Congress. If Mitch McConnell had 55 Republicans instead of 52, he'd be a genius strategist enacting agenda like a god. How effective you are is heavily reliant on how big your majority is.

Look at how much turnover has occurred in recent history in terms of leadership for both parties. Congress is a machine, it doesn't rely on any one person to get stuff done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_leaders_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Majority_Minority_Leaders.htm
 
Some of you put way too much stock into the power of an individual in Congress. If Mitch McConnell had 55 Republicans instead of 52, he'd be a genius strategist enacting agenda like a god. How effective you are is heavily reliant on how big your majority is.

Look at how much turnover has occurred in recent history in terms of leadership for both parties. Congress is a machine, it doesn't rely on any one person to get stuff done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_leaders_of_the_United_States_House_of_Representatives

https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Majority_Minority_Leaders.htm

And you put way too little...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom