Jump to content

US Politics: Ask Fox News


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

But voters have shown absurdly effectively that they don't care about that in the slightest, and it makes almost no difference at all in how they vote. This is especially true in the House. 

Also, creating big useful policies is hard and expensive; is it that valuable to create a bunch of policies that have zero chance of passing or even being debated?

That is what their job should be. Their job IS to keep getting re-elected.

That's always the problem. Winning elections is seen as a politician's job, instead of governing. It's why voters don't care about effective policy because it's all about the popularity contest of perpetual campaigning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

That's always the problem. Winning elections is seen as a politician's job, instead of governing. It's why voters don't care about effective policy because it's all about the popularity contest of perpetual campaigning.

Yep.  We have only ourselves to blame on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McCain is calling for special committee now. Can anyone explain to me - is this decided by majority vote in one of the chambers?

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/325330-mccain-congress-doesnt-have-credibility-to-handle-russia-probes

(Also calls Kim Jong Un a "crazy, fat kid" while he's at it.)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/325338-mccain-calls-north-korean-leader-a-crazy-fat-kid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

McCain is calling for special committee now. Can anyone explain to me - is this decided by majority vote in one of the chambers?

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/325330-mccain-congress-doesnt-have-credibility-to-handle-russia-probes

 

It is done by simple majority vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Swordfish said:
4 hours ago, Swordfish said:

it would be better, perhaps, in your eyes to devolve into ad hominem, apparently.

 

 

FYI.  It's not an ad hominem if you actually engage in said behavior.  And, Swordfish, getting cornered in your hypocrisy then claiming ignorance is your go to move.  Your Peoples Elbow.  Your "I know you are, but what am I".  The Swordfishian "ignoramus defense" let's call it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Great. That's just great.

Yep. And this is why we may be doomed. 

Rick Remender earlier today said that he hopes that there was no Russian coordination occurred, because he was not sure if the country would survive the result. I think that we're past that point. We have demonstrated that our political parties, norms and climate are such that if an executive branch member committed something like treason which aided his party, and that party happened to be in power, there is virtually nothing that can be done about it for at least 2 years and potentially far more. 

And moreover, if that person committed a crime which people could justify in some way - rape, murder, whatever - they STILL would likely be fine. 

And if they were massively corrupt, showed that they had taken bribes, they STILL would be fine.

Really, the only offense that they could take is if they make the other members of their party somewhat unelectable. And even that is in doubt. 

As a thought experiment, consider what would happen if Trump was accused of raping someone. If we had at least the same physical evidence that we had with Lewinsky. What would occur?

  • Would Fox report about it at all? (They did not report that Comey stated that there is an active criminal investigation right now)
  • Would any right-wing website report it?
  • Would most right-wing people believe it?
  • Would Trump be impeached?

It should be terrifying to note that Trump could easily rape someone and suffer zero consequences for it despite there being an abundance of proof that would otherwise convict him. The same could be said for something like bribery, fraud, corruption, almost anything. 

Just now, denstorebog said:

So provided McCain is ready to put his votes where his mouth is, the Senate would need two more R-s to go along, is that correct?

Yes, in the senate. It would not stop the house from investigating, but the senate could do so. That said, there is almost zero sign that you would have Republicans doing that, including McCain, because he's one of the most chickenshit Republicans that exists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is fun. US Officials: Info suggests Trump associates may have coordinated with Russians.

Quote

The FBI has information that indicates associates of President Donald Trump communicated with suspected Russian operatives to possibly coordinate the release of information damaging to Hillary Clinton's campaign, US officials told CNN.

This is partly what FBI Director James Comey was referring to when he made a bombshell announcement Monday before Congress that the FBI is investigating the Trump campaign's ties to Russia, according to one source.

The FBI is now reviewing that information, which includes human intelligence, travel, business and phone records and accounts of in-person meetings, according to those U.S. officials. The information is raising the suspicions of FBI counterintelligence investigators that the coordination may have taken place, though officials cautioned that the information was not conclusive and that the investigation is ongoing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to be Mr. Naive here, not after 2 months of the collective, seemingly unending abuse we've all suffered, but this is a lot of shoes dropping at the same time now. On top of a really unpopular bill splitting Republicans in half and some seriously bad polling for Trump. Sean Spicer is having the shakes and a shitload of cocaine somewhere right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

I don't want to be Mr. Naive here, not after 2 months of the collective, seemingly unending abuse we've all suffered, but this is a lot of shoes dropping at the same time now. On top of a really unpopular bill splitting Republicans in half and some seriously bad polling for Trump. Sean Spicer is having the shakes and a shitload of cocaine somewhere right now.

It felt like that during the campaign too. Again, who thought that Trump would recover after Pussygate?

Now, the good news is that with this much smoke some Republicans will feel more at ease with not actually going with Trump on things, including the AHCA. That helps. This is showing up in other ways, like with this report from NYT indicating that the Kochs are willing to pay for people to not vote for the AHCA.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mexal said:

Aren't we getting in to Iran-Contra sort of territory here? Some seriously dodgy shit happens / happened, big congressional enquiry +/- some criminal charges / pardons for minor functionaries. No significant electoral consequence, in that GHWB won the 1988 presidential election. Might be that Trump could not get away with issuing pardons, but unless a large pile of mud, laced with shit, sticks to Trump himself it's unlikely this affects anyone in the administration or in congress in any way that matters (i.e. re-election).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the latest edition of the Trump-Russia scandal is interesting, I have been wondering lately about something potentially far more devastating to far more people - specifically, the economic effects of the conservative Republican agenda, should it come to pass. 

Three elements - the republican health care plan, the tax cuts for the rich, and the shift from domestic to military spending.

The first automatically makes health care unaffordable for tens of millions of people.  That hurts them - and those still on insurance, who get to pay increased rates.  Some of those folks may opt out as well.  Additionally, healthcare is big biz in the US, with millions (?) of people on the payroll, and millions more jobs directly supported by it.  A great many of these jobs could go away under this plan.

Tax cuts for the rich amounts to an increased tax burden on the lower castes.  This means less disposable income - fewer people buying the things that keep the economy humming.  It also deals a major blow to an already struggling retail sector. This could also have a major effect on things like the real estate market. 

Pay for most folks this past decade or two has not been good.  More and more people in the 'minimum wage + a dollar or two' category who *depend,* one way or another, on one or more of the programs being cut.  Not good.

Taken together, I see a strong potential for two things:

1 - A major economic 'crash' within a year or two of these programs being enacted.  A crash worse than the 2007-2008 mess.

2 - A steep decline in the number of people in the 'middle class' as in this group being reduced by half, also within a short time span.  And no effective recovery for decades - effectively, this situation becomes permanent. 

Even the GOP will be forced to admit the existence of the crash when it occurs.  What interests me is their response.  Would a major disaster, created by their pet policies, be enough for them to renounce those policies? 

Thoughts?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not heard anyone connecting these dots. For the past week Sean Spicer and 45 himself have been saying 'there's more information that's going to come out'.

That begs the question - did 45 already know everything Nunes scurried off to tell him? And if 45 already knew whatever the information was, who told him? Or is there more information that 45 has and is going to release?

ETA:  Just saw a CNN discussion connecting such dots, and speculating the whole Nunes thing was carefully orchestrated to draw attention, once again, away from the bad news of Comey saying there was an active investigation of 45's associates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nunes acting as a frontman for the White House is pure crazy-pill territory for three reasons.

First, obviously, a chairman of an oversight committee behaving in such a manner is not only unprecedented, but an embarrassment to the country and our political system.

Second, his "revelation" is logically (I know, I know, not that that matters) no different than how the public has been getting any of this information.  At worst, the only improper thing he's accusing anyone of is the "unmasking" of incidental surveillance.  That's exactly how we learned about Flynn in the first place - and the WHO clearly didn't care he lied to Pence until it went public.

Three, the substance of what he's saying effectively confirms Trump DID lie in his ludicrous tweet, yet Trump claims he's vindicated by this.

5 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

Sooo, the GOP House is going with trying to secure a moral victory they know has absolutely no chance of actually being enacted.  Which they did during the Obama administration, like, over 60 times.  K.  And BTW, that's the only way you get GOP members in blue and purple districts to vote for this after stripping essential benefits - if they know it's never gonna amount to anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nunes should be stripped of the chairmanship, removed from the committee, and investigated. The investigation should be handed to an independent commission, Kenneth Starr style.

Re: Gorsuch, the Dems are in a no-win position. It's not their fault, it's the Republicans' fault, but it's unclear to me what they should do.

Option A: Be the adult in the room and allow Trump to make a nomination as president. Downsides: Rewards Republicans cynical obstruction of Obama's appointment, delegitimizes SCOTUS, plus Trump's legitimacy is in question due to the Russia allegations.

Option B: Argue that Trump has no right to make appointments, based on Russia etc. or on the fact that Obama was denied his rightful appointment. Downsides: Lose moral high ground and ability to argue about the obstruction, probably can't stop it anyway, make SCOTUS obstruction the new normal.

That's assuming they don't have the numbers to block Gorsuch, or that they should even try -- who knows what eldritch horror Trump would nominate in Gorsuch's place. But given Gorsuch's "I don't know nothin' about nothin'" performance in his confirmation hearings so far, I don't really want him on the Court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This AHCA stuff is insane. Even if you agree with the general premise of what Ryan wants to do, the haphazard and careless way they are going about things is just crazy. Republicans have no idea what this bill does anymore, and its contents are such a random assemblage of provisions that there is almost no one happy with the bill. I saw an analysis of the bill as it was yesterday, saying it would actually raise insurance premiums, the uninsured rate, and Federal costs more than just a one-sentence bill saying that the ACA was repealed in its entirety. And yet there's still a non-zero chance that the bill becomes a law.

On the upside, I think that chance is pretty slim, and getting slimmer. Last night Charlie Dent finally formally came out against the bill, likely due to leadership apparently caving to the Freedom Caucus on getting rid of the ACA's essential health benefits requirements; which I don't think he'd do unless most of his 'Tuesday Group' caucus was ready to do so as well. And its still not clear if that was enough for the Freedom Caucus anyway.

Plus, there were already 51 Senate votes against the bill because it was too conservative, and now its even more conservative (maybe; no one has even seen what the bill currently looks like). And there's a huge number of provisions that almost certainly are going to get stripped out due to reconciliation rules.

If Republicans wanted to give a tax cut to the rich, which is the only coherent part of the bill, they should've just done that separately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...