US Politics: Passing Gas In Public is Abhorrent Behavior

[Mexal]

1 minute ago, denstorebog said:

A more down-to-earth explanation for Chaffetz' behaviour.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/04/19/another-republican-tasked-with-investigating-trump-steps-aside/?utm_term=.0dd2d054b7a0

Yea but this was yesterday before it seemed like he was stepping down from Congress all together. It's one thing not to run for re-election in 2018 when gearing up for a 2020 Governor run but it's another thing to step down from Congress in 2017 so suddenly. You don't do that if you're running for another office, you do that because there is a scandal coming out soon.

[TheKitttenGuard]

Scott Brown is going to be the Ambassador to Middle Earth:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/scott-brown-new-zealand-ambassador-nominee-237401

[Swordfish]

11 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Yea but this was yesterday before it seemed like he was stepping down from Congress all together. It's one thing not to run for re-election in 2018 when gearing up for a 2020 Governor run but it's another thing to step down from Congress in 2017 so suddenly. You don't do that if you're running for another office, you do that because there is a scandal coming out soon.

Possibly.  Or possibly for any number of other reasons.  It's all pure speculation at this point, so i'm not sure why anyone would be arguing about it.

 

[Sivin]

2 hours ago, S John said:

I think you are painting working class voters with way too broad a brush.  Race and immigration were scapegoats used by Trump to explain the decline of the white working man, one of the oldest tricks in the book.  But while many were eager to hear it, that does not mean that every working class voter who voted for Trump is racist and anti-immigrant, or if they are, that those are their primary concerns.  Their primary concern is jobs.  Particularly up north where job loss is mainly due to automation and Capitalist outsourcing, not illegal immigration.  That is right in Bernie's wheelhouse and he wouldn't have needed to have a clean sweep white of working class voters, just enough to keep Pa, Michigan, Wisconsin in the Democratic fold.  

I agree that it is completely absurd that a man who lives in a golden NYC penthouse was anointed champion of the working man, and that it worked, but his opponent was someone that conservative media has been working over for damn near 30 years.  It was a terrible match-up.  I readily admit that some of these voters were motivated by racist and xenophobic tendencies, but that is not the whole story, and I am not at all convinced that Clinton was the best shot the Democrats could have had at defeating Trump. 

 

 

 

50 minutes ago, mormont said:

I'm summarising the actual findings of research into the election.

ETA -  I'm not dismissing what you're saying, by the way, but by the same token, Clinton being a poor choice of opponent for Trump does not mean Sanders was a better one. He wasn't.

Can we be real for a minute? Some honest introspection, I think, could do the left a lot of benefit. Running a woman or a man of Jewish faith on the ticket is a mistake. 62.5 million people know that a person's sex and (perhaps) faith are irrelevant in assessing ability to govern, but the empowered minority will not accept things like 'qualifications' or 'policy'. They want someone they can relate to, which sadly in the 'rust belt' states democrats need is not a woman or a Jew. 40/50-something year old charismatic males is the way for the party to go forward, and scandal free.

It's not all bad, maybe in 16 to 20 years we can run a guy with a Latino-sounding name to boost down ticket competitiveness in Texas.

 

[LongRider]

35 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Yea but this was yesterday before it seemed like he was stepping down from Congress all together. It's one thing not to run for re-election in 2018 when gearing up for a 2020 Governor run but it's another thing to step down from Congress in 2017 so suddenly. You don't do that if you're running for another office, you do that because there is a scandal coming out soon.

I hope it's a nice juicy sex scandal as we haven't had much in the way of seeing hypocritical Repugs squirm lately.  Plus he's a Morman so all that juicy sexual repression just ads to the fun. 

[Mexal]

We shall see where all this goes. I'm intrigued.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Fragile Bird said:

...which is?

 

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

WE'RE DOING IT LIVE!

/Or perhaps Tywin is referring to his loofah/falafel mixup

Ah man, it cut out the best part, though "F it, we'll do it live" would also be a nice title that is a dig at both O'Reilly and Trump.

FB, U.S. Politics: F'ing Thing Sucks! 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Ah man, it cut out the best part, though "F it, we'll do it live" would also be a nice title that is a dig at both O'Reilly and Trump.

FB, U.S. Politics: F'ing Thing Sucks! 

I love the "producer" in that faked video...

O'Really: I'll  write it, and we'll do it live

Producer: How are you gonna write it? You can't even read it! You troglodyte humunculus!

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I love the "producer" in that faked video...

O'Really: I'll  write it, and we'll do it live

Producer: How are you gonna write it? You can't even read it! You troglodyte humunculus!

Yeah it was pretty funny. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

22 hours ago, Swordfish said:

I'm not disagreeing here, but I'm genuinely curious how we know this.

I get the argument that with Bannon in the white house, they are represented, but with Bannon losing favor, what power do they wield?

While the number of alt-right members in his cabinet isn't very high, relatively speaking, they are all in his immediate orbit (as was Flynn before he got the boot). That said, I think it's better to look at the policies he's pursuing rather than the people to gauge the level of influence the alt-right is having on Trump and Republicans in general. Take the Muslim ban as an example. Most main stream Republicans were initially repulsed by the suggestion while those on the alt right generally were strongly in favor of it and had been long before Trump said it (you can find old articles on Breitbart and other alt right sources calling for a ban). The surprising popular support for it in the base of the party during the primaries caused several main stream Republicans to slowly change their views on the ban(IIRC the polling seemed to indicate that support for the ban was higher with primary voters than it was with generic Republicans). When Trump proposed it Ryan and Pence both came out strongly against it. Now they're for it. That's one way to look at how the influence of the alt right has increased as time has gone on. A fringe position became a main stream position in the base and then it became main stream with Republicans in general and then it became main stream with the elected class. 

[Swordfish]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

While the number of alt-right members in his cabinet isn't very high, relatively speaking, they are all in his immediate orbit (as was Flynn before he got the boot). That said, I think it's better to look at the policies he's pursuing rather than the people to gauge the level of influence the alt-right is having on Trump and Republicans in general. Take the Muslim ban as an example. Most main stream Republicans were initially repulsed by the suggestion while those on the alt right generally were strongly in favor of it and had been long before Trump said it (you can find old articles on Breitbart and other alt right sources calling for a ban). The surprising popular support for it in the base of the party during the primaries caused several main stream Republicans to slowly change their views on the ban(IIRC the polling seemed to indicate that support for the ban was higher with primary voters than it was with generic Republicans). When Trump proposed it Ryan and Pence both came out strongly against it. Now they're for it. That's one way to look at how the influence of the alt right has increased as time has gone on. A fringe position became a main stream position in the base and then it became main stream with Republicans in general and then it became main stream with the elected class. 

So to summarize, the alt right influences the base, which in turn influences the GOP?  is that the gist of it?

[Fragile Bird]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

The US is finally going after Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.  Trump's buddies.

[Sivin]

32 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

The US is finally going after Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.  Trump's buddies.

Is this real?...

[Fragile Bird]

5 minutes ago, WinterFox said:

Is this real?...

CNN is reporting that indictments are being drawn up. Apparently there was hope that the candidate in Ecuador who said he would throw Assange out of the embassy might win the presidential election, but he didn't. They'll issue indictments, but as long as Assange is holed up in the embassy not much will happen.

And some talking head they interviewed, some Republican, said that while Trump was cheering him on during the election, now that's he's president he 'recognizes the security risk'. 

One wonders if Republicans are getting sweaty under the collar about what other stuff Russians might leak to Assange.

[The Anti-Targ]

2 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

CNN is reporting that indictments are being drawn up. Apparently there was hope that the candidate in Ecuador who said he would throw Assange out of the embassy might win the presidential election, but he didn't. They'll issue indictments, but as long as Assange is holed up in the embassy not much will happen.

And some talking head they interviewed, some Republican, said that while Trump was cheering him on during the election, now that's he's president he 'recognizes the security risk'. 

One wonders if Republicans are getting sweaty under the collar about what other stuff Russians might leak to Assange.

Well, if the Russian gameplan is simply to politically destabilise the USA then their target will change according to what will achieve that outcome. So pre-election the target was HRC, as a HRC POTUS would be seen as more stable. Now with an unstable DJT POTUS would it destabilise the US further if Trump was to be impeached because of dirt that Russia can dish on him, or is the destabilising of the USA better achieved with Trump staying as POTUS for as long as possible, but use other dirt to destabilise other parts of the political system that may be acting as a buffer for the instability of DJT.

Preventing Democratic gains in the mid-terms would probably be in the destabilising interests of Russia I would think. So Democrats should still be the target, if it looks like substantial gains are on the cards.

Not sure if Russia would have any interest, inclination or capability in trying to destabilise SCOTUS.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

Sassy Trump is back! Talking about chocolate cake and shooting missiles at Iraq err, Syria and whatnot...

 

[karaddin]

On 19/04/2017 at 3:54 AM, Swordfish said:

I've seen a  lot of dumb proposals before, this one is up there.  How do these guys get to the point where they put something like this forward with a  straight face?

I get that this is an attempt to pander to his base, and not a serious attempt at legislation, but is this something people would actually support?

Late catching up but its just wtf.

Problem: The POTUS is only accountable if Congress do their jobs.

Solution: Empower the handful of no longer elected prior POTUS to act on their own, because we want to funnel more and more power into the hands of the executive. Fuck it, why not just appoint them Consuls for life after they leave Presidential office? What could go wrong here?

On 20/04/2017 at 6:17 AM, denstorebog said:

The parallel to the Democrats is obvious, but I still think there's a stronger polarization going on on the right. I think the left can still, at least for an election or two, coalesce around either an establishment candidate like Biden or an outlier like Bernie, and get most everyone on board. At least enough that it doesn't seem like a lost cause from the start.

The situation seems different on the right. The alt-right is a sizeable group now, and they share a strong sense of identity that is nurtured by aggressive smear attacks against not only the left, but equally against the "cucks". In fact, their opposition to the right-wing establishment seems just as important to their identity as their opposition to liberals. It feels like they're almost sworn to their own little community to abandon ship if they're not catered to from now on.

I think one of the most central desires of the alt-right is that "people like them" should be not just the primary but the exclusive target market, and audience, of pretty much everything. Yeah, they're gonna get pissy and walk as soon as they feel they're not being pandered to and they're going to call everyone cucks on their way out. I remember my jaw dropping at the self delusion of some incel I saw after the election who was wondering what Trump was going to do for the incel problem now they'd gotten him elected. I'm not even sure what solution they'd want for that tbh.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 hours ago, Swordfish said:

So to summarize, the alt right influences the base, which in turn influences the GOP?  is that the gist of it?

For this example yes, and at some point it goes in the reverse direction. Influence can be from both the grass roots and top down. 

[Swordfish]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

For this example yes, and at some point it goes in the reverse direction. Influence can be from both the grass roots and top down. 

Interesting.  Something for me to ponder.  Thanks.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

NP SF.

In other news, is this Congressman the dumbest human being alive?:

http://www.militarytimes.com/articles/gi-bill-benefits-new-fees-future-enlistees-house-lawmakers

 

Quote

The plan — draft legislation from House Veterans Affairs Committee Chairman Phil Roe, R-Tenn. — would deduct $2,400 from future service members’ paychecks to establish eligibility for revamped post-military education benefits. This was first reported Tuesday by Task & Purpose.

Currently, the post-9/11 GI Bill offers full tuition to a four-year state college (or the equivalent tuition payout for a private school) plus a monthly housing stipend to any service member who spends at least three years on active duty, and to reservists who are mobilized to active-duty for extended periods. Troops wounded while serving are also eligible. 

Unlike the older Montgomery GI Bill benefit, the post-9/11 GI Bill does not require any fees or pay reductions for eligibility. The new proposal would change that, taking up to $100 a month from new enlistees’ paychecks for the right to access the benefit after they leave the ranks.