Wethers Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 57 minutes ago, dmc515 said: If moderate Republicans get primaried out in purple states/districts, that's an advantage to for the Dems. This played out in 2010. If moderate incumbent GOP members get ousted in solidly red states, well, that has no bearing on the composition of either chamber. I don't necessarily disagree with you. Perhaps I am less sure of it than you. I guess it depends what you mean by advantage. It might be and advantage to the Dems come election time, though on the other hand, the more extreme Trump-supporting Republican might also turn out the Trump jihadist base better than the moderate one would. But I think the point is that for now, wavering Republican lawmakers are more likely to go along with Trump's insanity because of the fear of being primaried out by said jihadist base if they go against DJT. Unless their seat is very secure from threat on *both* sides. We'll see about the consequences overall. It's true, I have the (admittedly somewhat irrational) mindset that I'll believe Trump and his supporters will suffer any consequences for their shit or for being complicit in it when I actually see it happen for the first time. Other than a couple random sacrificial lackeys that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 33 minutes ago, Wethers said: I guess it depends what you mean by advantage. It might be and advantage to the Dems come election time, though on the other hand, the more extreme Trump-supporting Republican might also turn out the Trump jihadist base better than the moderate one would. Aye, the more extreme member will have the more mobilized base - but the opposition tends to mobilize their base much more easier in midterms, so it will at least be matched. The problem with "moderate" (and that is a loose term) GOP members being primaried is in safe seats, which means their more extreme replacements pulls the caucus even more further to the right. But again, that has nothing to do with composition, or basic numbers. 33 minutes ago, Wethers said: But I think the point is that for now, wavering Republican lawmakers are more likely to go along with Trump's insanity because of the fear of being primaried out by said jihadist base if they go against DJT. Unless their seat is very secure from threat on *both* sides. Yep, the fear of getting primaried by a Trump-backed candidate keeps them in line. For now. If he fires Mueller, however, the fear of sticking with Trump for any member in a remotely vulnerable seat becomes greater than the primary fear. That's the fundamentals of my argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigima Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 9 hours ago, dmc515 said: No, I read that stuff. You have not made a case for why this time would be different. It's not at all clear that Republican politicans would think that continuing to support Trump would be political suicide -- and it's not at all clear that it would. Trump supporters can be fanatical. Why do you think this particular case would cause them to jump ship, and why do you think that failing to do so would hurt them electorally? The GOP has drawn all sorts of lines in the sand before only to change their tune once Trump absolutely catapults himself past those lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 5 minutes ago, Inigima said: You have not made a case for why this time would be different. Yes, I have, you're just not buying it. That's fair enough, but don't ignore what I said - effectively twice - and pretend it's not right there. 8 minutes ago, Inigima said: It's not at all clear that Republican politicans would think that continuing to support Trump would be political suicide -- and it's not at all clear that it would. Of course it's not "clear" until it happens and the reaction can be gauged. But I have considerable experience that informs my opinion in how political elites will react to an action as brazen as firing Mueller, and such reactions almost uniformly have downstream effects. Further, how bout these statements on the prospect of firing Mueller. Or, if you'd like, this more comprehensive collection. Or the aforementioned unequivocal statement by Corker. Or Cornyn, the number two GOP Senator, saying a couple days ago to let Mueller do his job. 16 minutes ago, Inigima said: Why do you think this particular case would cause them to jump ship, and why do you think that failing to do so would hurt them electorally? Again, because firing Mueller, or pardoning Kushner or Junior before Mueller's investigation is completed, is tantamount to an admission of guilt to any reasonable person. Unfortunately "reasonable person" only pertains to about 60-65 percent of voters, but that's nothing to sneeze at for many GOP officeholders. 18 minutes ago, Inigima said: The GOP has drawn all sorts of lines in the sand before only to change their tune once Trump absolutely catapults himself past those lines. Maybe in the campaign, but what lines have the GOP drawn with Trump since he took office? They said nothing on Comey (admittedly because no one really thought that was a possibility). Seriously, maybe just I'm drunk and tired, but I'm failing to come up with any example where the GOP drew as clear a line as they have on firing Mueller above and Trump has violated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigima Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Your answer to why this will be different is "because I think it will be different." I hope you're right, but for now I will remain pessimistic. Trump has survived far too many scandals that should have destroyed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 45 minutes ago, Inigima said: Your answer to why this will be different is "because I think it will be different." I hope you're right, but for now I will remain pessimistic. Trump has survived far too many scandals that should have destroyed him. WTF? I don't know how I could have provided more support for my answer in this particular case. This is clearly pointless and your responses are pathetic at this point. I guess you've demonstrated your point - if all GOP MCs willfully ignore any contradictory information like you just did, Trump will be fine until his party is killed in the midterms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 "I have considerable experience" isn't really a good argument here. I remember during the election several people kept harping on their 'considerable experience' and how it was impossible Trump would be elected and how each new scandal would be the last and final straw and that Republicans - especially elected officials - would turn away from him in droves. THE MAN LAUGHED ON MICROPHONE ABOUT SEXUALLY ASSAULTING WOMEN. I'd like to point out that he's now in the white house. The rules are different. 'Considerable experience' means jack shit. Every time the GOP drew a clear line (the wall, the travel ban, about the Khan family, about sexual assault, etc. Lindsey Graham has been one big soundbite of line drawing, followed immediately by bending over), they then stepped back from that line. The GOP doesn't care. They aren't going to care. They will continue moving their goal posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted July 24, 2017 Share Posted July 24, 2017 Jared's executive assistants are trying to set a world record for clerical errors...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Anti-Targ Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 17 hours ago, Inigima said: No, I read that stuff. You have not made a case for why this time would be different. It's not at all clear that Republican politicans would think that continuing to support Trump would be political suicide -- and it's not at all clear that it would. Trump supporters can be fanatical. Why do you think this particular case would cause them to jump ship, and why do you think that failing to do so would hurt them electorally? The GOP has drawn all sorts of lines in the sand before only to change their tune once Trump absolutely catapults himself past those lines. I would think that on the basis of the strong belief i the deep state, lizard people and whatnot then Trump firing deep state people who are out to get him, and pardoning himself so that the deep state can't falsely charge him and find him guilty of things based solely on false facts in the fake news are both not only justified actions but also necessary and righteous actions. I don't have any problem believing that the vast majority (or the entirety) of the core Trump support will create solid justification narratives for whatever Trump does. And there are also a substantial number of people outside of that core who will never vote Democrat (as there are people who will never vote Republican). However the never Democrat people sitting outside of the Trump bubble are candidates for not turning out to vote. The question therefore is whether the never Democrats could be sufficiently demoralised to choose to not vote, and thus open the way for Democrats who may be able to motivate never Republicans to turn up on polling day and actually flip enough seats in the House and Senate to make a difference. But is Republicans are shitting the bed and Trump is doing it with explosive diarrhoea enough to actually get never Republicans out of bed, without the Democrats offering something positive to vote for? On healthcare specifically, if Democrats are being cowed into distancing themselves from single payer that just demoralises the people who would be inclined to vote for Democrats if they thought it would make a meaningful difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 This reminds me of something....scratches head Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Trump's attack on Sessions is really bad. Never thought I'd be rooting for him to hang on to avoid a recess appointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 7 minutes ago, Mexal said: Trump's attack on Sessions is really bad. Never thought I'd be rooting for him to hang on to avoid a recess appointment. Almost all GOP Senators really like Sessions a lot, both personally and professionally (and even a few Democratic Senators like him personally, even though they hate his policies); if Trump fires Sessions, I could very easily see McConnell keeping the Senate in pro forma session to prevent any recess appointments they way they did with Obama. First big health care vote is today, and I've no idea what'll happen. I could see the motion to proceed getting approved (if it doesn't, repeal is almost certainly dead), but that just allows the senate to start the floor debate. My sense is still that none of the underlying bills actually have enough support to pass, and that a success motion to proceed will just be followed by a series of failed votes. But we'll see. And what a shitshow it all is anyway, both of process and policy. In the longterm, Republicans better hope this ends in failure; either today or by Friday (I think all the votes will occur this week). Otherwise they'll own the mess the bill creates and will have created the precedent for Democrats to ram single payer through Congress next time they're in control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 Just saw this. Interesting. https://twitter.com/philiprucker/status/889829278497607680 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 26 minutes ago, Fez said: Almost all GOP Senators really like Sessions a lot, both personally and professionally (and even a few Democratic Senators like him personally, even though they hate his policies); if Trump fires Sessions, I could very easily see McConnell keeping the Senate in pro forma session to prevent any recess appointments they way they did with Obama. You're missing the point. He's trying to make Sessions quit, hoping that makes the inevitable firing of Mueller easier to swallow, or so Trump hopes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted July 25, 2017 Share Posted July 25, 2017 22 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: You're missing the point. He's trying to make Sessions quit, hoping that makes the inevitable firing of Mueller easier to swallow, or so Trump hopes. I agree Trump wants Sessions to quit, but remember Sessions gave up an Alabama Senate seat (AKA lifetime appointment) for this AG job. He's not going to quit out of politeness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.