US politics: Just another Mueller Monday

[Dr. Pepper]

I couldn't watch election coverage tonight because it was making me too nauseous.  Now I'm drowning in an inch of optimism.  My stomach hurts worse than last year's election night.

[denstorebog]

2 minutes ago, kairparavel said:

Here's the stat I want - the restored voting rights to >150 000 former felons in Virginia. How much has *their* votes flipped things around? 

So many had the ability to vote for the first time and I've seen testimonials on Twitter from seveal who did just that. 

Well, Northam is winning by over 200k.

But margins seem really important here. It's the difference between validating Gillespie's approach and sending him packing.

[Sivin]

Speech just got punched up a bit. The fascism meter is off the scale. 

[denstorebog]

Shit. HoD could come down to a recount. Dems need to win 1 of 2 races which are now at 50/50.

[GAROVORKIN]

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

It's certainly got me reaching for my pocketbook. This is precisely the kind of thing I want to see Democrats attempting more of - races across the board, against everyone - and if they do things like get rid of primary caucuses and pledge 50-state strategies I'd be in.

And supposing the Democrats  win all back, everything. Then what?  . How can they put the house in order when they  have own divisions , issues and lack of leadership to contend with  ? And who would  they unite around ? Who will  going to lead them? 

 

 

 

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, denstorebog said:

Shit. HoD could come down to a recount. Dems need to win 1 of 2 races which are now at 50/50.

This is why you don't jinx!  

[Sivin]

5 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

And supposing the Democrats  win all back, everything. Then what?  . How can they put the house in order when they  have own division and issues to contend with  ? And who are they unite around ? Who will  going to lead them? 

 

 

 

Go get fucked, you nihilist. 

[denstorebog]

6 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

And supposing the Democrats  win all back, everything. Then what?  . How can they put the house in order when they  have own division and issues to contend with  ? And who are they unite around ? Who will  going to lead them? 

Yeah, why don't you tell us your vision for government while the rest of us are over here celebrating the refusal of the Trump cult and Gileadism. If you don't see the inherent value of booting a party that enables the literal killing of minorities as well as their suppression, I don't give a shit about your whatnowism.

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

and if they do things like get rid of primary caucuses

Getting rid of caucuses is like number 627 on my list of things the Democrats need to do.

[GAROVORKIN]

31 minutes ago, WinterFox said:

Go get fucked, you nihilist. 

I  must say I'm rather impressed by your politeness  , you must really work hard at cultivating it. 

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

And supposing the Democrats  win all back, everything. Then what?  . How can they put the house in order when they  have own division and issues to contend with  ? And who are they unite around ? Who will  going to lead them? 

Dems aren't going to win all back, everything, for a while.

But it's important to win some of the time, with a lot of different people, showing common cause. And when there are disagreements, it's important to voice them, debate them, talk about them and then move forward. 

There are a lot of people that the Democratic party can perhaps unite around - including Sanders, though he'd not be my choice. But ultimately it doesn't matter right this instant provided that the party can encourage leaders, encourage each other, and work through differences. The Democratic party is best when it embraces each other and differences and doesn't let perfect be the enemy of the good. 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, dmc515 said:

Getting rid of caucuses is like number 627 on my list of things the Democrats need to do.

It's high on my list because it goes with the general 'make things open, fair, and just' platform that is needed to inspire the base. 

[Sivin]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

Dems aren't going to win all back, everything, for a while.

But it's important to win some of the time, with a lot of different people, showing common cause. And when there are disagreements, it's important to voice them, debate them, talk about them and then move forward. 

There are a lot of people that the Democratic party can perhaps unite around - including Sanders, though he'd not be my choice. But ultimately it doesn't matter right this instant provided that the party can encourage leaders, encourage each other, and work through differences. The Democratic party is best when it embraces each other and differences and doesn't let perfect be the enemy of the good. 

This man is a Nihilist, Kalley. There's nothing to be afraid of.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

It's high on my list because it goes with the general 'make things open, fair, and just' platform that is needed to inspire the base. 

I think actually being inspiring will go a long way in inspiring the base.

[GAROVORKIN]

1 minute ago, denstorebog said:

Yeah, why don't you tell us your vision for government while the rest of us are over here celebrating the refusal of the Trump cult and Gileadism. If you don't see the inherent value of booting a party that enables the literal killing of minorities as well as their suppression, I don't give a shit about your whatnowism.

I m a cynic I don't have a vision of tomorrow . I think that things have gotten so bad that neither political party can fix things.  

 

 

 

 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said:

And supposing the Democrats  win all back, everything. Then what?  . How can they put the house in order when they  have own divisions , issues and lack of leadership to contend with  ? And who would  they unite around ? Who will  going to lead them? 

 

 

 

I'm about as harsh a critic of the Democratic party as you can find and even I would have infinitely preferred a Clinton presidency with a Schumer led Senate and a Pelosi led House than what we have now.

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

I think actually being inspiring will go a long way in inspiring the base.

Maybe. It wasn't enough for Sanders. And point of fact, Sanders would have lost even worse if it wasn't for caucuses; they were one of the only reasons he was even remotely close. 

[Kalbear]

The other thing to consider here, @GAROVORKIN, is that the worst possible outcome for the US (and the one that I think is likely) is the US falling to a single-party state. Virginia and New Jersey and Maine and (hopefully) Washington make that outcome less likely. The Democrats don't have to be in charge of everything in order to keep the US a Republic, but they have to at least be somewhat close. 

[GAROVORKIN]

54 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The other thing to consider here, @GAROVORKIN, is that the worst possible outcome for the US (and the one that I think is likely) is the US falling to a single-party state. Virginia and New Jersey and Maine and (hopefully) Washington make that outcome less likely. The Democrats don't have to be in charge of everything in order to keep the US a Republic, but they have to at least be somewhat close. 

A single party State ? No thank you, I don't want to live in Oceana .

But I think they do need some kind of a vision and blueprint. Something that will appeal to voters en masse.

[LongRider]

What happens when the Dems win everything?  

EVERYONE GETS A PONY!  

And I want my pony right now!  

This has been a good night, even without the pony.