U.S. Politics: Girthers Vs. Anti-Girthers

[Sivin]

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

I don't understand this. This has nothing to do with HRC. Trump hit 57% disapproval in 2017, specifically December 15th to 17th. 

My point is that the idea that we're close to a 'tipping point' is wishful thinking. 

 

Shit, my bad. I was thinking you meant 2016. 

Regardless, my point stands. He hit 57 and then it dropped over the holidays and the tax bill. Now its back up, maybe that starts to convince R's that some people just aren't going to take the clownshow and start jumping ship no matter how nice the corporate handouts are. 

[mormont]

1 hour ago, OldGimletEye said:

Of course this presents an interesting question of where does the more socially moderate Republican Business wing go?

Doesn't look like they're going anywhere. They may be socially moderate in principle, but so long as the Republicans are delivering tax cuts they'll stick around.

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, mormont said:

Doesn't look like they're going anywhere. They may be socially moderate in principle, but so long as the Republicans are delivering tax cuts they'll stick around.

More accurately, so long as the Democrats are simply evil, horrible, no good, very bad people that eat babies and worship satan, they're not going to change. They might choose not to vote - but they're not going to vote Democrat. 

[Maithanet]

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I don't understand this. This has nothing to do with HRC. Trump hit 57% disapproval in 2017, specifically December 15th to 17th. 

My point is that the idea that we're close to a 'tipping point' is wishful thinking.

Indeed.  Trump's popularity isn't good, but it is not cratering.  If anything, his polling with Republicans has been improving of late. 

However, I do think that more and more there are signs that Trump's popularity is almost entirely built on the economy.  There is a large portion of the Republican base that dislike him personally, but will forgive him his personal failings because he is delivering on jobs*.  If the economy stumbles a bit, that segment of the Republican party that is ready to ditch him.  And I don't mean a huge 2007 redux economic downfall, I just mean an ordinary recession with some lagging growth and stock selloffs.  If that happens, Trump's approval could easily drop another 8-10 points. 

* I know this isn't true, I'm quoting the Republican line. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, mormont said:

Doesn't look like they're going anywhere. They may be socially moderate in principle, but so long as the Republicans are delivering tax cuts they'll stick around.

Yup. I’ve got a lot of these types in my family. They want to advance the rights of minorities and the LGBT community, combat global warming and find the Muslim ban to be gross, but don’t you dare interfere with their ability to make vast sums of money. If only country club Republicans could be a little less greedy…

[Paladin of Ice]

15 minutes ago, IamMe90 said:

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/7sfw2c/im_david_frum_author_of_the_new_book_trumpocracy/ 

David Frum AMA on Reddit. Apologies if this has already been linked. 

About as spineless as I would have expected - conveniently will not answer any question that refers to his tenure with the Bush Administration. 

Honest question: why should he answer questions about speeches written in 2001-2002 rater than commenting on the here and now? And why should we care about 2001-2002 more than now?

[Kalbear]

14 minutes ago, WinterFox said:

Shit, my bad. I was thinking you meant 2016. 

Regardless, my point stands. He hit 57 and then it dropped over the holidays and the tax bill. Now its back up, maybe that starts to convince R's that some people just aren't going to take the clownshow and start jumping ship no matter how nice the corporate handouts are. 

It really doesn't. He also hit 57% aggregate disapproval in August and September. And October. 

Meanwhile, after the tax law got passed, the aggregate 'vote for generic dem/republican' poll went from +10 Dem to +4 Dem. Which makes said jumping ship even less likely.

ETA: sorry, my bad - it's not 4, it's 5. Point still largely stands.

[S John]

After trying them about 750 times I still do not like IPA's very much.  They are OK.  Only get one when I want to start off with a beer with a higher abv %.  

America makes a lot of great beer to be proud of, and the quantity and quality of microbrews today compared to just 15-20 years ago is astounding.  But Europe, and Germany in particular, still reigns supreme in this category, imo.  It's like, for example, there are some good craft American lagers and pilsners out there that I drink regularly,  several that I genuinely really like made right here in Texas...but are they better then a classic Bavarian Helles or German Pils?  No.  No, they are not.  Are some American wheats pretty good?  Yes.  Better than the best German ones?  Not really.  Are American Belgians better than Belgian Belgians?  No.  And hell, for that matter - how many Stouts out there are as good as a good old fashioned Guinness?  Not many, my friends. 

IPA's might be the one variety where the US truly outshines the competition, but as I'm not a big fan of the style, I award the beer points to Europe.  

[Kalbear]

If someone can find a better beer brand than Unibroue I'd love to hear it. Maudite, in particular, is astounding - so good that it actually makes people who don't drink beer like it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Interesting. I’ve seen multiple insiders say today that the reason why the Dems caved so quickly is because they miscalculated Trump’s reaction to the shutdown. Apparently they were banking on him losing his mind on Twitter and making a ton of irrational statements. Instead he largely remained silent over the weekend, so they decided to accept the CHIP funding deal and hope that since the shutdown was so short, everyone would forget it come the 2018 elections. Not sure if that’s 100% accurate, but I trust the journalistic integrity of the people reporting it.

[IamMe90]

24 minutes ago, Paladin of Ice said:

Honest question: why should he answer questions about speeches written in 2001-2002 rater than commenting on the here and now? And why should we care about 2001-2002 more than now?

A lot of the questions are on point about how his part in helping frame the "axis of evil" narrative of the Bush administration 1) helped spur the recent wave of xenophobia and nationalism that allowed for the rise of Trump and continues today, and 2) is at odds with his portrayal of the Trump administration as an "aberration" of the Republican Party. 

I'm not sure what the point of his AMA is at all, to be honest; as such, I think a lot of people would just like to hear some kind of admission or recognition of the part he played in laying the groundwork for what's happening now. It's kind of hard to take what he has to say about the here and now seriously when he apparently doesn't seem to ascribe any sort of causal connection between what happened during the Bush administration and what is happening with the current iteration of the GOP. 

[Mexal]

20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Interesting. I’ve seen multiple insiders say today that the reason why the Dems caved so quickly is because they miscalculated Trump’s reaction to the shutdown. Apparently they were banking on him losing his mind on Twitter and making a ton of irrational statements. Instead he largely remained silent over the weekend, so they decided to accept the CHIP funding deal and hope that since the shutdown was so short, everyone would forget it come the 2018 elections. Not sure if that’s 100% accurate, but I trust the journalistic integrity of the people reporting it.

I buy it. I mean, they didn't really have an exit strategy and they were never going to get an actual deal for the Dreamers. Plus, shutting down the government never looks good. I don't think it'll make a lick of difference come 2018 mid terms.

[Maithanet]

11 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I buy it. I mean, they didn't really have an exit strategy and they were never going to get an actual deal for the Dreamers. Plus, shutting down the government never looks good. I don't think it'll make a lick of difference come 2018 mid terms.

Agreed with all of this.  I was surprised the Democrats went the shutdown route, and once it happened it seemed obvious that they weren't in it for the long haul.  The only hope of passing a dreamer deal is getting McConnell and Trump on board by giving them something they really want, and then making them force the House to pass it.  There is simply no way that a filibuster on the budget is going to force that chain of events. 

While obviously Trump doesn't take his strategy cues from me, I see this as potentially a winning issue for him.  I think there's a deal to be made where Trump gets the Wall+border security funding and a cutback of legal immigration AND more military funding for a DREAMer deal (which is itself broadly popular).  Plus he could burnish his bipartisan credentials.  I'm sure the racist/anti immigration wing will howl, but who the hell else are they going to support?  He could sell such a deal.

But I doubt Trump will make that deal, because he is bad at making deals, and he only cares about the opinion of his anti-immigrant base. 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I’m saying it costs $4-$5 a bottle. I’m starting a new political party, The Cost Of IPAs Is Too Damn High Party! Now I just got to get on that growing a crazy beard tip.

Oh, gotcha.  Fair enough...

1 hour ago, Hereward said:

Bah, as we invented IPA, it's Eurocommie by definition! 

...Yeah, then blame those hopped-up English.

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

Indeed.  Trump's popularity isn't good, but it is not cratering.  If anything, his polling with Republicans has been improving of late. 

However, I do think that more and more there are signs that Trump's popularity is almost entirely built on the economy.  There is a large portion of the Republican base that dislike him personally, but will forgive him his personal failings because he is delivering on jobs*.  If the economy stumbles a bit, that segment of the Republican party that is ready to ditch him.  And I don't mean a huge 2007 redux economic downfall, I just mean an ordinary recession with some lagging growth and stock selloffs.  If that happens, Trump's approval could easily drop another 8-10 points. 

* I know this isn't true, I'm quoting the Republican line. 

Yeah if the bubble bursts, Trump is done.  Even if it doesn't, if a Democratic "wave" comes to realization in November, that's when a "tipping point" will start to happen, ceteris paribus.

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Meanwhile, after the tax law got passed, the aggregate 'vote for generic dem/republican' poll went from +10 Dem to +4 Dem. Which makes said jumping ship even less likely.

ETA: sorry, my bad - it's not 4, it's 5. Point still largely stands.

With the generic ballot I prefer looking at 538 or at least RCP's aggregate.  At least for the former's, it never got within 6 points, and is at 7.8 right now.

43 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Interesting. I’ve seen multiple insiders say today that the reason why the Dems caved so quickly is because they miscalculated Trump’s reaction to the shutdown. Apparently they were banking on him losing his mind on Twitter and making a ton of irrational statements. Instead he largely remained silent over the weekend, so they decided to accept the CHIP funding deal and hope that since the shutdown was so short, everyone would forget it come the 2018 elections. Not sure if that’s 100% accurate, but I trust the journalistic integrity of the people reporting it.

I agree that Trump was the Dems greatest asset, but this is just another example of the feckless skittishness (sorry, I know I shouldn't do that to the English language).  Have the balls to wait a few more days.  If there's one thing that's predictable about Trump, it's that he'll say something stupidly offensive eventually.

22 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I don't think it'll make a lick of difference come 2018 mid terms.

This is why they should try it again:  it's unlikely to hurt them in the midterms even if they lose the blame game.  It's worth a try, or at least a real try instead of a damn long weekend.

[Inigima]

3 hours ago, WinterFox said:

Majority Whip in the House just said that the Senate promises mean nothing to him and they won't bring up any "amnesty"

 

We are FUCKED

Who could possibly have seen this coming

[Mexal]

 

[Maithanet]

14 minutes ago, Mexal said:

 

It needs a 60% threshold to pass.  That seems unlikely. 

[aceluby]

2 hours ago, S John said:

After trying them about 750 times I still do not like IPA's very much.  They are OK.  Only get one when I want to start off with a beer with a higher abv %.  

America makes a lot of great beer to be proud of, and the quantity and quality of microbrews today compared to just 15-20 years ago is astounding.  But Europe, and Germany in particular, still reigns supreme in this category, imo.  It's like, for example, there are some good craft American lagers and pilsners out there that I drink regularly,  several that I genuinely really like made right here in Texas...but are they better then a classic Bavarian Helles or German Pils?  No.  No, they are not.  Are some American wheats pretty good?  Yes.  Better than the best German ones?  Not really.  Are American Belgians better than Belgian Belgians?  No.  And hell, for that matter - how many Stouts out there are as good as a good old fashioned Guinness?  Not many, my friends. 

IPA's might be the one variety where the US truly outshines the competition, but as I'm not a big fan of the style, I award the beer points to Europe.  

I was with you until Guinness.  There are countless stouts better than a Guinness.  

[S John]

9 minutes ago, aceluby said:

I was with you until Guinness.  There are countless stouts better than a Guinness.  

I will agree to disagree.  I like the smoothness of Guinness.  Most other stouts are too.. something for me.  Whether its too thick, or too chalky, or too chocolatey, whatever it is.  Guinness strikes the right tone for me in terms of drinkability.  I have had stouts that I like just as much, but its kind of in-spite of those differences rather than because of them.  And availability of non-Guinness stouts is also something of an issue as it's not a favored style in the Texas climate.  Every so often I'm in the mood for a stout and will buy a 6-pack of some stout or another but rarely am I glad that I got that one instead of Guinness.

[aceluby]

14 minutes ago, S John said:

I will agree to disagree.  I like the smoothness of Guinness.  Most other stouts are too.. something for me.  Whether its too thick, or too chalky, or too chocolatey, whatever it is.  Guinness strikes the right tone for me in terms of drinkability.  I have had stouts that I like just as much, but its kind of in-spite of those differences rather than because of them.  And availability of non-Guinness stouts is also something of an issue as it's not a favored style in the Texas climate.  Every so often I'm in the mood for a stout and will buy a 6-pack of some stout or another but rarely am I glad that I got that one instead of Guinness.

Yeah, opposite for me.  Guinness is missing those things that I want in a stout.  It drinks like a lager, which is fine when I want a lager, but then I'll just order a lager.  Guinness just won't do for those 20 below northern evenings.