U.S. Politics: The Ideas of Mueller

[Zorral]

42 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Just another Tuesday in Murika! 

There are no words.  One is just not surprised.  And just yesterday there was a colloquium here in which the principals insisted that school shootings are so rare in reality that students shouldn't worry them.  Those guys -- all white guys, of course -- provoked me into fantasies of physical violence committed on their persons.

 

[DMC]

30 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Look guys, this Storym business won’t end Trump, not even if he personally bribed her, blackmailed her and threated her physical safety.

It's not gonna take Trump down, but depending on the details of the physical threat, the story could have very long legs (and in any other presidency prompt its own special investigation).

25 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I think other states should look into Iowa's system.

Yeah Iowa appears to have a very good system at the state level.  With their US House districts, three of the four are super competitive (D+1, D+1, R+1).  However, the 4th is a safe Republican seat (+11), and a state that competitive should have one safe seat for each party or none.  Plus, the real reason I refused to mention Iowa is because that safe seat was created for the creature known as Steve King, and that I can't abide.

[Zorral]

17 minutes ago, Ormond said:

He claims not to believe in "exercise", but that's because he doesn't define golf as "exercise", and even if he uses a golf cart most of the time, all the swinging of golf clubs he must do is a lot more exercise than many American men his age get. Plus "massively" overweight is a great exaggeration --"massively" to me would be a morbidly obese person, and he is nowhere near that fat. His hostile personality is a definite risk factor for heart disease, but that is balanced by his being a nonsmoker. So I would guess that his chance for a heart attack the next seven years is close to the average risk for an American man his age. 

He's right at the point of obese classification, as was revealed via his last potus health check-up.  If he didn't have such expensive, skilled bespoke tailoring people would see it a lot more clearly.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

23 minutes ago, Ormond said:

He claims not to believe in "exercise", but that's because he doesn't define golf as "exercise", and even if he uses a golf cart most of the time, all the swinging of golf clubs he must do is a lot more exercise than many American men his age get. Plus "massively" overweight is a great exaggeration --"massively" to me would be a morbidly obese person, and he is nowhere near that fat. His hostile personality is a definite risk factor for heart disease, but that is balanced by his being a nonsmoker. So I would guess that his chance for a heart attack the next seven years is close to the average risk for an American man his age. 

On the issue of exercise, he has said on several occasions that he believes the human body is like a battery with a set amount of energy, and exercise depletes that causing you to die faster. I’m a golfer and I can tell you I’ve never broken a sweat playing 18 holes (unless it’s ungodly hot outside) and playing basketball for 20 minutes is more of a workout than spending four hours out on the links.

As to him being massively overweight, (i) allow some wiggle room for the joke and (ii) I rest my case. He is obese and his medical records would prove that if he didn’t magically grow an inch at the age of 71 (I believe we discussed this before).

And lastly, it’s not just his hostile personality, but the job he has. The combination of the two makes him much more susceptible to a heart attack than the average out of shape 70 year old male with a terrible diet.

[Inigima]

2 hours ago, Nasty LongRider said:

It ain't the affair, it's the cover up.  The 130K lame payoff, the threats to her and who knows what she has to tell.  I was watching Tweetie last night and he said that Trump doesn't talk about Putin or Stormy, and Tweetie said he thinks it because with both he has something to hide.  Hmmmm, interesting insight, and it  may be more than sexual peccadillos.  So Stormy, what's he hiding?

That's the thing. It doesn't matter. None of it matters. The President is basically immune from conventional criminal prosecution and civil suits. The only thing that matters is if Republicans in Congress want to hold him accountable, and so far they do not. They have already twisted themselves into unbelievable knots to justify everything to date; he was impeachable long, long ago. I honestly don't think Republicans would turn on him if he brought back concentration camps and gas chambers.

[Fragile Bird]

11 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Apparently running a tight ship is one. (I'm sure he has more, but they haven't leaked yet)

Edit: seconds too slow. 

I concede to the other bird. 

I went to bed! While I was first, this title is better!

[Fragile Bird]

10 hours ago, Zorral said:

GUYS -- just stop this topping US politics threads even before the previous one hits 400, ok?  You all are making messes, you know?  Just be cool, like orange ade ain't, OK?

401 posts when I opened mine, a minute before this one.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

17 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

It's not gonna take Trump down, but depending on the details of the physical threat, the story could have very long legs (and in any other presidency prompt its own special investigation).

Maybe, but I think the extent of its legs is that it will keep some social conservatives home in November. Outside of that, I’m not sure what else it will do. Trump seems to be the one man who has dodged any consequences from the #MeToo movement.

Also, your comment in parentheses has inspired a fun (and by fun I mean really ******* depressing) game. What’s the most outlandish thing that Trump has done that would have sunk any other president or politician? There are soooooooooo many things to choose from.

[Zorral]

Ya, YouTube (google) has a lot to answer for as well as Zucherberg:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/19/business/media/youtube-wikipedia.html?

As the article points out, the supreme irony here, is that Google, with billions in resources, is asking a volunteer-built, donation funded, non-profit to help it out with fake news, crazy conspiracy Youtube channels, racism and sexism.

[DMC]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Maybe, but I think the extent of its legs is that it will keep some social conservatives home in November. Outside of that, I’m not sure what else it will do. Trump seems to be the one man who has dodged any consequences from the #MeToo movement.

Yeah I don't think it will have much of any direct effect on the elections at all - unless, say, Daniels has proof of a rather extreme physical threat made by Trump or someone (very) close.  But with an allegation of a physical threat, the story promises to stick around the news cycle for quite some time, dragging down enthusiasm and, with Trump of course, there's always the distinct possibility his reaction will make things worse.

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

What’s the most outlandish thing that Trump has done that would have sunk any other president or politician?

Charlottesville.

[Zorral]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Maybe, but I think the extent of its legs is that it will keep some social conservatives home in November. Outside of that, I’m not sure what else it will do. Trump seems to be the one man who has dodged any consequences from the #MeToo movement.

Also, your comment in parentheses has inspired a fun (and by fun I mean really ******* depressing) game. What’s the most outlandish thing that Trump has done that would have sunk any other president or politician? There are soooooooooo many things to choose from.

Personally?  How the h@!! he thought he could even run for POTUS, much less get the nomination from one of the only two political parties we voters are allowed to have?  But he did, and he did.  And he won.  NOBODY ELSE WITH THE WEIGHT OF HIS BAGGAGE WOULD EVER HAVE EVEN CONSIDERED IT, couldn't have considered it, much less succeeded. Before #MeToo already he was disqualified from running for anything.  But dumbest tv trumps all.

[Ormond]

51 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

It's not gonna take Trump down, but depending on the details of the physical threat, the story could have very long legs (and in any other presidency prompt its own special investigation).

Yeah Iowa appears to have a very good system at the state level.  With their US House districts, three of the four are super competitive (D+1, D+1, R+1).  However, the 4th is a safe Republican seat (+11), and a state that competitive should have one safe seat for each party or none.  Plus, the real reason I refused to mention Iowa is because that safe seat was created for the creature known as Steve King, and that I can't abide.

Uh, do you have any evidence that the seat was created "for" King? That phrasing implies deliberate gerrymandering.  I think he just lucked out and happens to live in the northwestern part of Iowa, which is the most Republican part of the state and would have the safest seat for Republicans no matter who held it. 

[DMC]

19 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Uh, do you have any evidence that the seat was created "for" King? That phrasing implies deliberate gerrymandering.  I think he just lucked out and happens to live in the northwestern part of Iowa, which is the most Republican part of the state and would have the safest seat for Republicans no matter who held it. 

The 4th is, by far, the most Republican leaning district.  Really, it's the only Republican leaning district (the first three districts went from D+5, D+4, and R+1 in 2012 to D+1, D+1, and still R+1 in the 3rd today).  After it was created, fellow Republican incumbent Tom Latham opted to run in the 3rd district in 2012 even though the new 4th contained more of Latham's old territory than King's (King's prior 5th district was abolished).  Seems pretty clear and that's all the evidence I need, but to each his own.

[Ormond]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

On the issue of exercise, he has said on several occasions that he believes the human body is like a battery with a set amount of energy, and exercise depletes that causing you to die faster. I’m a golfer and I can tell you I’ve never broken a sweat playing 18 holes (unless it’s ungodly hot outside) and playing basketball for 20 minutes is more of a workout than spending four hours out on the links.

As to him being massively overweight, (i) allow some wiggle room for the joke and (ii) I rest my case. He is obese and his medical records would prove that if he didn’t magically grow an inch at the age of 71 (I believe we discussed this before).

And lastly, it’s not just his hostile personality, but the job he has. The combination of the two makes him much more susceptible to a heart attack than the average out of shape 70 year old male with a terrible diet.

We should start a separate thread on heart disease risk if this continues much farther.

But those photos don't show a morbidly obese person. And obesity is only a risk factor in terms of heart disease because it is a risk factor for hypertension, high cholesterol, and diabetes. If one's heredity is such that obesity does NOT lead to one of those three things, being fat by itself doesn't increase risk of heart attacks. Even being morbidly obese doesn't independently increase risk of atherosclerosis, which leads to what we normally think of as a heart attack. (Morbid obesity increases risk of congestive heart failure on its own, but that's not the same thing as a "heart attack".)

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/severe_obesity_revealed_as_a_stand_alone_high_risk_factor_for_heart_failure

Trump actually DOES have a cholesterol problem and takes cholesterol lowering drugs. He also has a fairly high calcium level in his blood, which is associated with heart attack risk. However, his nonsmoking and his heredity (his father lived to 93 and his mother to 88) combine with those factors to put his risk at about average for an American man of his age:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/17/health/trump-heart-disease-gupta/index.html

As a psychologist I agree that the combination of a stressful job with his hostile personality is a definite risk factor. But in political terms I don't think that makes his risk high enough for anybody to count on it as a factor in the country's political future the next few years. 

 

[Ormond]

9 minutes ago, dmc515 said:

The 4th is, by far, the most Republican leaning district.  Really, it's the only Republican leaning district (the first three districts went from D+5, D+4, and R+1 in 2012 to D+1, D+1, and still R+1 in the 3rd today).  After it was created, fellow Republican incumbent Tom Latham opted to run in the 3rd district in 2012 even though the new 4th contained more of Latham's old territory than King's (King's prior 5th district was abolished).  Seems pretty clear and that's all the evidence I need, but to each his own.

To use that as your evidence that the district was created "for" King seems to show an overly cynical and conspiratorial view of the nonpartisan board that put together the districts. But as you say to each his own. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, dmc515 said:

Yeah I don't think it will have much of any direct effect on the elections at all - unless, say, Daniels has proof of a rather extreme physical threat made by Trump or someone (very) close.  But with an allegation of a physical threat, the story promises to stick around the news cycle for quite some time, dragging down enthusiasm and, with Trump of course, there's always the distinct possibility his reaction will make things worse.

But a lack of enthusiasm would lead to it effecting elections, no? Especially when we’re seeing so many narrow margins of victory.

Quote

Charlottesville.

I think that’s a fair nominee. Personally I lean towards the unending amount of blatant corruption, especially when it comes to his financial affairs.  

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

Personally?  How the h@!! he thought he could even run for POTUS, much less get the nomination from one of the only two political parties we voters are allowed to have?  But he did, and he did.  And he won.  NOBODY ELSE WITH THE WEIGHT OF HIS BAGGAGE WOULD EVER HAVE EVEN CONSIDERED IT, couldn't have considered it, much less succeeded. Before #MeToo already he was disqualified from running for anything.  But dumbest tv trumps all.

That’s a little outside of the box, but in a sense it’s the root of everything else he’s done.

[Zorral]

You all have been hearing that Cynthia Nixon, who played a lawyer on TV, namely Sex and the City, was planning to challenge Cuomo for the Dem nomination for governor of NY.  Just now she's announcing the challenge officially.

She's been progressively more activist in matters of our city, particularly in the fields of education, transportation over the last few years.  She's been a guest, and a guest host on the public radio station fairly regularly.

As far as I know, she has no management experience of any kind in any field.  But then -- that didn't stop the long yet squat orangeade from believing in himself perfectly competent to run the whole USA.  She does take public transportation regularly, she has kids in public school, she's deeply familiar with all the issues LGBT and women face.  Through her own non-profit and charitable work -- as well as being a part of theater, film-television (both of which are huge industries in NYC), publishing and art circles she does know a lot about organizations and problems of all kinds. Still, I dunno.  She knows NYC yes, but the rest of the state is very different than NYC.

 

 

 

 

[Maithanet]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I think that’s a fair nominee. Personally I lean towards the unending amount of blatant corruption, especially when it comes to his financial affairs. 

I feel like it's gotta be Grab Em By the *****. 

The only defense possible of that is "well, he's a scumbag, but...", and yet people were willing to elect him Scumbag in Chief. 

[DMC]

15 minutes ago, Ormond said:

To use that as your evidence that the district was created "for" King seems to show an overly cynical and conspiratorial view of the nonpartisan board that put together the districts. But as you say to each his own. 

Well, I can also look at the map and compare it to county election results, and realize that if you traded some of those border counties in the 4th that vote heavily GOP - like Chickasaw, Butler, Grundy, Harrison, Shelby, etc. - and compare it to, say, Marshall, Dallas, and Polk that border the 4th in the 1st and 3rd, there seems to be a concerted effort to create a safe GOP seat in the state.  And King was the beneficiary of that, Latham even had to move to run in the 3rd.  

Anyway, I'll never deny being incredibly cynical about all politics, let alone redistricting politics, but I don't think it's being conspiratorial to put two and two together.

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

But a lack of enthusiasm would lead to it effecting elections, no? Especially when we’re seeing so many narrow margins of victory.

Right, that's why I said "direct effect."  I choose my words carefully!  ...sometimes - although obviously not enough for Ormond. 

19 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Personally I lean towards the unending amount of blatant corruption, especially when it comes to his financial affairs.  

I don't think you're playing your own game correctly.  Needs more specificity.

[The Wedge]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

What’s the most outlandish thing that Trump has done that would have sunk any other president or politician? There are soooooooooo many things to choose from.

The moment in the campaign when he pantomimed a reporter with disabilities. 

Good gods, that was in 2015. Anyone staying on after that, well, they showed their asses. What the heck else was going to push them off his bandwagon? A porn star? Pfft.