US Politics: Dead Pimps Need Not Apply

[James Arryn]

Some chatter that the grand jury might be convening.

Meanwhile Trump is telling Europe to beware of Nazi Germany. (not joking)

[Fez]

1 hour ago, Maithanet said:

To me, I don't expect Clinton to run, because she's smart enough to know that her moment has passed, and there's no path for her to win the primary. 

So whether she "wants" to run again isn't really relevant. 

I think Clinton would want to avoid the potential for an extremely embarrassing primary loss too. I'd be very surprised if she ran again, especially since the field won't be cleared for her this time.

The party has (for the most part) moved past the Clintons, and many of the people who might still support her in a narrow primary field are almost certainly going to have at least one, and probably more than one, other candidates they like more in the very wide field that will exist this time.

[Maithanet]

Just now, Fez said:

I think Clinton would want to avoid the potential for an extremely embarrassing primary loss too. I'd be very surprised if she ran again, especially since the field won't be cleared for her this time.

The party has (for the most part) moved past the Clintons, and many of the people who might still support her in a narrow primary field are almost certainly going to have at least one, and probably more than one, other candidates they like more in the very wide field that will exist this time.

Plus, there is not a single liberal in America who remembers the 2016 election fondly.  Why would we want a sequel?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Maithanet said:

It's interesting, but the Senate map is looking increasingly horrifying, IMO. 

It’s broken. I’ve cited this stat before. The smallest 22 states have the same combined population as California. You cannot have a healthy legislative chamber when 40 million people get 44 senators and another 40 million get 2, especially when the latter is very liberal and the former are largely conservative states. I read an interesting article the other day that argued the only way to fix congress is double the number of House members and make the senate have proportional representation.   

[IheartIheartTesla]

I understand it looks a bit grim, but didnt the Dems go to 57 seats in 2008 from 49 (or 51)? One of the hopes is to get a transformative politician who can redo the electoral map and carry along some Senate seats with his/her coattails.

By the way, looking through the 2008 results, I am amazed Mark Pryor won Arkansas with no Republican opponent (and a Green candidate as opposition who got 20% of the vote)

[Fez]

We've got indictments! Albeit not the big ones; Mueller may be announcing some later today (rumor has it anyway).

In this case, somewhat surprisingly, an Alabama grand jury has indicted the EPA southeast regional administrator (a Senate-confirmed position) on violating state ethics law; the charges are from incidents prior to his appointment by Trump. 

I'm mainly bringing this up because I didn't think Republicans (especially Trump-favored ones) could face indictments in Alabama.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

It’s more like putting your thumb on the scale. That’s not the same as rigging it. And the former happens at every level of politics. Here’s two real life personal experiences, and since you mentioned the debates, I’ll keep it to just that:

First, for a state senate debate, there were 100 or so people allowed in. They were each allowed to submit a question, and the five most commonly asked questions would be asked during the debate. So I made sure the first 75 or so people in line were supporters of my candidate, and I wrote the questions for them. Furthermore, I wrote them in a way to confuse my boss’s opponent, because my former boss is a Harvard trained lawyer and his opponent was merely a high school graduate. Early on I picked up that he had a weak lexicon, so I made the questions as wonky as possible. End result, he was slaughtered.

Second, for a gubernatorial debate at the state fair, there was only seating for about 200 people. So my fellow organizers and I made sure that we had twice that many people volunteer to attend. Our campaign was able to force the debate to take place at 8 A.M. The opposing candidate may have had 25 supporters there tops, and when the debate was reaired in the evening, it made him look like a fool.

These are the realities of life in politics. You need to accept that. I learned it the hard way in college when I was elected to student government and quickly realized that the fraternities and sororities ran the place. The system was not rigged against Sanders. He just lacked the means to create structural advantages. And there is no level of politics where that does not exist.

So, the roadblocks the two major parties put on non-Republicans and non-Democrats are just “thumbs on the scale”?  And you don’t see making sure your questions were asked as twisting the purpose of allowing questions from the public in a forum like the one you descended?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

13 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It’s broken. I’ve cited this stat before. The smallest 22 states have the same combined population as California. You cannot have a healthy legislative chamber when 40 million people get 44 senators and another 40 million get 2, especially when the latter is very liberal and the former are largely conservative states. I read an interesting article the other day that argued the only way to fix congress is double the number of House members and make the senate have proportional representation.   

The Senate was never supposed to be proportional representation.  It was intended as a balm to the smaller States guaranteeing they would always have a voice in National politics.  Further it is the only provision of the US Constitution that demands unanimous ratification to change.  US Const. Art. V:

and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

 

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I understand it looks a bit grim, but didnt the Dems go to 57 seats in 2008 from 49 (or 51)? One of the hopes is to get a transformative politician who can redo the electoral map and carry along some Senate seats with his/her coattails.

By the way, looking through the 2008 results, I am amazed Mark Pryor won Arkansas with no Republican opponent (and a Green candidate as opposition who got 20% of the vote)

Yes, every 60 years when the US hits a massive global recession the dems will hold the Senate for two to 4 years. 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

It was intended as a balm to the smaller States guaranteeing they would always have a voice in National politics.

I've heard the Senate described as a host of things, but I think that's the first time I've heard it described as a "balm."

[SkynJay]

3 hours ago, Simon Steele said:

This is great. Colorado just elected the first openly gay senator, and I'll be honest, I didn't even know he was gay until after he won. It doesn't seem, despite the right attacking gay/bi lifestyles all the time, that these candidates were attacked on their sexuality. I actually think these are really good signs of the country reacting to Trump in the right way.

I got some GOP PAC ads online the last few days of the election cycle that tried to hit Polis on his sexuality.  They said (paraphrasing here) 'I am all for LGBT rights but Polis pushing it on children is over the line.'

I guess the fact that Stapleton never stooped to that level says something, buy it is a low bar.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

9 minutes ago, DMC said:

I've heard the Senate described as a host of things, but I think that's the first time I've heard it described as a "balm."

I was trying to come up with a $.50 cent word that means it’s what small States got to agree to ratify the Constitution.  They feared large States like Virginia would dominate the Federal Congress with their large population and demanded a House of Congress not tied to population.  And thus, the US Senate was born (with its super-Constitutional protection from change).

[DMC]

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I was trying to come up with a $.50 cent word that means its what small States got to agree to ratify the Constitution.

You're a true wordsmith.  If only Sherman and Ellsworth had your silver tongue maybe the convention could've avoided the August heat.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

You're a true wordsmith.  If only Sherman and Ellsworth had your silver tongue maybe the convention could've avoided the August heat.

[lokisnow]

Columbia and Puerto Rico have to be granted statehood and The big states have to break up, there’s no other cure to the senate problem. 

baseline no state should be larger than 12 million people, with exceptions to preserve existing city or county lines if a county or city exceeds that threshold.

California divides nicely into three, four or five states, Texas divides naturally into five states, tougher to do four, Florida divides simply into three states, Pennsylvania and New Jersey are bisected. New York City is freed from the psychotic tyrannies of Albany (and perhaps divides again?), Chicagoland is likewise freed and Ohio will have to prepare to be bisected either NS or EW in the very near future.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So, the roadblocks the two major parties put on non-Republicans and non-Democrats are just “thumbs on the scale”?  And you don’t see making sure your questions were asked as twisting the purpose of allowing questions from the public in a forum like the one you descended?

Yes Scot, because saying elections are rigged implies that the outsider cannot win. And the first politician I ever liked proved that not to be true.

And I’m sure the five people who showed up who were not associated in some way with either candidates’ campaign were really sad their version of the questions asked got flooded out.    

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

NYC would be perfectly viable as its own State. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

Yes Scot, because saying elections are rigged implies that the outsider cannot win. And the first politician I ever liked proved that not to be true.

And I’m sure the five people who showed up who were not associated in some way with either candidates’ campaign were really sad their version of the questions asked got flooded out.    

 

Gaming the system and playing on the apathy generated by the system being gamed bothers me.  I’d be lieing if I said anything else.  How much gaming needs to take place before the effect is the same as rigging?

[Morpheus]

Bunch of Roger Stone associates have been summoned before a grand jury in recent days, I wonder if he is the one to get indicted next if the rumors are true about something coming out today.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

I think Clinton would want to avoid the potential for an extremely embarrassing primary loss too. I'd be very surprised if she ran again, especially since the field won't be cleared for her this time.

The party has (for the most part) moved past the Clintons, and many of the people who might still support her in a narrow primary field are almost certainly going to have at least one, and probably more than one, other candidates they like more in the very wide field that will exist this time.

There is this too: Monica Lewinsky is again visible, for interviews and again (re?)-writing her own views as to what went down, ahem, with Bill.  For example as in this:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/monica-lewinsky-sets-the-record-straight-on-bill-clinton-i-was-completely-at-his-mercy?

Quote

The six-part series, which premieres Nov. 18, is yet another examination of Clinton’s presidency, and the various scandals—notably, the Whitewater controversy and the Paula Jones case, which would ultimately bring the Lewinsky affair to light—that punctuated his time in the White House. What’s notable about The Clinton Affair, however, is that it includes interviews with Lewinsky herself—and allows her to redefine the narrative years later, in the midst of #MeToo-inspired outrage at toxic men.

This sort of thing is not going to help HRC at all, no matter what it is that she might wish to do politically.