Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jace, Basilissa

U.S. Politics: 5.7 Billion Problems But The House Ain't One

Recommended Posts

Eh, the best I could do. 

Meanwhile, I have a little crackpot theory that this MAGA kid contrived-oversy might have helped cover up the Donald's bullshit proposal and suck some of the air out of the room. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@A Horse Named Stranger:

Quote

Ahum, how to put it... Yes, and no. Ultiamtely Donnie Dipshit did it, because he believes that's what his base wants. He believes that, because that's what Limbaugh and Coulter said, who were playing to their audience and the echo chamber that has hatched them.

Yes, of course Limbaugh and Coulter (particularly Coulter) pushed for the shutdown because they thought it was in their interest to do so.  And yes, if it wasn't them someone else would take their place.  But the fact is it is them, and if they didn't push for it Trump wouldn't have shut down the government.  I'm not really interested in having a nuanced debate about the top-down endogeneity of political influence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know US high school terminology. I’m already so past the MAGA hat kid, but what’s a High School junior? Is a sophomore grade 9 and a junior grade 10? So, 15, 16?

Edited by Fragile Bird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DMC said:

Yes, of course Limbaugh and Coulter (particularly Coulter) pushed for the shutdown because they thought it was in their interest to do so.  And yes, if it wasn't them someone else would take their place.  But the fact is it is them, and if they didn't push for it Trump wouldn't have shut down the government.  I'm not really interested in having a nuanced debate about the top-down endogeneity of political influence.

Yes, but you expressed surprised by the fact, that they were not going easy on Donnie Fatso. And I just tried to explain it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I don’t know US high school terminology. I’m already so past the MAGA hat kid, but what’s a High School junior? Is a sophomore grade 9 and a junior grade 10? So, 15, 16?

Junior is the third year of high school, so 16 or 17, with a couple of the kids whose parents "redshirted" them being almost 18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Yes, but you expressed surprised by the fact, that they were not going easy on Donnie Fatso. And I just tried to explain it.

I expressed surprise that they haven't shifted the narrative to blaming Dems and give Trump an out as of yet.  They will eventually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I don’t know US high school terminology. I’m already so past the MAGA hat kid, but what’s a High School junior? Is a sophomore grade 9 and a junior grade 10? So, 15, 16?

US high school: grades 9 (freshman), 10 (sophomore), 11 (junior), 12 (senior)

Ages 14-18, more or less for all students,

Juniors are typically 15-17

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@DMC

 

Re security for Mahers show, I’ve worked in the same studio building they film in and yup, very good security and audience screening on the lot.

Edited by lokisnow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone here plan to vote for Paul Buttigieg (pronounce boot-uh-judge, as the Atlantic helpfully points out) in the primaries? Anyone? Anyone?

He is a veteran, gay and from Indiana (he should be the VP pick, just to see him debate Pence), so he checks a lot of boxes. And he is 37! Still, I think it may be a few cycles too early for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This'll be fun. Trump just sent a letter to Pelosi saying he'll be "honoring" her original invitation and will be providing a state of the union address on Jan. 29 at the Capitol Building.

However, just yesterday Pelosi ordered the Capitol Building's Sergeant-At-Arms to ignore a White House request to do a security walkthrough in preparation for the address. If Trump just shows up at the Capitol Building on Jan. 29, what the hell happens? The Sergeant can say he's forbidding access to the building and not lower the physical barricade for the presidential motorcade, but the Secret Service is not going to let him physically block Trump himself if he tries to get in.

The House Speaker does control access to all cameras on the House floor, so there's no televised speech without Pelosi's permission, but we could be heading for a major incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, IheartIheartTesla said:

Anyone here plan to vote for Paul Buttigieg (pronounce boot-uh-judge, as the Atlantic helpfully points out) in the primaries? Anyone? Anyone?

He is a veteran, gay and from Indiana (he should be the VP pick, just to see him debate Pence), so he checks a lot of boxes. And he is 37! Still, I think it may be a few cycles too early for him.

It's hard to take someone seriously who's only political accomplishment is being mayor of South Bend.  I generally take the approach that lack of experience isn't disqualifying, it just means you need to look at them more carefully to make sure they know what they're doing.  This is why Obama was an acceptable choice (in spite of limited experience) and Sarah Palin was not.  But being mayor of the 4th largest city in Indiana is really pushing it.  I can't help but wonder if he's just doing this to increase his profile for some other job, like a cabinet post or an MSNBC spot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fez said:

The House Speaker does control access to all cameras on the House floor, so there's no televised speech without Pelosi's permission, but we could be heading for a major incident.

Then you are finally at Brexit levels of silly and crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fez said:

This'll be fun. Trump just sent a letter to Pelosi saying he'll be "honoring" her original invitation and will be providing a state of the union address on Jan. 29 at the Capitol Building.

However, just yesterday Pelosi ordered the Capitol Building's Sergeant-At-Arms to ignore a White House request to do a security walkthrough in preparation for the address. If Trump just shows up at the Capitol Building on Jan. 29, what the hell happens? The Sergeant can say he's forbidding access to the building and not lower the physical barricade for the presidential motorcade, but the Secret Service is not going to let him physically block Trump himself if he tries to get in.

The House Speaker does control access to all cameras on the House floor, so there's no televised speech without Pelosi's permission, but we could be heading for a major incident.

Would be great if Trump delivers a state of the union to an empty, camera-less chamberor freezing his golden balls off on the Capitol steps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be he has more local ambitions, or even a cabinet post. But as 538 points out, part of the appeal of a campaign like his is normalizing the idea of different types of people running for higher office (be it young or gay, or even just the idea that veterans can be progressive Democrats). So in that sense it is welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pelosi's strategy with Bush was to make sure his approval ratings tanked, while taking on the SS privatization efforts. I feel she is taking a similar approach here, needling Trump and his ego towards an epic meltdown or mistake that would peel off more of his numbers (or people he listens to like Coulter etc.). Not sure how well it will work here because of the cult of personality around Trump, something Bush didnt have.

 

Edit: changed "before" to "while, SS privatization was part of her strategy to lower Bush numbers

Edited by IheartIheartTesla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most houses of legislature that are modeled on British Parliament, like the US and Canada have done, have a position that is both ceremonial and functional as well, called an Usher or a Master at Arms or something, who controls visitors to the legislative chamber.

It goes back to revolution in the UK, and the physical separation of the House of Commons and the House of Lords. The doors of the Commons can be barred to both Lords and King. When parliament opens the Lords and the Crown have to be invited in order to enter.

In Canada the Usher of the Black Rod, iirc, opens parliament by knocking on the door and can bar entry to the chamber.

I know that the Senate and the President have to be invited in order to speak in Congress, do they also have to be invited just to enter the chamber? I assume there is also a similar person who ceremonially can block entry into the Congress. Who is that? If Trump shows up and is refused entry and tried to enter anyway, that would be an impeachable offense, wouldn’t it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×