Fragile Bird Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Someone on CNN said once again, Pelosi has shown she knows how to talk Trump-ese. He’s the tv guy, the reality show guy, the one who watches hours and hours of tv every day. She said ‘no tv in Congress for you, sweetie, until the government re-opens’, and that’s language he understands. He may find somewhere else to give his speech, but it’s not going to be Congress. The WH has been trying to figure out where for the past week. Oh horrors, do you think he could talk McConnell into letting him do the speech from the Senate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorral Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 He's announced he's going to do the SOTU address from somewhere else -- undisclosed . . . . Maybe, if all the media that isn't faux etc. then doesn't cover it or broadcast it -- would this make him happy or furious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, DMC said: Have to check my notes for the exact figure, but his sources and the GOP spent around $54 million dollars on the campaign. The result? More people were against his proposal after the campaign than before it. Nancy Pelosi had nothing to do with that. Entrenched interests deadset against any privatization of SS did that. Anyway, that was 2005 when the Dems were still in the minority and preceded Katrina in September. According to the below article, she did do nothing about it. Beinart states that her strategy was to basically refute the claim that SS was in crisis, and keep the Democrats from putting forward their own tinkers. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/why-nancy-pelosi-wont-compromise-border-wall/580516/ Quote Still, Pelosi, understanding that policy and politics are inseparable, did nothing. Irrespective of the merits of tweaking Social Security, she realized that offering Democratic proposals would divide her caucus and give Bush a political lifeline. Instead, she forced Americans to choose between Social Security as it was and Social Security privatization, maneuvering Bush into a battle that crippled his second term and laid the foundation for Democrats to retake the House in 2006. “The first thing we had to do in 2005 was take the president’s numbers down. Bush was 57 percent in early 2005,” Pelosi recently remarked to The New York Times’ Robert Draper. “His numbers came down to 38 in the fall, and that’s when the retirements [of congressional Republicans] started to happen.” "In the fall" could include the Katrina effect, but was it 38 pre-Katrina? I know it reached about 28 towards the end so there was room for it to drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said: According to the below article, she did do nothing about it. Uh, k. Moving out of the way of a trainwreck isn't much of a laudable. Also, the quote you provided severely overstates the influence of Bush's SS proposal on the 2006 election. Between his SS efforts and the midterms was Katrina, the rising unrest with Iraq, the Foley/page scandals, the failed Harriet Miers nomination, and the emerging immigration debate. Bush's SS reform was dead by summer 2005. Suggesting it had much of any impact on the 2006 midterms is, again, apocryphal or revisionist history, if you prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Quote The two California Democrats have been talking about areas of interest for each committee and where there's common ground, Schiff said in an interview. "We're going to work jointly," he said. "We think we'll be more effective doing it that way." The investigation into Deutsche Bank will be one of the most closely watched probes launched by the new Democratic-controlled House because it could provide a glimpse into Trump's finances and ties abroad. Schiff, Waters plan joint Deutsche Bank investigation https://www.politico.com/story/2019/01/23/adam-schiff-maxine-waters-deutsche-bank-1108140 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 The Case Against Impeachment Removing Trump from office before the next election is the best way to ensure that Trumpism survives. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/impeach-trump-bad-idea-trumpism-dolchstosslegende.html Quote Given everything we’ve seen in the past two years, this depressing timeline seems dangerously plausible. But let’s, for the sake of argument, game out a seemingly more hopeful course of events. In this scenario, Trump’s popularity does suffer a significant hit as a result of impeachment proceedings. As a result, traditionalist conservatives within the Republican Party who have always secretly been horrified by the president finally see an opportunity to coordinate their resistance to him. Enough senators cross the aisle to remove him from office. Would that outcome liberate America from both Trump and Trumpism? Hardly. If Trump is removed from office because Republican senators turn on him, rather than because he loses an election, his most hardcore supporters are likely to embrace their own version of the Dolchstosslegende. If only Trump’s troops had stood by him, they will say, he would have proved to be invincible. To make up for the humiliation of impeachment, his base will then demand a purge of the Republican Party. Even if Trump himself is irremediably damaged by his impeachment, he might still prove capable of handing the reins of the party to an ideological heir, like Sen. Tom Cotton, or a literal heir, like Ivanka. Like the German Revolution of 1918, Trump’s impeachment could soon come to look like a Pyrrhic victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kuenjato Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 30 minutes ago, Martell Spy said: The Case Against Impeachment Removing Trump from office before the next election is the best way to ensure that Trumpism survives. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/01/impeach-trump-bad-idea-trumpism-dolchstosslegende.html Let them purge their party. Perhaps it will lead to a dissolution of the two-party stranglehold. If nothing else, isolate the broke-brain boomers and their xenophobic harkening to a neverland nationalism, so that they will fester again at the margins, like they did for decades prior to broadcasting deregulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 34 minutes ago, kuenjato said: Let them purge their party. Perhaps it will lead to a dissolution of the two-party stranglehold. If nothing else, isolate the broke-brain boomers and their xenophobic harkening to a neverland nationalism, so that they will fester again at the margins, like they did for decades prior to broadcasting deregulation. While I would definitely enjoy a purge of the Republican party, I don't think the point of this article is that impeachment will necessarily lead to that outcome. The main point of the article is that impeachment is akin to rolling a dice. No one can be sure of the outcome. And that is worth at least worth some consideration, especially since Trump can be removed via election. I personally think if the Democrats or Mueller find something damning there is no choice but to impeach, and damn the consequences. But, I am not at all sure that there should be impeachment based on what is currently out there. It's risky, and despite not fully knowing all the outcomes, I think we can agree that the shit-eating Republican Senators will vote against removal if they have a shred of choice in the matter. We've all seen how they have behaved during this time of crisis. The fact that it is so difficult to reign in a gleefully corrupt President shows us how broken our system really is. Far more broken than even the cynical of us believed a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Whitehouse apparently contemplating the Shutdown lasting into March...and maybe April. One wonders if there will be riots before then....or if the corporate oligarchs will step in somehow... http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/white-house-seeks-list-of-programs-that-would-be-hurt-if-shutdown-lasts-into-march/ar-BBSEazQ?li=BBnbcA1&ocid=msnclassic The shutdown has already caused the federal government to stop paying 800,000 employees, but the impact is expected to become exponentially broader in the coming weeks. The federal court system is likely to halt major operations after February 1, and the Department of Agriculture does not have funding to pay food stamp benefits in March to roughly 40 million people. The White House also faces a backlash from many federal workers, who face missing a second consecutive paycheck in the coming days. Some workers have balked at continuing without being paid, and their unions are filing legal action against the administration. And there were new signs on Wednesday that federal agencies are still trying to comprehend the scope of their growing problems. The U.S. General Services Administration, an agency that manages many of the government’s leases and contracts, notified a number of departments that it doesn’t have a plan for how it can pay utility and lease payments in February if the shutdown persists. Many federal agencies lease space in commercial buildings around the country, and if the GSA can’t make rental payments it could incur major fees and other costs. This could also have a big impact on the property owners, which rely on large government payments for their income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Can’t Trump just deliver the SoTU from the Oval Office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 24, 2019 Author Share Posted January 24, 2019 16 minutes ago, S John said: Can’t Trump just deliver the SoTU from the Oval Office? Nancy already gave him permission to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Trump has backed down on the speech, and worryingly did not take any petty juvenile shots while doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 4 hours ago, Martell Spy said: The Case Against Impeachment Removing Trump from office before the next election is the best way to ensure that Trumpism survives. That's a really stupid opening argument. "Trumpism" is going to survive no matter what. At worst, they'll just give it a new name again. 1 hour ago, S John said: Can’t Trump just deliver the SoTU from the Oval Office? Trump can give the SotU from his twitter toilet. Was just delivered in writing for a good chuck of this country's history, thanks to that prick Jefferson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 With the updated tracking polls, Trump dropped .7% in approval and gained .9% in disapproval in the 538 aggregate over the last 24 hours. I was off by about a week in expectations for when this would start. Still worried the faux "reasonableness" of his proposal may stem the tide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 I have survived my pilgrimage to the liberal Mecca. On the one hand, it was difficult ordering a bacon cheeseburger because I had to order a grass fed ground beef patty (and endure the shame of saying pink when saying how I want it done) with locally butchered organic pork, French brie cheese on a gluten free garlic onion bun. But OTOH, it was funny seeing the looks of horror as I downed $20 glasses of wine in a single gulp in the heart of California's wine country. Also, I didn't realize the Golden Gate Bridge was that fucking big. Holy shit. (That burger was damn good though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThinkerX Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 I begin to wonder... Perhaps Trump does have a suitably outlandish and devastating endgame in mind for the Shutdown. If the Shutdown continues for another month, then that starts to seriously imperil civil order in the country. So, perhaps Trumps plan is to step in with an 'executive solution' once things get bad, some sort of half assed scheme to use the crisis to make himself effectively a dictator. Fortunately, Team Trump is far too corrupt, cowardly, and incompetent for this to succeed, if it is his intent.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Can Mitch McConnell be removed from his position in any way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 54 minutes ago, Relic said: Can Mitch McConnell be removed from his position in any way? By a majority of the Senate GOP caucus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 Why not just take $5 billion from the insanely oversized defense budget and build a damn wall with it. Then take 10% of the troops stationed overseas and secure the damn border with them. Why is logic and the law sometimes so far apart? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 24, 2019 Share Posted January 24, 2019 27 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Why not just take $5 billion from the insanely oversized defense budget and build a damn wall with it. Then take 10% of the troops stationed overseas and secure the damn border with them. Why is logic and the law sometimes so far apart? I dunno. Maybe because logic is so far apart from spending any money on building a wall. What you're describing, though, is essentially what will happen when he probably declares an emergency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.