Jump to content

US politics - sometimes political jokes get elected


Rippounet

Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Trump will not be on the ballot in 2024, and his influence with the Republican party may be very different then than it is now.  At the very least, I'm skeptical that Trump loyalty will be the #1 issue on Utahans minds in 2024. 

I’ve always bought into the speculation that he’s only serving one term. This act probably seals that.

And good for Romney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Recall is, of course, not constitutional. But it shows the depths of the pressure and threats being flung at people. We know Romney is near the top of Trump's retribution list. Donnie Jr. is yammering away about how he should be expelled from the GOP. 

The fact is that the courageous senators who lost re-election didn't know for a fact that they would lose re-election. And some, like Lucius Lamar, merely became unpopular among their colleagues for acts or votes against the party, while continuing to be re-elected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Triskele said:

Because there won't be ballots.

I skew different politcally than most in this thread, but reading this made me think of something that is a bit embarrassing.  My grandmother is 87 and has lost most of her hearing.  Therefore, she gets most of her interaction through social media/Facebook.  She was a lifelong Democrat who basically became a Republican during the Clinton/W era or some such.  Not an uncommon thing here in the South.

Grandma told me at Christmas that because Trump had been Impeached, he was no longer subject to term limits and could run for a third term... and she was dead serious.  Trying to explain the Constitution and relevant amendments to your essentially deaf grandmother is a very difficult proposition. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ormond said:

That entirely depends on what the Republicans decide to make attack ads out of. If they aren't mentioning it in October, you're right. If they make an ad about it that plays frequently in late October, I think you're wrong.

The GOP is going to make Pelosi the boogeywoman for any and all congressional races they think they got a chance at.  That's been the case for..oh, about 15 years now.  You might be right, maybe they'll put that footage in for their ads this time, but the message is pretty constant: this woman will destroy our country -- and you!  I (very) highly doubt giving them a new way to say the same thing they have been since 2006 is going to have any type of discernible effect on vote choice.

3 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Bruh, spoilers much? You just ruined the best campy samurai movie starring a silly Caucasian woman who likes to play with swords.

What’s wrong with you?

Well, the entire premise of the movies is that Bill shot "the woman."  Don't think that's much of a spoiler.  I suppose I spoiled her name, but whenever I rewatch those movies I still don't get why Tarantino built that up so much as a big reveal.  Probably has something to do with film history that I'm not familiar with, knowing him.

As for what's wrong with me?  Would have to start a whole new thread on that one.

3 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Yeah everyone thinks of USSR, China, Nazi Germany as forced patriotism and flag humping, US could certainly use some serious introspection here.  Hearing the pledge of allegiance and the obligatory God bless America shit gives me hives, and makes mass killing and robbery palatable for all of us.

I thought of, and subsequently looked up, the pledge of allegiance the other week when I was going over Rousseau for the first time in ages.  I agree with you that it's a disgusting expression of nationalism that we still make kids do, but the words are actually pretty interesting:  "...to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."  This is the most basic articulation of Rousseau's social contract and "general will."  Rousseau was trying to establish how a state, or body politic, could be "one Republic" that was indivisible - a public or joint entity - that still maintained liberty for each individual.  And then you gotta but god in there of course.  Don't know where I'm going with this, but it's really interesting to me so thought I'd share.

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Also, I find it interesting that, despite crossing the Rubicon, he's only voting to convict on the first charge, abuse of power; and not the second charge, obstruction of Congress. 

That is interesting - there's a much clearer case for obstruction than there is for the inherently amorphous "abuse of power."  And just intuitively, if you think Trump abused power, then he definitely is also guilty of the obstruction charge.  Whereas there is an argument against that in the opposite direction - the president could be "obstructing" Congress, but that doesn't necessarily mean the original charge was an impeachable "abuse" of power.

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

It is not courage to do your job unless your job is like a firefighter or in the armed forces or something. Not being a coward doesn't mean you're brave, it just means you're not spineless.

Yeah I totally agree with Kal irt this discussion.  Romney ain't no profile in courage.  He's doing what he wants because he can, and also obviously has plenty of political antipathy towards Trump based on their history.  He's a mormon icon at this point, if he wants to run for reelection in 2024, he will get reelected in Utah unless he, I don't know, starts showing up to floor votes only wearing his magic underwear.  That recall measure ain't gonna make a difference even if it could.  Anyway, don't think he deserves a medal for voting to remove or anything.  We reserve that for true dying heroes like Rush Limbaugh.

3 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Grandma told me at Christmas that because Trump had been Impeached, he was no longer subject to term limits and could run for a third term... and she was dead serious.  Trying to explain the Constitution and relevant amendments to your essentially deaf grandmother is a very difficult proposition. 

I have heard - think someone mentioned this idea was being spread about on this thread.  Just...what?  What kind of fucked up logic leads you to that?  But yeah, I would never try to argue politics with my grandmother.  She wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I skew different politcally than most in this thread, but reading this made me think of something that is a bit embarrassing.  My grandmother is 87 and has lost most of her hearing.  Therefore, she gets most of her interaction through social media/Facebook.  She was a lifelong Democrat who basically became a Republican during the Clinton/W era or some such.  Not an uncommon thing here in the South.

Grandma told me at Christmas that because Trump had been Impeached, he was no longer subject to term limits and could run for a third term... and she was dead serious.  Trying to explain the Constitution and relevant amendments to your essentially deaf grandmother is a very difficult proposition. 

 

Please don’t take this as calling her a lunatic Rhom, though I will always refer to your son as a traitor, but one of the big dangers of Trump’s presidency is that it has fully unleashed lunacy across the land. People are embracing ideas no one could have thought of just a few years ago, and oddly they’re things the right always accused Obama of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I skew different politcally than most in this thread, but reading this made me think of something that is a bit embarrassing.  My grandmother is 87 and has lost most of her hearing.  Therefore, she gets most of her interaction through social media/Facebook.  She was a lifelong Democrat who basically became a Republican during the Clinton/W era or some such.  Not an uncommon thing here in the South.

Grandma told me at Christmas that because Trump had been Impeached, he was no longer subject to term limits and could run for a third term... and she was dead serious.  Trying to explain the Constitution and relevant amendments to your essentially deaf grandmother is a very difficult proposition. 

 

There is a meme running around Facebook making that claim.  It is blatantly false.  My best friend's 80 year old father claimed it was true and when I challenged him on it he claimed I was playing fancy "Lawyer tricks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Please don’t take this as calling her a lunatic Rhom, though I will always refer to your son as a traitor, but one of the big dangers of Trump’s presidency is that it has fully unleashed lunacy across the land. People are embracing ideas no one could have thought of just a few years ago, and oddly they’re things the right always accused Obama of.

My son will forever be a traitor to me as long as he expresses any affection towards the state of Wisconsin.

Grandma, well... she's grandma.  She's like much of her generation, technology is dangerous in her hands and she is precisely the target for misinformation campaigns.  The same sort of gullible belief that makes them targets for scammers calling to say that their grandchild is in prison in Mexico makes them believe any article they read online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

There is a meme running around Facebook making that claim.  It is blatantly false.  My best friend's 80 year old father claim it was true and when I challenged him on it he claimed I was playing fancy "Lawyer tricks".

I looked it up on Snopes I think it was (dangerous because so many people feel they are slanted in and of themselves and therefore won't listen to anything even when well researched) and I believe it was traced back to a Tweet from a radical right personality that I don't believe I had ever heard of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I looked it up on Snopes I think it was (dangerous because so many people feel they are slanted in and of themselves and therefore won't listen to anything even when well researched) and I believe it was traced back to a Tweet from a radical right personality that I don't believe I had ever heard of.

Every fact check service has said that the meme is absolute crap.  Cite them all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Every fact check service has said that the meme is absolute crap.  Cite them all.

That's the thing that gets me... its so obviously ridiculous that I don't understand why I should ever have to cite anything.  But then again, I would think its ridiculous on the surface to believe that Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring out of the basement of a DC pizza parlor... but there we are seeing people barging in with guns to liberate the poor kids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just FYI on the "Did Romney display political courage?" question, he was the first person Senator ever from the same political party to vote to impeach the President.  Both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton had 100% of their party on board. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rhom said:

That's the thing that gets me... its so obviously ridiculous that I don't understand why I should ever have to cite anything.  But then again, I would think its ridiculous on the surface to believe that Hillary Clinton was running a child sex ring out of the basement of a DC pizza parlor... but there we are seeing people barging in with guns to liberate the poor kids.

This is coming from the same guy as the one who promoted "pizzagate":

posobiec.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

he was the first person Senator ever from the same political party to vote to impeach the President.  Both Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton had 100% of their party on board. 

That's a great way to get yourself into the history books through an entirely trivial and meaningless vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMC said:

Well, the entire premise of the movies is that Bill shot "the woman."  Don't think that's much of a spoiler.  I suppose I spoiled her name, but whenever I rewatch those movies I still don't get why Tarantino built that up so much as a big reveal.  Probably has something to do with film history that I'm not familiar with, knowing him.

Yeah, I've never gotten it either. Google seems to think he was just screwing around.

Quote

As for what's wrong with me?  Would have to start a whole new thread on that one.

I think you and I would Spiderman meme on that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rhom said:

My son will forever be a traitor to me as long as he expresses any affection towards the state of Wisconsin.

I mean, I'm not going to say go full Adrian Peterson on the lad, but Bender has some wise words:

Quote

Grandma, well... she's grandma.  She's like much of her generation, technology is dangerous in her hands and she is precisely the target for misinformation campaigns.  The same sort of gullible belief that makes them targets for scammers calling to say that their grandchild is in prison in Mexico makes them believe any article they read online.

That actually happened with my grandfather. Someone pretending to be me calling from a prison in South America, Peru I believe. He was out $34,000. To be fair though that is something I would totally do, and it could have happened freshmen year spring break in Cancun. 

Also, I've seen some reports that young people are actually the easiest to scam now because of their willingness to put information online. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

I mean, really, is Joe Manchin now a profile in Courage? Is Sinema? Meh. 

To be fair, kind of? They had to weigh their electability versus their place in the caucus, and they chose correctly. I though that worthless carpet salesmen from West Virginia would crack. He's barely a Democrat these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

To be fair, kind of? They had to weigh their electability versus their place in the caucus, and they chose correctly.

Manchin has well-established incumbency, this don't matter to him.  Sinema?  I guess, but if she voted the other way it'd be a much more expensive political cost, in terms of any rational choice analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...