US Politics: I Say a Little Prayer for You!

[DanteGabriel]

2 minutes ago, Ormond said:

If Trump would actually refuse to leave the White House after losing the election, I would hope that they would be wise enough NOT to try to physically remove him. The power of the Presidency is not determined by who is living at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in DC. The new president can set up his or her office someplace else, and you can use the Capitol Police or whoever to prevent food deliveries or even cut off electricity and water to the White House. Trump is not someone who is going to "rough it" in such a situation and I'm sure would actually physically leave on his own in a week or so. If you use physical force to bodily remove him, you make him more of a martyr with his base. 

 

I would actually love to have Trump's presidency end with him being starved out of the White House like vermin. I bet Lindsey Graham would try to smuggle him Big Macs in his underwear.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I would actually love to have Trump's presidency end with him being starved out of the White House like vermin. I bet Lindsey Graham would try to smuggle him Big Macs in his underwear.

Lindsey Graham is just the most two faced hypocritical human being to ever draw breath, isn't he?

[DanteGabriel]

3 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Lindsey Graham is just the most two faced hypocritical human being to ever draw breath, isn't he?

He and Ken Starr both have necks that turn all the way around, I'd say.

[Larry of the Lawn]

4 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

He and Ken Starr both have necks that turn all the way around, I'd say.

There's also Ted Cruz, with the added bonus of new facial hair stylings on each rotation.

[Fragile Bird]

I was thinking about the discussion we had a few threads ago, when the Warren camp leaked the story that Sanders told Warren in their private meeting that a woman couldn’t beat Trump, and the later discussion about how Sanders should have dropped out and conceded to Clinton far earlier than he did. Since then whenever I’ve watched him speak all  I can see is this old fart who went and mansplained to Warren why she shouldn’t run.

I think he has the attitude that a woman can’t win because of his age, and he wouldn’t stop his campaign at an earlier stage in 2015 because he was damned if he was going to concede to a woman. And he will be one of the last candidates standing this time around as well. He may very well be the winner. But if Mayor Pete surges elsewhere or if Bloomberg comes on strong because Biden drops out or if Biden surges, Sanders will fight them tooth and nail to the bitter end, cheered on by Republicans who will work to divide Democrats.

And Trump will win.

I blame Sanders for Trump winning the last time and I have pretty well reached the conclusion Trump will win again. And I blame Sanders. The old fucker should have had the grace to drop dead when he had a chance.

[sologdin]

There’s no right-wing equivalent to this kind of ideological policing toward people sympathetic to right-wing causes

an unwarranted fantasy.  consider the following requisite propositions of modern rightwing politics, demurral to which results in the normal roll call of dreadful gemeinschaft remedies, all of which propositions are either false or unfalsifiable utterances with no discernible truth-value:

Quote

america [sic] is the greatest country in the world

america [sic] is a christian nation

america [sic] is the name of the united states

america [sic] never dropped more bombs on vietnam than all countries dropped in all theatres of word war two

if america [sic] did drop bombs on vietnam, it was to help vietnam

vietnam deserved to be bombed

hurricane katrina is obama's fault

obama is not a citizen of america [sic]

christians are oppressed in america [sic] because they don't get to exclude other religions

christians are oppressed in america [sic] because they don't get to control the government

christians don't control the government in america [sic]

god exists

god loves america

fetal persons have more rights than their mothers

republicans are not liberals

biological race exists

biological sex exists

america didn't do anything to anger terrorists

terrorists hate the freedom of america

iraq had WMD

iraq was a threat to america even though america took it over in a week

and so on,.  rightwing PC piety has all the markers cultic identity politics--it has the additional defect of being false.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Not good news an emoluments suit has been dismissed for lack of standing.  I'd like to see the actual text of their holding so I can better understand the reason they are rejecting this on standing grounds. The three judge panel issuing the ruling was Henderson (appointed by GHW Bush on the bench since 1990) Tatel (Clinton appointee on the bench since 1994) and Griffith (appointed by GW Bush on the bench since 2005) it was a unanimous ruling:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/07/politics/emoluments-lawsuit-trump/index.html

[Centrist Simon Steele]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

The most annoying aspect of Sanders supporters is exactly this, the implied threat that they won’t come out for anyone other than Bernie.

Oh shit, it's a response to the enraged centrists. As opposed to trying to work with other people in the party, libs who see themselves as the true north of the party would instead rather condescend about electability and throw around the term of misogynist. I truly think it's butt hurt Hillary lovers, but it doesn't matter, it's a real problem on both sides, and to act like it's only Sanders supporters is pretty disingenuous.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

I'm frequently surprised by my Mother, who is one of the most compassionate and caring people I know, and her insistent and unwavering support for Trump.  Every time I question her on her support of Trump she goes off on how horrible Sec. Clinton is (not was, is).  I point out that Clinton hasn't held public office since 2012 and that she isn't running for any office today.  It doesn't even slow her down... she's 73.

To be fair, she does come from the generation of women that are more critical of women’s behavior than men’s.

[Larry of the Lawn]

What about picking a purple state Republican senator as a unity pick for VP?  Anybody out there who fits that description?  

Eta: Mittens?  Somebody not up for reelection in 2020.  I could totally see Buttigieg or Biden doing this

[Centrist Simon Steele]

35 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

I meant to respond to @Triskele's post a couple days ago about Lamar Alexander and the worries of these retiring Republicans about how they'll be treated if they cross Trump. There was a Vox article last week about just that topic, and I think it cites tweets from the Politico reporter you mentioned. It also argues for a "right wing political correctness" which is an interesting take. It might also be relevant to why Scot's mom is defending Trump.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/31/21116689/trump-impeachment-lamar-alexander-witness-bolton

As for my own Dem primary preferences, it's become a litany of ugh and meh. I have reservations about the character, policies, or electability of each one. But sure, let me see...

1. Warren -- Is she really dead in the water? Is third place in Iowa not enough to be optimistic? I have the fewest doubts about her character or policies but I don't want to underestimate America's capacity for misogyny again, especially given the opponent.

2. Buttigieg, I guess? I have strong doubts about his character and potential policies. He may be more electable than the others just because the only Democrats who've been elected President in my lifetime have been young and charismatic, which I guess he sort of is. I suspect a gay man may have an easier time with the national electorate than a woman. Too bad he's probably The Smiler from Transmetropolitan.

3. Sanders, because I think there's a decent chance he can overcome the socialism narrative. I don't think the socialist label is a death kiss for most people under 50 or so. It's a bit of a turnaround from my relatively enthusiastic support for him in the 2016 primary. My change in opinion on him was largely due to his own actions, but the very real Bernie Bro phenomenon has contributed. If Bernie wins the nomination and loses in the general, will his most earnest supporters at least shut up about being cheated out of their inevitable glorious victory by the DNC? I bet not.

4. Bloomberg or Biden, because fine whatever just no more Trump.

I wonder, especially if Biden drops sooner rather than later, that Warren might make a comeback. I think that'd be great, though my biggest concern are the extremely sexist, racist slurs Trump will hurl and her ability to sidestep that bullshit. 

[sologdin]

scot--

it seems plausible that a minority of one chamber or the other or both can't speak for the chamber and therefore the claim can't be brought on behalf of the legislature.  that said, who exactly has standing to bring a domestic emoluments clause case?

 

simon--

this seems to be the normal problem in a primary for a big party: every candidate risks alienating the other wing of the party. i get that the right wing of democratic party has an entitled expectation, and always has, that its left wing will get aboard to defeat the fascists.  popular fronts are cool.  no problem there.  i would hope, though, that they would jump aboard also when the left wing of the democratic party is ascendant, rather than whining like trumpites.

that said, what, however, is the right wing of the democratic party willing to pay for the support of the party's left wing? i am happy to vote for some futile socialist party to remain principled if i am not to be bribed.

[Ormond]

3 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

What about picking a purple state Republican senator as a unity pick for VP?  Anybody out there who fits that description?  

Of course there is no such thing as a sitting Senator who would fit that description after the impeachment vote. Romney is the only senator who would have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted by a Democratic convention in that role, and I don't see him accepting it.

I suppose in some ways Jeff Flake fits this idea among Senators now out of office, but I think his policy positions are even more right wing than Romney's so I don't see Democrats really accepting him either.

[Larry of the Lawn]

Just now, Ormond said:

Of course there is no such thing as a sitting Senator who would fit that description after the impeachment vote. Romney is the only senator who would have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted by a Democratic convention in that role, and I don't see him accepting it.

I suppose in some ways Jeff Flake fits this idea among Senators now out of office, but I think his policy positions are even more right wing than Romney's so I don't see Democrats really accepting him either.

Yeah, part of the idea was to open up a seat in a special election (although I know some states do this differently and the governor or legislature appoints someone to a vacant seat, like McSally) that Dems could potentially pick up.  Collins maybe but she's up for reelection anyway.  

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

4 minutes ago, sologdin said:

scot--

it seems plausible that a minority of one chamber or the other or both can't speak for the chamber and therefore the claim can't be brought on behalf of the legislature.  that said, who exactly has standing to bring a domestic emoluments clause case?

 

It will be very hard to show "concrete and particularized" damages as required by Spokeo v. Robins.  

:(

[DanteGabriel]

25 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

There's also Ted Cruz, with the added bonus of new facial hair stylings on each rotation.

Cruz is rising fast, especially how much he's rolled over for the asshole who insulted his wife, but Graham and Starr have covered themselves with glory with the contrast between two impeachments.

I'm actually trying to figure out how the various Republican lickspittles and toadies would smuggle food and supplies to a besieged Rat King Trump holding out in the White House. Lewandowski would try to impersonate a cop with Jacob Wohl's help to break the blockade. Stephen Miller would find some Sinaloa cartel guys to dig a tunnel under the WH fence. Matt Gaetz would smuggle onions in his cheeks. Cruz would try to grow a beard to hide AA batteries in but fail and act like he had no idea how those batteries got in there. Devin Nunes would sneak him mouthfuls of sweetened condensed milk from the farm his family rents to maintain cred. Trump's sons would book a hunting trip in Africa, and Ivanka would move back to New York and try to pretend she'd never left.

[butterbumps!]

26 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

Oh shit, it's a response to the enraged centrists. As opposed to trying to work with other people in the party, libs who see themselves as the true north of the party would instead rather condescend about electability and throw around the term of misogynist. I truly think it's butt hurt Hillary lovers, but it doesn't matter, it's a real problem on both sides, and to act like it's only Sanders supporters is pretty disingenuous.

Are there significant numbers of democrats who actually like Hillary that much?  Or is it more that people believe Sanders hurt her dramatically enough that it cost the election and got Trump?   I’m genuinely asking because I don’t know anyone who likes Hillary.   

I’m slightly more optimistic about Bloomberg’s chances of victory in the general than Sanders in part because I think that Sanders chances rely on getting high turnout of a group of people who notoriously do not turn out (young people), while Bloomberg seems to soothe a lot of the more reliable voters, like suburbanites and such, who did surge in 2018.  I think there’s a lot of people out there who aren’t super impacted by a lot of politics and don’t think it matters personally who’s in power- that comfortable complacent contingent.  They’re the ones I suspect bring in more Bloomberg votes to where he may not need to rely on the less reliable voter bloc Sanders does.  
 

eta- I know there’s still a lot more time, but the overall numbers in Iowa do not fill me with hope that sanders will produce the requisite surge of engaged youth.    If that changes, I think my assessment of his chances in the general do as well.  

[Ice Queen]

25 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Of course there is no such thing as a sitting Senator who would fit that description after the impeachment vote. Romney is the only senator who would have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted by a Democratic convention in that role, and I don't see him accepting it.

I suppose in some ways Jeff Flake fits this idea among Senators now out of office, but I think his policy positions are even more right wing than Romney's so I don't see Democrats really accepting him either.

Democrats will never forgive Jeff Flake for Kavanaugh. 

[Larry of the Lawn]

13 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

.  
 

eta- I know there’s still a lot more time, but the overall numbers in Iowa do not fill me with hope that sanders will produce the requisite surge of engaged youth.    If that changes, I think my assessment of his chances in the general do as well.  

I wouldn't use Iowa as a bellwether for youth turnout.  The nature of a caucus doesn't exactly make it a convenient form of civic engagement to anyone with kids or who works nights, plus, it's Iowa.  Sanders could have won Iowa by +10 and all the centrist Dem pundits would still be saying "Sanders wins Iowa but does he have enough of a following to best Trump?". 

[Maithanet]

The idea of a unity ticket is always a bad one.  But IF a Democrat like Biden or Buttigieg went that route, the only possible republicans are the governors, not the Senators.  Obviously a lot of Democrats wouldn't cringe at the thought of voting for Larry Hogan since so many Maryland Democrats already have.  But what would such a plan gain?  Would any real voters actually be convinced to vote for a Biden/Hogan ticket who wouldn't already be voting Biden?  I'm very skeptical.

In contrast, I can easily see picking Stacey Abrahams or Julian Castro or Elizabeth Warren for VP could bring actual voters to Biden who would otherwise stay home.  IMO whoever wins the Democratic nomination is going to need to use the VP spot to shore up some weakness in the Democratic base, whether it is with black voters, moderates, etc.