Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
A Horse Named Stranger

US Politics: CPAC - Finding new ways to bring America to Rune.

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, A True Kaniggit said:

Please let these be acceptable. I know you can't make out the words on the upper flag, but they say, "Not my president" I'll get a better photo if you demand it, but it'd be nice if you take me at my word.

I think you should quit while you're ahead before he shoots you as a trespasser.

Share this post


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

I think you should quit while you're ahead before he shoots you as a trespasser.

Yeah. Which is why the photos are so shitty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A True Kaniggit said:

@Ser Scot A Ellison "Pics or it didn't happen"

I keep my campaign promises.

https://i.imgur.com/NIjPPxM.png

https://i.imgur.com/gz62hAT.png

Please let these be acceptable. I know you can't make out the words on the upper flag, but they say, "Not my president" I'll get a better photo if you demand it, but it'd be nice if you take me at my word.

Yeah, I got a guy down the street from me flying a “Trump 2020: No More Bullshit” flag... with no intended irony.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

maybe just plain indexing the current federal minimum wage to inflation?  Inflation goes up, so does the minimum wage.  perhaps that might garner a few republican votes...

 

Be nice to slide in a dollar or three an hour pay bump on top of that, but probably unlikely 

Per the video I linked a wee while ago. ALL of the countries included in the video have a minimum wage setting process that is linked to things like CPI and it is largely automatic, though in most cases there is probably a review process to ensure nothing extreme happens,... all that is, except for the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh. Roy Blount is retiring, guess he didn't want to deal with another primary. I doubt Democrats can win a senate seat in Missouri anymore, but maybe this cracks the window just a tiny bit (e.g. Likely R instead of Safe R). More importantly, this is the 5th GOP Senate retirement this cycle, and all 5 are from the less-Trumpy side of the party. As bad the Senate Republicans have been, there are likely going to be a whole lot worse in 2023.

 

Also, an odd SCOTUS decision just came out. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-968_8nj9.pdf It's not a major case or anything, but its an 8-1 opinion written by Thomas, with Roberts as the lone dissenter. I'm not sure that configuration has ever happened before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Fez said:

Huh. Roy Blount is retiring, guess he didn't want to deal with another primary. I doubt Democrats can win a senate seat in Missouri anymore, but maybe this cracks the window just a tiny bit (e.g. Likely R instead of Safe R). More importantly, this is the 5th GOP Senate retirement this cycle, and all 5 are from the less-Trumpy side of the party. As bad the Senate Republicans have been, there are likely going to be a whole lot worse in 2023.

 

Also, an odd SCOTUS decision just came out. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-968_8nj9.pdf It's not a major case or anything, but its an 8-1 opinion written by Thomas, with Roberts as the lone dissenter. I'm not sure that configuration has ever happened before.

All the Republicans who swallowed their consciences to appease Trump are retiring, and being replaced by soulless hacks.  It's been happening since 2016.  Marshall, Blackburn, Lummis, Scott, Hawley, Kennedy all objected to the election results.  Hagerty was a Trump fundraiser.  Kevin Cramer is one of the Trumpiest Senators. 

I won't be singing any dirges for the retirees, but the replacement of cowards by fanatics is a bad thing for the country. 

You look at the Missouri presidential election results in 2020 though, and hard to believe any Democrat can win a statewide election there for federal office. 

Claire Mcaskill may be the Dems best bet? Although the Dems spent a lot of effort in 2020 trying to get the "right" candidatea in Montana, Iowa, NC etc to overcome the rightward lean, and as a general rule it didn't work.   

The exclusion of Steve Bullock, who took a bullet for his party running in Montana against Daines, from Biden's cabinet is something I will never understand. 

Edited by Gaston de Foix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fez said:

Huh. Roy Blount is retiring, guess he didn't want to deal with another primary. I doubt Democrats can win a senate seat in Missouri anymore, but maybe this cracks the window just a tiny bit (e.g. Likely R instead of Safe R). More importantly, this is the 5th GOP Senate retirement this cycle, and all 5 are from the less-Trumpy side of the party. As bad the Senate Republicans have been, there are likely going to be a whole lot worse in 2023.

 

Also, an odd SCOTUS decision just came out. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-968_8nj9.pdf It's not a major case or anything, but its an 8-1 opinion written by Thomas, with Roberts as the lone dissenter. I'm not sure that configuration has ever happened before.

Probably written by his clerks, I have doubts whether he could even write his own opinion.

Share this post


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

Probably written by his clerks, I have doubts whether he could even write his own opinion.

He can.  There are many grounds to criticize Thomas fairly: intellectual inferiority is not one of them.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blunt's been hinting at this for awhile.  Trumpist and disgraced former governor Eric Greitens was already angling for a primary challenge.  It appears the best chance to stop him would be John's smarmy little son Jay Ashcroft.  He's also pretty Trumpist, but at least he's never been indicted for sexual blackmail.  On the Democratic side, Scott Sifton has already secured a lot of institutional support.  It appears he will be the sacrificial lamb - Jason Kander has already said no.  I guess maybe McCaskill could try again but I doubt it.

Anyway, if (when?) Grassley retires, that'll be quite the generational turnover for the GOP.  What a victory for all the little Eichmanns.

14 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

The exclusion of Steve Bullock, who took a bullet for his party running in Montana against Daines, from Biden's cabinet is something I will never understand. 

Bullock never really expressed much interest in any Cabinet position.  And other than Interior, he wasn't really a fit either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WH press conference Biden's preference is not to make changes to the filibuster and is still into bipartisanship for passing legislature. (Psaki.) Sigh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DMC said:

Anyway, if (when?) Grassley retires, that'll be quite the generational turnover for the GOP.  What a victory for all the little Eichmanns.

Bullock never really expressed much interest in any Cabinet position.  And other than Interior, he wasn't really a fit either.

Yup.  And Mitch is also organizing a succession plan in Kentucky: https://wfpl.org/mcconnell-backs-ky-bill-ensuring-gop-successor-if-he-leaves-office/.  It may just be a prudent precaution or he may not intend to serve out his full term.  

Bullock would have worked for Ag, rather than giving Vilsack a second go at the department.  Bullock was courted by the party and Obama into running: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/06/steve-bullock-obama-meeting-111814.  I'm sure he would have been happy to be in the cabinet. 

Frankly, the collapse of the Dems in Nebraska, ND, Montana is a distressing and underrated story of its own. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was searching for another story when I came across this gem of a story: billionaire Robert Brockman, a big GOP donor, was accused in October of running the biggest tax fraud scheme in US history, $2 B worth of fraud. GOP groups across the country have been silent about the story. No kidding. His lawyers are claiming he should not be brought to trial because he has dementia. A competency hearing is scheduled for June.

Quote

Democrats are already pouncing on the lack of public GOP pushback against Brockman after he funded some of their campaigns.

American Bridge, a Democratic super PAC that specializes in opposition research and first flagged the Brockman contributions to CNBC, used the episode to blast the GOP.

“Congressional Republicans spent the last four years gutting IRS enforcement and cutting taxes for billionaires while being bankrolled by the biggest tax cheat in American history,” Max Steele, an American Bridge spokesman, told CNBC. “While they should return or donate the money, we know they won’t. After all, how can a party blindly loyal to Donald Trump afford to oppose billionaires committing tax fraud?”

Brockman, through companies he controlled, also heavily financed a super PAC backing Mitt Romney for president in 2012, according to a report by Mother Jones.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/gop-groups-quiet-as-donor-accused-of-running-biggest-tax-fraud-scheme-ever.html?__twitter_impression=true&recirc=taboolainternal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

You look at the Missouri presidential election results in 2020 though, and hard to believe any Democrat can win a statewide election there for federal office. 

Claire Mcaskill may be the Dems best bet? Although the Dems spent a lot of effort in 2020 trying to get the "right" candidatea in Montana, Iowa, NC etc to overcome the rightward lean, and as a general rule it didn't work.   

Jason Kander manage to get within 3% in 2016, when Trump was beating Clinton by 19%. He ruled out running again already, but I wonder if Blount retiring will change his mind.

McCaskill already said this morning in response to the news that she won't run, and it sounds pretty certain.

2 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

WH press conference Biden's preference is not to make changes to the filibuster and is still into bipartisanship for passing legislature. (Psaki.) Sigh.

Previously he has also said his preference was to get Republican votes on the COVID bill. What Biden's preference is, is not always what happens. But if he wants to give, or at least appear to give, a shot at bipartisanship each time, that's probably a good way to keep Manchin on board. It's also a good way to maintain relationships with Republicans like Murkowski for smaller bills where it can matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fez said:

Also, an odd SCOTUS decision just came out. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-968_8nj9.pdf It's not a major case or anything, but its an 8-1 opinion written by Thomas, with Roberts as the lone dissenter. I'm not sure that configuration has ever happened before.

Funniest line in the decision in Robert's solo dissent (referring to an English Chief Justice):

"These statements, however, bear less weight than the Court suggests. Lord Holt was alone in dissent in Ashby (no shame there), and although his opinion has been cited favorably by subsequent cases and commentary, his colleagues disagreed with him." 

Share this post


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

I was searching for another story when I came across this gem of a story: billionaire Robert Brockman, a big GOP donor, was accused in October of running the biggest tax fraud scheme in US history, $2 B worth of fraud. GOP groups across the country have been silent about the story. No kidding. His lawyers are claiming he should not be brought to trial because he has dementia. A competency hearing is scheduled for June.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/05/gop-groups-quiet-as-donor-accused-of-running-biggest-tax-fraud-scheme-ever.html?__twitter_impression=true&recirc=taboolainternal

I can't believe Trump forgot to pardon him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

Bullock would have worked for Ag, rather than giving Vilsack a second go at the department.  Bullock was courted by the party and Obama into running: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/06/steve-bullock-obama-meeting-111814.  I'm sure he would have been happy to be in the cabinet. 

Vilsack was probably my least favorite Cabinet pick, but Bullock would have been a weird (and not really qualified) choice there.  There were a lot of other candidates that should have gotten agriculture before him.  Of course he was courted by the party, but him not getting a cabinet post is a rather odd complaint.

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

He ruled out running again already, but I wonder if Blount retiring will change his mind.

 

5 minutes ago, Fez said:

But if he wants to give, or at least appear to give, a shot at bipartisanship each time, that's probably a good way to keep Manchin on board.

Yeah Biden encouraging bipartisanship right now is, ironically, the best way in which to actually achieve filibuster reform by convincing Manchin.

Share this post


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

Yeah Biden encouraging bipartisanship right now is, ironically, the best way in which to actually achieve filibuster reform by convincing Manchin.

What shape would this reform take that would meaningfully allow legislation to pass? Genuine question.  

the Republicans would organize a rota to talking-filibuster H.R.1, I have no doubt.  I understand going through the motions to test, again, the Republican profession to working together in a bipartisan way on infrastructure, particularly since Manchin has publicly expressed support for $3-4 trillion bill.  Maybe there's a deal with enough pork, though I kind of doubt it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

He can.  There are many grounds to criticize Thomas fairly: intellectual inferiority is not one of them.   

It's not even necessarily whether he has intellectual inferiority or not. For me it's more of a case in disbelief whether he comes to his opinions on his own or whether he's beholden to whatever extreme conservative special interest group wants his position to be.

I believe he's not above giving whatever opinion he's rewarded to give. Such an opinion wouldn't necessarily be his own.

Eta: The day i'll believe otherwise will be the day I see him give an opinion that diverges from his wife's lobbying business.

Edited by DireWolfSpirit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

What shape would this reform take that would meaningfully allow legislation to pass? Genuine question.

What will they ultimately decide on?  No idea.  Doubt anybody does at this point.  See upthread for the various options.

7 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

the Republicans would organize a rota to talking-filibuster H.R.1, I have no doubt.

Well it sounded like yesterday Manchin would be in favor of passing at least some of HR1 through reconciliation, not through filibuster reform.

Share this post


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

×
×
  • Create New...