Jump to content

US Politics: The Copper, Silver, and Peach hangover


Ormond

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

it looks like Democrats may end up with 214 (if Porter manages to hold on and CA-22 goes to the Republicans)?

Agreed.  Checked out the outstanding races this morning and that's how it looks to me as well - 221-214.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the news box is saying Trump is expected to announce his 2024 run tonight as multiple political leaders, like R Money, are calling for him to go away as there's a leadership battle for Republicans in the House and Senate.

This is full kick up your feet and light one up season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

It's much better than we hoped for if you asked us last Monday, where the polls were pointing to ~225-230 for the Republicans, but worse than expected since Friday when there was still hope of Democrats retaining the House. All said and done, it's a pretty acceptable outcome IMO.

Republicans are going to hold the House with a small, but non-trivial margin.  If it were 218 or 219 then there would be the possibility of real shenanigans, but the difference between 220 and 222 is fairly minimal.  The only question is how much additional leverage the tight margin gives to both the moderate and extreme wings of the GOP caucus.  Sadly, we can be confident that it will be the questionably named "Freedom Caucus", not the moderates, who are most willing to aggressively play their hand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

That’s worse than you hoped for, right?

I mean, my "prediction" (guess) on here before the election was the GOP would win 230 seats.  On Tuesday night/Wednesday morning it looked like they'd win 220 seats, and my expectations really haven't changed since then.  So, I suppose one seat worse?

But as I said last week - as long as the Dems are limited to 51 seats in the Senate which includes Manchema - honestly I'd prefer the GOP to have a 220 seat majority than the Dems having a 220 seat majority.  Partly because there ain't much more the Dems can do with those majorities anyway, partly because it means the GOP shares responsibility attribution come 2024, and partly because of...

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

This is full kick up your feet and light one up season. 

...this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Sadly, we can be confident that it will be the questionably named "Freedom Caucus", not the moderates, who are most willing to aggressively play their hand. 

Sad?  Turn that frown upside down and enjoy the clusterfuck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

I think said clusterfuck is somewhat of a major issue because it heavily increases the risk that Ukraine will lose funding and support.

Not unless enough GOP Senators are on board to push for it (i.e. 40 of them).  In which case it doesn't really matter if the GOP holds 215 or 220 seats in the House.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

Not unless enough GOP Senators are on board to push for it (i.e. 40 of them).  In which case it doesn't really matter if the GOP holds 215 or 220 seats in the House.

That's the thing - that appears to be pretty easy, at least so far. McConnell et al have been fairly consistent in voting for funding and outspoken in the need for it. I'm not that worried about the senate. 

But the House has had repeatedly votes that were very narrow for Ukraine support. And I'm pretty sure you need both House and Senate support to vote for these bills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

But the House has had repeatedly votes that were very narrow for Ukraine support. And I'm pretty sure you need both House and Senate support to vote for these bills. 

Ukraine funding at the point should and most likely will be wrapped into either the budget or the NDAA.  If the GOP House wants to go to war - with their own party in the Senate mind you - on either over Ukraine, again, I'm enjoying that clusterfuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Ukraine funding at the point should and most likely will be wrapped into either the budget or the NDAA.  If the GOP House wants to go to war - with their own party in the Senate mind you - on either over Ukraine, again, I'm enjoying that clusterfuck.

And I think they may be willing to, and I'm not really enjoying the notion of Ukraine getting fucked over by Republicans again in order to score political points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

And I think they may be willing to, and I'm not really enjoying the notion of Ukraine getting fucked over by Republicans again in order to score political points. 

There's been talk of passing a very large Ukraine aid bill in the lame duck, perhaps enough to cover the next two years. I wouldn't worry too much about Ukraine funding.

The really worry, as ever, is the debt ceiling. Democrats need to defuse that issue in the lame duck as well, and, unlike Ukraine funding, there's no guarantee that McConnell will go along with it.

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...