Future of the Democratic Party


Off-Topic Discussions

151 to 200 of 4,260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I like how thejeff's post artfully, and entirely accidentally, refuted Drahlianna's "Game Over" declaration.

Trump's control over the Senate remains frail at best, and can be shattered with effortful electioneering. Keep the pressure on and we just might survive the next two years.

We have to bring the A game to the mid-terms. Of 33 senate seats up in 2018, 25 are Democrats or vote with Democrats. In a mid-term election that could spell some fairly substantial losses.
And how many of those 25 Democrats are in states that voted Red last year?
And quite frankly the Democrats have been fighting a rear guard action since Reagan's landslide.

Since the Civil Rights movement and the backlash to it turned whites against government programs.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
thejeff wrote:
In actual news, rather than rehashing the primaries: Two Republicans, Sen. Susan Collins (ME) and Lisa Murkowksi (AK), have announced they'll vote against confirming Betsy DeVos for Secretary of Education. Since it looks like no Democrat will support her, one more Republican backing out and she can be rejected.

The committee also voted to change the rules so that Democrats can't forestall the process by boycotting the meetings.

In addition the Scalia-Clone has finally been unwrapped from it's plastic sheeting.

President Donald Trump on Wednesday encouraged Republican leaders in Congress to "go nuclear" if Democrats on the Hill move to block his Supreme Court nominee.

Speaking at at the White House, the president said Neil Gorsuch deserved a "unanimous endorsement" and if Democrats cause gridlock, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has his blessing to choose the so-called "nuclear option."

The move would rob the minority party of the right to filibuster a nominee, allowing Republicans to confirm Gorsuch with only 51 votes, instead of the 60 normally needed.

Yes, they did. Does this surprise you?

And we all knew they'd kill the SC filibuster to get a nominee through.

None of that changes that there looks to be a chance of blocking one of the nominees. Which, quite frankly, is more than I'd expected. Partly because the nominees are even worse than expected. Bad enough to bother even some Republicans.


Yeah, I'll just note that FiveThirtyEight, which is probably the only major news site that really kept its head during the final days of the election, expressed extreme skepticism about any appointees getting blocked. It's not exactly common. Even coming close will indicate much weaker Republican support than Trump is gonna need. He's rapidly used up what little political capital he started with, if you believe in the concept of such a currency.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:

Sure, but that's a YUGE "if". If he manages to pull that off, I'll give him a hell of a lot of credit. It would be a miracle - especially since he appears to plan to do it with tax cuts and bullying. Frankly, I'll be shocked if keeps from crashing the economy before 2018.

The coal jobs aren't coming back. Manufacturing might, but it's going to be even more automated and less labor intensive.

Trump doesn't need to do any of that. He just needs to make people BELIEVE that he's done that. His standard operating procedure is to make a bluff so high he misses it with his own sense motive and then believes his own malarky, and then people who have a long and troubled history with reality also believe him. this is a man who found excuses for why a picture of his inauguration was wrong and his followers went with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kobold Cleaver wrote:
That's an exaggeration. The Republicans were widely blamed for the Bush disaster. Trouble is, it didn't last—not because Democrats are bad at sales, but because they never bothered to sell at all to the places where it mattered when it mattered.

That is partially because to sell that disaster you would need to actually "Look back instead of looking forward". Obama chose to "Look forward instead of looking back".

A true progressive would have supported instead of demolished the Occupy movement which was essentially (despite the many warts it had) a movement that wanted to censure Wall Street and give Main Street a greater voice in the government. A true progressive would have shrink not expanded international conflicts.

So under Obama Wall Street and the Military Industrial complexes got richer and more powerful and once the Citizens United ruling was issued all bets were off.

Sure Obama and Hillary got big money funding (Obamas cabinet in his first administration mirrored the picks that Citibank suggested for him!) but big money favors Republicans on the local level.

All that extra cash was used to fund a lot of the local political right wing agendas which brought us to where we are today. I know I am oversimplifying this but what Obama failed to do (or more likely never had any intention of doing) cannot be discounted.


His followers will never switch sides. But we were never really campaigning for them, so I don't understand why so many people are stuck on them as a political asset. "If we can't get @JoeDeplorable155 on our side in 2020, gosh, I think we might as well pack it in here!"


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
By the way, Drahliana, can I ask what you think you're accomplishing in this thread by posting to say "let's all give up"? Are you trying to save us some trouble? Seeking the intellectual high ground over us? We have other threads to complain, is the thing, so if that's what you want to do, you might be spared the arguments over there. :P

I'm not sure. I'm looking for someone to come up with an alternative besides the ones that seem to have failed us already. I'm remembering that the Nazi Party ruled for over a decade before it's fall. And the folks we're trying to beat seem to have all the cards. They've got the money, they've got the state and local legislatures, the bulk of the Governors, and soon they'll have the Supreme Court. At the very least they'll have four or eight years to do with what they will, and I don't see a path out of this.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

A lot's going to change in two years. Remember, the real problem wasn't voters flipping—it was voters sitting the election out because they were frustrated with Clinton.

Fear and anger are going to go a long way if the Democrats learn to use them.

Storyteller Shadow wrote:
The gutting of the voting rights act is part of what led to the recent gerrymandering that assisted Trump to a win (well that and pulling minority voters off of roles). I think that if Trump actually manages to bring jobs back to lower middle and middle class workers he will be hard to beat in a 2020 election. Between voter suppression and the belief by a blue collar base that he kept his promise where the Democrats have not (whether that is true or not) would be tough to overcome. Unless he makes some other YUGE mistakes along the way.

And that brings us to the Democrat's Party's secret weapon—don't tell anybody, shh!

Trump is actually extremely bad at literally everything.

LOL.

True but when your base denies reality they will not flee from you if they think you did what they asked you to do. Everything Trump has done so far, like it or not, he pretty much promised in his campaign. Executive Orders are not the same as passing Legislation but the perception that he is doing what he said he would do goes a long way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
...So go call your Senators. :)

Most of their voicemail is already full. So instead, fax your Senators (free) from the Internet. You must use a valid email address, because you will receive a confirmation email at it; you must click the link within that email to confirm the sending.

Remind your Senator that if they support Trump's nominees, you will actively work with any Democrat (or Green or other Left-y) who primaries them when they next come up for re-election.

If you need to in the future, you can can also send a fax to your Congresscritter too.


thejeff wrote:
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
The gutting of the voting rights act is part of what led to the recent gerrymandering that assisted Trump to a win (well that and pulling minority voters off of roles). I think that if Trump actually manages to bring jobs back to lower middle and middle class workers he will be hard to beat in a 2020 election. Between voter suppression and the belief by a blue collar base that he kept his promise where the Democrats have not (whether that is true or not) would be tough to overcome. Unless he makes some other YUGE mistakes along the way.

Sure, but that's a YUGE "if". If he manages to pull that off, I'll give him a hell of a lot of credit. It would be a miracle - especially since he appears to plan to do it with tax cuts and bullying. Frankly, I'll be shocked if keeps from crashing the economy before 2018.

The coal jobs aren't coming back. Manufacturing might, but it's going to be even more automated and less labor intensive.

Agreed but perception is more important sometimes than reality.

Personally I suspect that the Republicans forced Pence on him so they can go ahead and impeach him and have the type of candidate they really wanted in the Presidency.


Again, we don't care about Trump's base. Trump's base is a screaming minority—albeit a powerful one within the GOP—that will never admit wrongdoing. A deplorable minority, you might say. A veritable basket.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
thejeff wrote:

Sure, but that's a YUGE "if". If he manages to pull that off, I'll give him a hell of a lot of credit. It would be a miracle - especially since he appears to plan to do it with tax cuts and bullying. Frankly, I'll be shocked if keeps from crashing the economy before 2018.

The coal jobs aren't coming back. Manufacturing might, but it's going to be even more automated and less labor intensive.

Trump doesn't need to do any of that. He just needs to make people BELIEVE that he's done that. His standard operating procedure is to make a bluff so high he misses it with his own sense motive and then believes his own malarky, and then people who have a long and troubled history with reality also believe him. this is a man who found excuses for why a picture of his inauguration was wrong and his followers went with it.

This twice over. Trump has already managed to convince the working class that he's "saved" jobs at several plants, despite the evidence clearly showing he hasn't saved one. Americans have always believed in magic bullet solutions despite the logic and evidence that show they don't exist. He maintains a Reality Distortion Field that makes Steve Jobs look like a fricking amateur.


Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
thejeff wrote:
...So go call your Senators. :)

Most of their voicemail is already full. So instead, fax your Senators (free) from the Internet. You must use a valid email address, because you will receive a confirmation email at it; you must click the link within that email to confirm the sending.

Remind your Senator that if they support Trump's nominees, you will actively work with any Democrat (or Green or other Left-y) who primaries them when they next come up for re-election.

If you need to in the future, you can can also send a fax to your Congresscritter too.

Calling works better, if you can get through. Try the local office.

Fax is still better than email, if I understand correctly.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
His followers will never switch sides. But we were never really campaigning for them, so I don't understand why so many people are stuck on them as a political asset. "If we can't get @JoeDeplorable155 on our side in 2020, gosh, I think we might as well pack it in here!"

I think there are a lot of people out there (whether they admit it or not) voted for him as a populist candidate that maybe would have voted for Bernie (think Wisconsin, Michigan, etc.) as a Democratic populist candidate. Though I suppose he is more of a strongman than a populist based on his rhetoric of making America Great Again and what not as if he is a savior. Still he appealed to people who are really struggling not just "deplorables" whatever they may be.

Not sure how a billionaire can be a populist but again perception does not always equal reality.

That deplorables drop really was a stupid comment. She should have been more specific, White Nationalists, Neo Nazis, whatever, but the comment was taken by anyone who was thinking about voting for Trump as a personal insult to them even if it wasn't. Go read any Yahoo comments, people are still talking about that one.


Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
The gutting of the voting rights act is part of what led to the recent gerrymandering that assisted Trump to a win (well that and pulling minority voters off of roles). I think that if Trump actually manages to bring jobs back to lower middle and middle class workers he will be hard to beat in a 2020 election. Between voter suppression and the belief by a blue collar base that he kept his promise where the Democrats have not (whether that is true or not) would be tough to overcome. Unless he makes some other YUGE mistakes along the way.

Sure, but that's a YUGE "if". If he manages to pull that off, I'll give him a hell of a lot of credit. It would be a miracle - especially since he appears to plan to do it with tax cuts and bullying. Frankly, I'll be shocked if keeps from crashing the economy before 2018.

The coal jobs aren't coming back. Manufacturing might, but it's going to be even more automated and less labor intensive.

Agreed but perception is more important sometimes than reality.

Personally I suspect that the Republicans forced Pence on him so they can go ahead and impeach him and have the type of candidate they really wanted in the Presidency.

Possible. But doing that will enrage his followers, who already distrust establishment Republicans.

Pence'll be nasty, but in that situation he'd be horribly weakened.

I suspect the real hope was that Pence could play a Cheney role and run things from behind the scenes, since Trump's not really interested in the work of governing. Instead, if I'm following the infighting correctly, Bannon's grabbed that role and the establishment GOP isn't happy about it.


thejeff wrote:
Pence'll be nasty, but in that situation he'd be horribly weakened.

Agreed. That doesn't mean they won't do it if they think they will need to! :-)


Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Pence'll be nasty, but in that situation he'd be horribly weakened.
Agreed. That doesn't mean they won't do it if they think they will need to! :-)

Oh yeah, it's definitely an option on everyone's plate.

But it doesn't happen unless they think Trump staying in office hurts them worse than the damage of an impeachment would.


thejeff wrote:
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Pence'll be nasty, but in that situation he'd be horribly weakened.
Agreed. That doesn't mean they won't do it if they think they will need to! :-)

Oh yeah, it's definitely an option on everyone's plate.

But it doesn't happen unless they think Trump staying in office hurts them worse than the damage of an impeachment would.

Who knows, they may even seek to give him the JFK treatment. In fact considering he has a private security team he is no doubt paranoid about that. Having the CIA as an enemy is not conducive to a long life span...

Note that I am in no way condoning such a thing but these deep state bastards are amoral and if you mess with their money or their power well, JFK once again springs to mind.

---

Getting back on topic, I agree with what many here have posted. Local elections are critical. City, State and Congressional elections matter as much as the Presidential election does because those ripples have a significant impact for good or for ill.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
This twice over. Trump has already managed to convince the working class that he's "saved" jobs at several plants, despite the evidence clearly showing he hasn't saved one.

He actually didn't. Trump's votes didn't carry a large advantage with working class voters—in many states, he lost the working class vote. Again, let's just try to remember that Trump didn't win. Hillary Clinton lost. They both had abysmal turnout, but hers was a good sight worse in the Rust Belt and a good sight better where it didn't matter.


thejeff wrote:

ation he'd be horribly weakened.

I suspect the real hope was that Pence could play a Cheney role and run things from behind the scenes, since Trump's not really interested in the work of governing. Instead, if I'm following the infighting correctly, Bannon's grabbed that role and the establishment GOP isn't happy about it.

They've been more than happy to make use of Britebart since it reared it's pole tent up.

And Trump isn't so much "disinterested in government" as "disinterested in the donkey work details". He seems to be very enthusiastic in the "My word made law" department.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!


Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

The court politicising ship has been sailing since Scalia's death with the Republicans preventing Obama from even submitting a replacement.

The Republicans want that majority as soon as possible, and they will move what they have to to get it. They've got a lot of progressive work to undo, and the lawsuits waiting to launch.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

As I said earlier on this thread, McConnell has requested that Democrats treat Trump's nominee the same way he treated Obama's.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

The court politicising ship has been sailing since Scalia's death with the Republicans preventing Obama from even submitting a replacement.

The Republicans want that majority as soon as possible, and they will move what they have to to get it. They've got a lot of progressive work to undo, and the lawsuits waiting to launch.

Psst. I'm pretty sure that's what Trinam was saying. The "even a hearing for eight months or so" was kind of a giveaway.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

The court politicising ship has been sailing since Scalia's death with the Republicans preventing Obama from even submitting a replacement.

The Republicans want that majority as soon as possible, and they will move what they have to to get it. They've got a lot of progressive work to undo, and the lawsuits waiting to launch.

BARBARIAN NOT FALLING FOR THIS ONE. AM TRYING TO TALK LIKE MARTIAL APOLOGIST IN C/M-D THREAD IN HOPES BARBARIAN ENGAGE. SORRY, TALKY PERSON. BARBARIAN SEE THIS TRICK BEFORE. THIS AM POINT WHERE BARBARIAN COUNT TO FIFTY, THEN SMASH.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AM BARBARIAN wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

The court politicising ship has been sailing since Scalia's death with the Republicans preventing Obama from even submitting a replacement.

The Republicans want that majority as soon as possible, and they will move what they have to to get it. They've got a lot of progressive work to undo, and the lawsuits waiting to launch.

BARBARIAN NOT FALLING FOR THIS ONE. AM TRYING TO TALK LIKE MARTIAL APOLOGIST IN C/M-D THREAD IN HOPES BARBARIAN ENGAGE. SORRY, TALKY PERSON. BARBARIAN SEE THIS TRICK BEFORE. THIS AM POINT WHERE BARBARIAN COUNT TO FIFTY, THEN SMASH.

Luckily the barbarian runs out of fingers and toes long before he gets to 50, so we're pretty much safe.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

BARBARIAN HAVE PHD IN ENGINEERING AND AM ABLE TO DETERMINE STRUCTURAL WEAK POINTS OF AVERAGE CAVE SYSTEM BY CALCULATING LOADS ON VARIOUS PORTIONS OF WALLS.

MAYBE BARBARIAN DO THAT WITHOUT COUNTING. MAYBE BARBARIAN USE MULTIPLICATION AND DIVISION LIKE NORMAL. AM HARD TO SAY.

MAYBE NOT WANT TAKE CHANCE.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think a lot of people, especially Republicans, were expecting Pence to actually be the one calling the shots. Bannon pretty much usurped that role, and his actions have started to strain the relationship between the white house and party. And we are not even a month in. I really don't think it's going to be long before the Republicans start looking into ways of getting rid of Trump, something that they can happily count on support from by the democrats. Trump may actually cause an increase in Bipartisan work :P


As for Trump's base. Yeah there is a hardcore faction that will always support him. But a lot of Trump voters I think, if they see there insurance or medicaid suffer, or see prices go up and still no improvement in their communities job wise, are going to quickly turn against him.

You can deny reality for some things, but if suddenly your healthcare no longer covers the basics you need, or your lose your job or simply can not afford the things you used to...well reality denial only goes so far.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
AM BARBARIAN wrote:

BARBARIAN HAVE PHD IN ENGINEERING AND AM ABLE TO DETERMINE STRUCTURAL WEAK POINTS OF AVERAGE CAVE SYSTEM BY CALCULATING LOADS ON VARIOUS PORTIONS OF WALLS.

MAYBE BARBARIAN DO THAT WITHOUT COUNTING. MAYBE BARBARIAN USE MULTIPLICATION AND DIVISION LIKE NORMAL. AM HARD TO SAY.

MAYBE NOT WANT TAKE CHANCE.

...has sudden fond recollections of a 2H fighter in the RotRL home campaign he was part of, who used K: Engineering to figure out the best angle for nodachi strikes through walls...


It's a small, but potentially important distinction: Republicans don't really control all three branches. They're sharing the Executive Branch with Bannon and Trump.

That's both damnation and salvation, potentially.


Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Pence'll be nasty, but in that situation he'd be horribly weakened.
Agreed. That doesn't mean they won't do it if they think they will need to! :-)

Oh yeah, it's definitely an option on everyone's plate.

But it doesn't happen unless they think Trump staying in office hurts them worse than the damage of an impeachment would.

Who knows, they may even seek to give him the JFK treatment. In fact considering he has a private security team he is no doubt paranoid about that. Having the CIA as an enemy is not conducive to a long life span...

Note that I am in no way condoning such a thing but these deep state bastards are amoral and if you mess with their money or their power well, JFK once again springs to mind.

Or do some "Spring Cleaning".


MMCJawa wrote:
I think a lot of people, especially Republicans, were expecting Pence to actually be the one calling the shots. Bannon pretty much usurped that role, and his actions have started to strain the relationship between the white house and party. And we are not even a month in. I really don't think it's going to be long before the Republicans start looking into ways of getting rid of Trump, something that they can happily count on support from by the democrats. Trump may actually cause an increase in Bipartisan work :P

Despite that, he's still giving them what he wants. And he at this point is a more winning candidate in 2020 than Pence will be. So he may make them grate their teeth, but they really don't have any reason to complain as far as the social agenda goes. And he hasn't done any real damage to anyone other than Silicon Valley on the HB1 visa thing... whom everyone is learning to hate anyway. He's made posturing noises about renegotiating NAFTA, but he hasn't shredded the agreement yet.

He's gutting EPA, again a long desired Republican goal, and He's put charter school christian in Education... again the social conservatives are wetting themselves with glee. He's ruffling the feathers of moderate Republicans, but the leadership has been putting them behind the woodshed anyway. The Buisness conservatives are all aglow on his 2for1 deal on regulations


thejeff wrote:
AM BARBARIAN wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Trinam wrote:

It's worth noting that Mconnell is highly unlikely to go nuclear option unless the minority basically tries to filibuster even a hearing for eight months or so. Doing something like that clearly politicizes the highest court in the land, and the reason people listen to and have faith in the courts is because they're largely apolitical--even the notorious RBG ran into trouble when...

Wait. Wait. I'm about to state an opinion based on reasoned analysis on a politics thread on the bleeding internet.

Whew. Good thing I made my reflex save there, that could have been messy!

The court politicising ship has been sailing since Scalia's death with the Republicans preventing Obama from even submitting a replacement.

The Republicans want that majority as soon as possible, and they will move what they have to to get it. They've got a lot of progressive work to undo, and the lawsuits waiting to launch.

BARBARIAN NOT FALLING FOR THIS ONE. AM TRYING TO TALK LIKE MARTIAL APOLOGIST IN C/M-D THREAD IN HOPES BARBARIAN ENGAGE. SORRY, TALKY PERSON. BARBARIAN SEE THIS TRICK BEFORE. THIS AM POINT WHERE BARBARIAN COUNT TO FIFTY, THEN SMASH.
Luckily the barbarian runs out of fingers and toes long before he gets to 50, so we're pretty much safe.

Unless his counting system goes... one.... two.... more than two... that's 50!


AM BARBARIAN wrote:

BARBARIAN HAVE PHD IN ENGINEERING AND AM ABLE TO DETERMINE STRUCTURAL WEAK POINTS OF AVERAGE CAVE SYSTEM BY CALCULATING LOADS ON VARIOUS PORTIONS OF WALLS.

MAYBE BARBARIAN DO THAT WITHOUT COUNTING. MAYBE BARBARIAN USE MULTIPLICATION AND DIVISION LIKE NORMAL. AM HARD TO SAY.

MAYBE NOT WANT TAKE CHANCE.

Doesn't a barbarian with a PHD in engineering automatically have his club carrying Barbarian card stripped from him? I mean that level of integration into civilization can't reflect well on the other Barbarians can it? Or is it just because you take the Barbarian out of the wild does not mean you take the wild out of the Barbarian?


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

It's a small, but potentially important distinction: Republicans don't really control all three branches. They're sharing the Executive Branch with Bannon and Trump.

That's both damnation and salvation, potentially.

They also don't really control the Court. Even with Gorsuch making it to the Court, it's still essentially the same split it's been for years - Kennedy as the swing vote. Hardly liberal, but also not the hardline conservative Court modern Republicans demand.


thejeff wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

It's a small, but potentially important distinction: Republicans don't really control all three branches. They're sharing the Executive Branch with Bannon and Trump.

That's both damnation and salvation, potentially.

They also don't really control the Court. Even with Gorsuch making it to the Court, it's still essentially the same split it's been for years - Kennedy as the swing vote. Hardly liberal, but also not the hardline conservative Court modern Republicans demand.

I think some of Robert's rulings did not go the way that the Republicans expected them to when Bush appointed him to the Court. Certainly there have been some pretty horrible ruling the past 10 years but Roberts is not as ultra conservative as I think he was expected to be.


MMCJawa wrote:
I think a lot of people, especially Republicans, were expecting Pence to actually be the one calling the shots. Bannon pretty much usurped that role, and his actions have started to strain the relationship between the white house and party. And we are not even a month in. I really don't think it's going to be long before the Republicans start looking into ways of getting rid of Trump, something that they can happily count on support from by the democrats. Trump may actually cause an increase in Bipartisan work :P

I don't think republicans can disentangle themselves from cuthulu that easily.

Any time republicans want to they can impeach him: he outright bribed someone in florida looking into trump university into not prosecuting him....

But the cost of doing that would be getting fired. Congress is not determined by the will of the people. it's determined by the people willing to vote in the primaries for their party which is guaranteed to win the district via gerrymandering. Impeach trump, trump backs tea party candidates (or alt right if you have tea party already) , and they push out the republican congress.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I think a lot of people, especially Republicans, were expecting Pence to actually be the one calling the shots. Bannon pretty much usurped that role, and his actions have started to strain the relationship between the white house and party. And we are not even a month in. I really don't think it's going to be long before the Republicans start looking into ways of getting rid of Trump, something that they can happily count on support from by the democrats. Trump may actually cause an increase in Bipartisan work :P

Despite that, he's still giving them what he wants. And he at this point is a more winning candidate in 2020 than Pence will be. So he may make them grate their teeth, but they really don't have any reason to complain as far as the social agenda goes. And he hasn't done any real damage to anyone other than Silicon Valley on the HB1 visa thing... whom everyone is learning to hate anyway. He's made posturing noises about renegotiating NAFTA, but he hasn't shredded the agreement yet.

He's gutting EPA, again a long desired Republican goal, and He's put charter school christian in Education... again the social conservatives are wetting themselves with glee. He's ruffling the feathers of moderate Republicans, but the leadership has been putting them behind the woodshed anyway. The Buisness conservatives are all aglow on his 2for1 deal on regulations

I don't think the republican party wants trade tariffs, nor jettisoning NAFTA, nor a cozy relationship with Russia and undermining NATO, nor military interventionism in Iran and Syria. These are all things we can expect Trump to push in the coming year. So far he has not backed down or ameliorated ANY of his campaign talk, nor does he care about the Republican Party as a whole. Why you think he is suddenly going to not follow through on these other ideas? Not to mention he has been undermining his own side's view of healthcare (making contradictory statements leaving the party to just guess what Trump wants) as well as just generally botching his overall roll out of his presidency.


Storyteller Shadow wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Kobold Cleaver wrote:

It's a small, but potentially important distinction: Republicans don't really control all three branches. They're sharing the Executive Branch with Bannon and Trump.

That's both damnation and salvation, potentially.

They also don't really control the Court. Even with Gorsuch making it to the Court, it's still essentially the same split it's been for years - Kennedy as the swing vote. Hardly liberal, but also not the hardline conservative Court modern Republicans demand.
I think some of Robert's rulings did not go the way that the Republicans expected them to when Bush appointed him to the Court. Certainly there have been some pretty horrible ruling the past 10 years but Roberts is not as ultra conservative as I think he was expected to be.

Scalia on the other hand pretty much marched the line. And the remaining liberal justices are all the older ones. Either retirement or death is going to take them fairly soon. Right now it's been a 4-4 split. Gorsuch will make it 5-4, even if Kennedy does swing liberal on a case.


Yeah, impeaching is far less about guilt than it is about political climate.


MMCJawa wrote:


I don't think the republican party wants trade tariffs, nor jettisoning NAFTA, nor a cozy relationship with Russia and undermining NATO, nor military interventionism in Iran and Syria. These are all things we can expect Trump to push in the coming year. So far he has not backed down or ameliorated ANY of his campaign talk, nor does he care about the Republican Party as a whole. Why you think he is suddenly going to not follow through on these other ideas? Not to mention he has been undermining his own side's view of healthcare (making contradictory statements leaving the party to...

The party is somewhat split on tariffs... the Protectionists want them, the globalists clearly don't, but they might keep quiet if they think that Trump can force a better deal.

I don't think that Trump is looking for a military intervention in Iran or Syria, he's beating an isolationist drum, so he'd more likely to look for a pullout. As far as NATO is gone, the Republicans themselves are introducing a bill to end the US membership in the UN and it's associated organisations, so maybe Trump will be happy signing THAT bill instead.

As far as Healthcare goes, the main complaint that the Republicans seem to have is that it's not being gutted fast enough. Trump may issue some executive orders to cripple it, as he has done with his recent guidelines, but the ball is mainly in Congress's court as they would have to come up with a bill for him to sign. And many Republicans are wary of doing so without a replacement, but a fair number want a "damm the torpedoes, just kill it now" bill for Trump to sign.

As far as Trump might do... one perhaps should better be served looking at what Britebart has been publishing over the last year, since Steve Bannon has been elevated over both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the NSA.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
I think a lot of people, especially Republicans, were expecting Pence to actually be the one calling the shots. Bannon pretty much usurped that role, and his actions have started to strain the relationship between the white house and party. And we are not even a month in. I really don't think it's going to be long before the Republicans start looking into ways of getting rid of Trump, something that they can happily count on support from by the democrats. Trump may actually cause an increase in Bipartisan work :P

I don't think republicans can disentangle themselves from cuthulu that easily.

Any time republicans want to they can impeach him: he outright bribed someone in florida looking into trump university into not prosecuting him....

But the cost of doing that would be getting fired. Congress is not determined by the will of the people. it's determined by the people willing to vote in the primaries for their party which is guaranteed to win the district via gerrymandering. Impeach trump, trump backs tea party candidates (or alt right if you have tea party already) , and they push out the republican congress.

Oh it won't happen this year. But Trump is starting his presidency at a record low approval rating, and a fumbled obamacare repeal or bad trade policy might be sufficient to do so

Just look at this weekend...the bad role out of the new immigration executive order finally resulted in some solid criticism from members of "his" party beyond McCain and Graham, which mostly hasn't happened since the election. De Vos as a education nominee was such a failure that two republicans have already backed down from supporting her. Dissent is growing in the Republican party.

I know there is a lot of talk here that somehow Republicans are a monolithic core who can not be swayed by anything, but that really isn't true. If there pocketbook starts hurting, or factions within the party start eying other options, Trump will continue to lose support, and any capital he has to bring Congress to heel.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Storyteller Shadow wrote:
AM BARBARIAN wrote:

BARBARIAN HAVE PHD IN ENGINEERING AND AM ABLE TO DETERMINE STRUCTURAL WEAK POINTS OF AVERAGE CAVE SYSTEM BY CALCULATING LOADS ON VARIOUS PORTIONS OF WALLS.

MAYBE BARBARIAN DO THAT WITHOUT COUNTING. MAYBE BARBARIAN USE MULTIPLICATION AND DIVISION LIKE NORMAL. AM HARD TO SAY.

MAYBE NOT WANT TAKE CHANCE.

Doesn't a barbarian with a PHD in engineering automatically have his club carrying Barbarian card stripped from him? I mean that level of integration into civilization can't reflect well on the other Barbarians can it? Or is it just because you take the Barbarian out of the wild does not mean you take the wild out of the Barbarian?

BARBARIAN AM INFINITELY BETTER EQUIPPED THAN AVERAGE BARBARIAN TO DETERMINE HOW SMASHING ANYTHING FROM REGULAR ITEM TO FULL SIZE MAGE TOWER AM WORKING, AND THUS AM ABLE TO SMASH AT OPTIMUM EFFICIENCY.

BARBARIAN NOT SEE HOW THAT MAKE BARBARIAN SOMEHOW LESS BARBARIAN THAN OTHER, MORE CRAPPY BARBARIAN. AM NOT LIKE BARBARIAN WEARING SHIRT OR SOMETHING.

EDIT: THIS AM BARBARIAN 666TH POST.

OF COURSE IT AM TAKING PLACE IN POLITICS DISCUSSION. OF COURSE.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

The party is somewhat split on tariffs... the Protectionists want them, the globalists clearly don't, but they might keep quiet if they think that Trump can force a better deal.

I don't think that Trump is looking for a military intervention in Iran or Syria, he's beating an isolationist drum, so he'd more likely to look for a pullout. As far as NATO is gone, the Republicans themselves are introducing a bill to end the US membership in the UN and it's associated organisations, so maybe Trump will be happy signing THAT bill instead.

As far as Healthcare goes, the main complaint that the Republicans seem to have is that it's not being gutted fast enough. Trump may issue some executive orders to cripple it, as he has done with his recent guidelines, but the ball is mainly in Congress's court as they would have to come up with a bill for him to sign. And many Republicans are wary of doing so without a replacement, but a fair number want a "damm the torpedoes, just kill it now" bill for Trump to sign.

As far as Trump might do... one perhaps should better be served looking at what Britebart has been publishing over the last year, since Steve Bannon has been elevated over both the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the NSA.

From my reading a large chunk of the republicans are against Tariffs. And even if they aren't, Tariffs have been predicted to drive up prices and hurt the economy. which will in fact effect trump voters along with everyone else. I am not convinced the Protectionist faction has nearly the weight of numbers to cow the other republicans to accept those.

With healthcare, most of the plan proposals would hurt medicaid or otherwise diminish quality of care. A good chunk of motivated and invested republican voters are senior citizens who don't take kindly to seeing their benefits diminish. For many red state politicians this is a mind field they are left with, especially those states which expanded medicaid. Last week details were leaked from the retreat showing this to be the case.

Trump has been calling for a pull out from Iran deal and Flynn's discussion today of suggesting military intervention is laying the ground work for a future intervention, which almost certainly will result in escalation leading to more military involvement.


Wheeee...!!! War with Mexico! War with Mexico! Just what the country needed. Trump is AWESOME!!!

Note - Please modify your sarcasm detection module for level 11 before reading this.

Note 2 - Perhaps the warning should have come first.


Don't worry about Trump. He's not the problem. The problem is the people who listened to him and decided to vote for him. Many of them were Democrats. Many of them were Latinos and Blacks. The current President espouses threats of violence, violence, and torture. Where do you think that's going to go? Drones will target U.S. "criminals", torture will be legitimate for interrogating U.S. citizens. Saying this isn't an accusation. That's where he's been going from the beginning. Bash'em, stomp'em, say anything, do anything. He doesn't even say he was being rhetorical, he just pretends he didn't really mean it for a little while. The truth is there is no pressing crisis hitting the country right now. What if there is any kind of prolonged serious crisis? Those same people who voted Trump will support the kind of crap he is perfectly willing to push.
As far as trade issues, healthcare issues, border issues, all those things are double-edged and bang directly up against the law of unintended consequences, sometimes called Murphy's Law. So what we have here is a wild ride into the darkness. Put your blinders on, floor the pedal, and listen to the Cardigans - My Favorite Game. That's the background music you should be hearing when you watch the news.


MMCJawa wrote:


Oh it won't happen this year. But Trump is starting his presidency at a record low approval rating, and a fumbled obamacare repeal or bad trade policy might be sufficient to do so

Much like the popular vote, his overall approlval rating is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is

his approval rating
... with primary voters
...in states with republican congresscritters

which is sky high. Nothing else matters.


Republicans do still have to fear a General surge, actually. They can't afford to only pander to their party any more than a president can.

151 to 200 of 4,260 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Future of the Democratic Party All Messageboards