Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by mongey, Mar 2, 2016.
I so want him to come back into the fray, swinging like I know he can, with little held back.
Yeah, I can't see how last night helped Trump, at all. He didn't bring anything new to the table, didn't really build a case why a border wall is the solution to his alleged crisis, made no new offer to the Democrats to reopen the government or new executive action to sidestep the issue, and repeated a bunch of already-disproved claims. Meanwhile, the Democrats continued to reiterate that they for border security but didn't think this was an effective (much less cost-effective) way to do it, and that they have an offer in place to get the government open while they continue to negotiate. They may have not brought anything new to the table either.... but they also did't decide to schedule a prime-time address and they're the ones who put the most recent offer on the table. Trump basically wasted ten minutes of prime time. Anyone looking for incremental change last night didn't get it.
One, you're obviously not an American.
Two, if there is ANY doubt this is about racism, the fact Trump is only concerned about building a wall on the border with Mexico, and not the one with Canada, should be telling.
I make the statement jokingly, of course... I've got some... complex feelings about the way the whole thing played out but it's the reality we're living in now, so we've just gotta deal with it.
On the upside, if you look at a guy like Jon Stewart and the effect he was able to have from the outside, Franken definitely has an opportunity to play a role in the political landscape without necessarily seeking elected office again.
I listened to his radio shows religiously and read all his books back, and I thought he really undermined his brand when he said "I'm running for Senate, so I'm not allowed to have a show and I'm not allowed to be funny anymore". I mean, he was effective as a Senator but drawing a line in the sand where the funny man ended and the public servant began was a choice and it certainly didn't do much to prevent his 'past' from coming back to haunt him. But now that that's in the past, I've been kinda looking forward to 'what's next'.
While I'm not going to say I condone his actions in the past, I do miss Franken.
Franken was in the wrong, no question. But, it was in the realm of "that was pretty stupid and disrespectful," and not "this is something that should have been federally prosecuted and sent him to federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison." There's a lot that could be debated about male privilege and power imbalances and whether or not he may have - knowingly or otherwise - taken advantage of those, and I firmly believe that his decision to step down was the right one... but he's no Roy Moore, and yeah, I miss him too.
As someone who lives in Minneapolis and didn't vote for him, I think the whole Franken debacle was a joke. It was disappointing but not surprising to see how many people were upset by that. the Dude was a comedian for God's sake and the photo was what, a decade old?
This is exactly what should happen. Let the people decide if we need the wall. And there are people who want the wall so bad, let THEM pay for it.
It's sad that this was an obvious thing over the last 200 years and in today's climate, the idea didn't come up once (in any mainstream way) until now.
Pretty good first pass at the Democratic field for 2020 courtesy of 538. I've liked Harris as a potential candidate for a while now, and she measures up well on this. It also supports my subjective impression that Warren kind of makes Sanders irrelevant in this election - there's an economics term I'm blanking on that refers to the process of narrowing a large number of options by immediately discarding any option where there's another option better than it in every criteria you care about, but that's kind of what I see the relationship with Warren and Sanders being - they both appeal to the same basic base, but Warren does so better than Sanders (IMO) for the vast majority of potential supporters, the only exceptions I can think of being the far-left progressives who think Sanders doesn't go far enough, and the (small number of) chauvinistic elements of his base.
I feel like the right thing to do would be for Sanders to start supporting Warren early. The faster that's done, the better.
Doubly so, because it'll appeal to two groups - people who just want that wall, period, and profit minded individuals who think the return is objectively good enough to warrant investing.
I think the wall is stupid, idiotic, and offensive... But if it truly IS going to happen one way or another (which FWIW I don't believe to be the case, I think the Dems are winning the shutdown fight and the national emergency approach will die in the courts) I'd feel better about it happening if I could at least buy risk-free bonds paying a way-higher rate of return than they technically should because the project they're supporting is so politically divisive that 2/3 of the country won't touch it. Buy them, kick a good chunk of my gain to the SPLC to offset some of the harm Trump is doing elsewhere, and then feel slightly better about the whole mess by at least being able to profit off it.
(this is why millenials hate capitalism, lol)
Won't happen - Sanders is the current front-runner, and IMO the single most prescient observation Silver makes here is that, much like Trump in 2016, Sanders benefits more than probably any other candidate by keeping the field divided as long as possible.
Only way I could see him dropping out and endorsing her is if either a scandal or a debate performance or something like that pushed him so far down in the polls that he was clearly no longer a credible contender - i.e. at a point where it no longer mattered what he did.
Just some wishful thinking.
Much like me dreaming about Trump getting primaried by someone like Kasich or Bloomberg (which is doubly unlikely now that he's back to being a registered Democrat, lol)?
If there's one thing that the right has shown us, it's that they're far more pragmatic when it comes to stuff like this.
They're not dumb enough to get greedy (for once ) and try and run another candidate. They'll make a show of it until the last few months where the front runner bows out and throws full support behind Trump. If they even bother.
Also, can we just say: fuck Gabbard.
Not sure I fully agree. I think there's an element of conditional probability here - Trump isn't likely to face a serious primary challenge... unless he's doing so badly that a decent primary challenger is likely to defeat him and have a better shot in the general election, in which place I think it becomes highly likely that he faces a realistic challenger.
To be fair, I don't think we're there yet, but this shutdown has been hammering his favorability numbers, and the Russia probe is continuously releasing worse and worse news for Trump. It's not an inconceivable scenario.
I know it's two years out and he's polling really shitty with little positive outlook, but it just don't think he's going to be perceived as that toxic by the GOP. I mean, what could he possibly do at this point to be worse?
Actually get pinned down with concrete evidence of collusion?
I mean, I get your point, and how his GOP support has been strangely resilient... But, I think there are two things I'd think about here.
First, there's some evidence that while Trump's in-party approval numbers have held up surprisingly well, the share of voters who identify as Republican or Republican-leaning has dropped since Trump's election, meaning that it's less his approval numbers have been stable, so much as everyone who doesn't approve is switching party identification to independent.
Second, I think one of the main reasons that his approval numbers have held up pretty well is the polarization of the news media and the fact that Fox and other right-wing outlets have covered him pretty favorably. If something so beyond the pale were to emerge that even Fox news hosts (and Breitbart behind them) were to suddenly start criticizing Trump openly for corruption/possible working on behalf of Russia, at that point I would expect his numbers to deteriorate in a hurry. I have to imagine relatively favorable news coverage from their preferred news sources has been a factor in Trump's ongoing popularity with Republican voters.
I suspect it's the second more than the former, and if his Fox firewall ever breaks he's toast. Which makes it not at ALL surprising that he's been cozying up to his preferred hosts, having them join him at campaign events, etc.
Don't worry, @jaxadam, Trump told us today that he "never worked for Russia," and if he said it it must be true!
I really wish I had a screencap of that from CNBC, him speaking with the banner below reading "Trump: 'I Never Worked for Russia.'" How far we've fallen. I mean, shit, you guys kept calling Obama a socialist, yet even he never had to deny reports he was a Russian secret agent!