General politics

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Last night's Dem win is a perfect case study in all of this. Many Trump labor voters will turn on him for the corporate handout. (Aka tax cur) Many of his voters are also still single issue voters on health care.

So run a smart candidate to win that district not to check boxes on how left vs. Right you are. Thats how Republicans think, best way to beat them is to keep running sharp candidates that will represent their constituency.

Yeah... I saw a few people on Facebook that lean left who screamed "IT DOESN'T MATTER, BOTH CANDIDATES WERE TERRIBLE".

 

Way to miss the point. A candidate that leans slightly to the left is A LOT better than a far right candidate. Take the modest win and get on with your day. If you get enough modest wins of that kind, you might actually be able to do something, as shocking as that sounds.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I maintain Nancy Pelosi as minority leader is a huge mistake.

I've maintained that Nancy Pelosi being in any position of power is a huge mistake and I've been saying that since I first noticed her rise to power in California politics in the 90s and early 2000s. I cannot stand her, she's everything I dislike about partisan politics.

[TheLeviathan]

Yeah... I saw a few people on Facebook that lean left who screamed "IT DOESN'T MATTER, BOTH CANDIDATES WERE TERRIBLE".

 

Way to miss the point. A candidate that leans slightly to the left is A LOT better than a far right candidate. Take the modest win and get on with your day. If you get enough modest wins of that kind, you might actually be able to do something, as shocking as that sounds.

Fox News was spinning him as a conservative calling himself a democrat. Which I guess is a good thing until they get into office? (Then death to rhinos I am told)

 

The point here is to win elections. Blue dog Democrat >>>>>>> Avian Flu/Tony Batista/Trumpy Tea Party Guy.

[Squirrel]

 

Yeah... I saw a few people on Facebook that lean left who screamed "IT DOESN'T MATTER, BOTH CANDIDATES WERE TERRIBLE".

 

Way to miss the point. A candidate that leans slightly to the left is A LOT better than a far right candidate. Take the modest win and get on with your day. If you get enough modest wins of that kind, you might actually be able to do something, as shocking as that sounds.

This right here is what is the matter with the Democratic party and something I've been saying for a while now. They can't get organized and they can't get a universal message out there because too many want an exact match to everything they think should be. If the message leans too far one way, people get upset; if it leans too far the other, people get upset; if it's in the middle somewhere, people get upset.  They will never get on the same page. And then if a candidate doesn't line up perfectly with what they want, too many won't vote and scream how awful the party is and how disenfranchised they feel and walk away saying it's no use and it's everyone else's fault for where we are to blame. I vote for lots of candidates I'm not in 100% agreement with ... at some point you have to compromise for the greater good. You don't go sit on the sidelines and pout, you continue to work for what you believe in and temper your expectations.

[TheLeviathan]

Dems eat their own at the ballot box wheras GOPers wait until they are in office.

 

Might partially explain the imbalance of GOP control at so many levels.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

This right here is what is the matter with the Democratic party and something I've been saying for a while now. They can't get organized and they can't get a universal message out there because too many want an exact match to everything they think should be. If the message leans too far one way, people get upset; if it leans too far the other, people get upset; if it's in the middle somewhere, people get upset.  They will never get on the same page. And then if a candidate doesn't line up perfectly with what they want, too many won't vote and scream how awful the party is and how disenfranchised they feel and walk away saying it's no use and it's everyone else's fault for where we are to blame. I vote for lots of candidates I'm not in 100% agreement with ... at some point you have to compromise for the greater good. You don't go sit on the sidelines and pout, you continue to work for what you believe in and temper your expectations.

Exactly. After all, in 2016 I checked a box with the name "Clinton" next to it, even though it caused me considerable intestinal pain to do so.

 

Because the alternative was so much worse. I did not and do not like Clinton for a variety of reasons too long to list here (but the last name is a real sticking point for me) and I did not support her in the primaries... but I'm not going to throw out the baby with the bath water just because I don't get my way 100% of the time.

[Mike Sixel]

I guess I can stop asking when they'll win anything that matters......

[Squirrel]

Exactly. After all, in 2016 I checked a box with the name "Clinton" next to it, even though it caused me considerable intestinal pain to do so.

 

Because the alternative was so much worse. I did not and do not like Clinton for a variety of reasons too long to list here (but the last name is a real sticking point for me) and I did not support her in the primaries... but I'm not going to throw out the baby with the bath water just because I don't get my way 100% of the time.

It’s rare that there will be that perfect candidate who checks most if not all the boxes. RARE. I still mourn the loss of Wellstone, he was that for me. But you look at the field and decide who’s best for the greater good, not me personally, but for most.

[nicksaviking]

 

This right here is what is the matter with the Democratic party and something I've been saying for a while now. They can't get organized and they can't get a universal message out there because too many want an exact match to everything they think should be. If the message leans too far one way, people get upset; if it leans too far the other, people get upset; if it's in the middle somewhere, people get upset.  They will never get on the same page. And then if a candidate doesn't line up perfectly with what they want, too many won't vote and scream how awful the party is and how disenfranchised they feel and walk away saying it's no use and it's everyone else's fault for where we are to blame. I vote for lots of candidates I'm not in 100% agreement with ... at some point you have to compromise for the greater good. You don't go sit on the sidelines and pout, you continue to work for what you believe in and temper your expectations.

 

I'm sure it's a product of looking across the aisle and seeing that this is exactly how the GOP operates. If a Republican doesn't check all the boxes they are tossed aside in favor of someone who does; they are lock-step and there is no room for alternate party views. Even if an individual slips through the cracks and are not lock step (Trump) the message might morph but everyone still unifies around the one vision.

 

It hadn't always been that way for the GOP, it probably started some with the Reagan era and then really took hold with Karl Rove. I'd guess the Dems could get a strongman/strongwoman to threaten and bribe party members into one unified vision, but is it worth it to sell their soul to do so when there's only one major party with any hint of a soul left?

[D. Hocking]

 

I still mourn the loss of Wellstone,.

 

Not that there were not other dissenting voices, but I have wondered if he would have helped prevent going into Iraq.  Too many people were afraid to speak up to not appear patriotic even though a lot of the reasons/intelligence for going in had already been proven weak or false.  I remember at the time they kept shifting why we should go in until one finally stuck. (9-11, WMD, free the Iraqi people from a tyrant etc.)

 

It hadn't always been that way for the GOP, it probably started some with the Reagan era and then really took hold with Karl Rove. 

 

That makes sense, I also read somewhere that Newt had a lot to do with the current environment of GOP.  Each era shifted things that were then further exacerbated by the next group.

[Craig Arko]

 

Not that there were not other dissenting voices, but I have wondered if he would have helped prevent going into Iraq.  Too many people were afraid to speak up to not appear patriotic even though a lot of the reasons/intelligence for going in had already been proven weak or false.  I remember at the time they kept shifting why we should go in until one finally stuck. (9-11, WMD, free the Iraqi people from a tyrant etc.)

 

 

That makes sense, I also read somewhere that Newt had a lot to do with the current environment of GOP.  Each era shifted things that were then further exacerbated by the next group.

1994.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America

[stringer bell]

Election Day this year will be fun (or totally depressing).

 

Minnesota will be much-watched. In the battle for House control, we have not one, not two, not three, but four House districts considered tossups (CDs 1, 2, 3, and 8). In addition a competitive governor’s race and two Senate elections.

 

The special elections have to give Democrats hope. Republicans can’t throw $10 M at every district and many are up for grabs. Anything to rein in the Donald would be good news.

[jimmer]

Jeff Sessions has fired the now ex-deputy FBI director McCabe.

[Badsmerf]

Jeff Sessions has fired the now ex-deputy FBI director McCabe.

--\_("/) _/--

[PseudoSABR]

 

Jeff Sessions has fired the now ex-deputy FBI director McCabe.

So deplorable, and cowardly.  I hope McCabe crowdfounds his retirement and exceeds whatever pension he would have gotten.  The more likely outcome is a lawsuit, which will reveal details Trump and Sessions don't want given any illumination. 

 

This is the American equivalent to Russian assassination. 

[Mike Sixel]

Awful. I hope he sues the **** our of the government. And wins.

[D. Hocking]

Trump gloat tweeted about it - very Presidential.

 

Not that hypocrisy is new, but Sessions firing him for not being forthcoming, when so much of his confirmation testimony and his testimony at other hearings does not exactly pass the smell test is notable.

 

Different topic - but hopefully Bolton will not find his way into the cabinet with the administration shake-up that seems to be on-going.

[jimmer]

 

--\_("/) _/--

I don't know what that means.

[Mike Sixel]

Terrible human beings.

[Badsmerf]

I don't know what that means.

Did you expect any different? McCabe should sue the **** out of them. With all the Trump tweets, I think it will be pretty easy to bring a case that his firing was politically motivated.

[jimmer]

 

Did you expect any different? McCabe should sue the **** out of them. With all the Trump tweets, I think it will be pretty easy to bring a case that his firing was politically motivated.

No, I didn't expect any different. The pettiness, and vindictive nature, of the POS-in chief knows no bounds.

 

But I was just wondering what that symbol you typed meant :-)

[ashbury]

No, I didn't expect any different. The pettiness, and vindictive nature, of the POS-in chief knows no bounds.

 

But I was just wondering what that symbol you typed meant :-)

*shrug* It'll come to you.

[jimmer]

In great news (for a change), Speaker Paul Ryan will NOT seek re-election.

[Squirrel]

I heard that this morning. I wonder why. Maybe his re-election is looking doubtful that another republican candidate might keep his seat? Or else someone has something on him.

[TheLeviathan]

Ryan never struck me as a diabolical Republican.  Maybe he's just tired of being stuck in the middle of a *#^storm that he always ends up being blamed for.

 

Also, it wouldn't shock me if his seat was won and held by a Democrat.  It's been awhile that the Republicans controlled it, but that area of Wisconsin has continued to get more urban and less rural over Ryan's time in office.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Ryan never struck me as a diabolical Republican. Maybe he's just tired of being stuck in the middle of a *#^storm that he always ends up being blamed for.

 

Also, it wouldn't shock me if his seat was won and held by a Democrat. It's been awhile that the Republicans controlled it, but that area of Wisconsin has continued to get more urban and less rural over Ryan's time in office.

Ryan is pretty bad but I find him way more tolerable than people like Cruz and McConnell. I disagree with him but he occasionally flashed signs of having principles. Unfortunately, that Paul Ryan all but disappeared after the 2016 election.

 

Then again, expecting ANYONE to rein in the idiot brigade that is the current House may be an impossible expectation.

[jimmer]

Ryan wanting to go after social security is bad enough.

[PseudoSABR]

Ryan could have reined in Nunes and his becoming part of the thing he was suppose to be investigating; so he was complicit with whatever power Trump presidency gave the republicans.

 

I recall reading that his democratic opponent(s) have done very well in fundraising.   Also I wouldn't doubt there's some dirt on Ryan that wouldn't play well in an election.  The RNC was also hacked, but none of that information was made public, suggesting it still could be...

 

I don't know that it will be a Democratic windfall in November, but more news like this certainly suggests Republican enthusiasm will be muted.

[D. Hocking]

 

Ryan is pretty bad but I find him way more tolerable than people like Cruz and McConnell. 

 

They are all pretty bad.   One thing I will say about McConnell, he might be more honest than Ryan in the fact that he is pretty open about how bad he is.  Ryan in the past has tried to seem like he can be somewhat reasonable, when really all along his life time goal is to gut social security and enforce some Ayn Rand philosophy (even though he himself befitted from social security as a young man).     Plus he seems to have the spine of a jelly fish and is careful to not say anything with much conviction so it cannot be used against him later. 

 

I think he might be more fake than McConnell, but really we are comparing vermin and slugs at this point.    Part of the reason Trump is so out of control is that none of these people would speak up early in the game to try and keep him in check, but they were more concerned about their personal career rather than what was best for the country or even their own party. 

 

I read a statement that we had safeguards for a bad president, but nothing for when Congress is also complicit.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Ryan could have reined in Nunes and his becoming part of the thing he was suppose to be investigating; so he was complicit with whatever power Trump presidency gave the republicans.

 

I recall reading that his democratic opponent(s) have done very well in fundraising.   Also I wouldn't doubt there's some dirt on Ryan that wouldn't play well in an election.  The RNC was also hacked, but none of that information was made public, suggesting it still could be...

 

I don't know that it will be a Democratic windfall in November, but more news like this certainly suggests Republican enthusiasm will be muted.

It's also possible he plans to move into the Senate. Wisconsin has a seat up for grabs this election.

 

Personally, I hope he just goes away.