Well look at it this way. At least the ones from TX will get out of paying their mortgages, which are underwater literally and figuratively.pearlbeer wrote:Goddammit. Every day this orange fucker does something stupid or cruel. Ending DACA is both. Every. Fucking. Day.
The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Moderators: Jonicont, mark lynn, Maluca3, Tequila Cowboy, BigTom, CooleyGirl, olwiggum
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- cortez the killer
- Posts: 15510
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 3:22 pm
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
True opinion or alternative fact?beantownbubba wrote:We have a winner. Totally indisputable.dogstar wrote:Logic smogic
You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.
- DPM
- DPM
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Absolutely this and if we search pages back during the primaries, I had resonated the same sentiment. They even tried to appoint her in the 2008 primaries against Obama and she wasn't well received as a Republican Lite candidate with immense baggage (still less than 2016) and very low likeability. I feel that it was such a misconception on the right wing that Obama was some sort of easily appointed candidate that the Democratic party lifted up from the beginning. I never viewed it that way. The system democrats tried in many ways during the primary to raise Hillary above Barry O, but she didn't have luster. The system Democrats did so again while effectively sand bagging Bernie, with early talk of Super Delegates and their system allegiance pledged towards assisting Hillary since day one. While ignoring the fire in the people's bellies for the movement that Bernie had created, just as Barry O had done 8 years ago. It can't be under emphasized how off putting that was to a lot of Democratic and Independent voters who voted for Obama both terms and championed Bernie on this go round.schlanky wrote:The "But her emails" meme has mildly annoyed me from the first time I saw it. If you simplify it down to red vs blue, I guess it makes some sense.
But beyond that, as bad of a candidate as Trump was, he still beat Hillary. Up against the worst candidate in history, she did worse. Instead of blaming the folks who voted for Trump or the ones who were disillusioned to the point that they stayed home on voting day, maybe it's time to put the blame on a bad candidate/party with a bad strategy. Sometimes you need to look in the mirror instead of out the window.
In the year of the outsider, the party did all it could to pave the way for the most establishment candidate it had because it was "her turn." She won the primary, but was too Republican Lite for for the left and too polarizing to attract independents. It was much more than her emails.
And the DNC still doesn't get it.
How about the fact Hillary lost the primary in Wisconsin to Bernie and didn't make another campaign visit to that state which went blue twice under Obama. Or something like 1 visit to Michigan. She certainly made many visits to Illinois for campaign fundraisers though. And you can't take a 90 minute car ride North to Milwaukee or Madison? Or 2-3 hour car ride to Grand Rapids? (She had access to private jets) I could care less about reading her memoir. She and the Democratic party ran a dog shit campaign. And that Orange Fucker is in office because of it.
The Dems need to become better organized. Get their shit together and not impede on solid candidates in both 2018 and 2020. They failed the world in 2016 and I'm pointing the finger squarely on them.
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Hmmm...good question. I guess I'd call it incisive analysis which is a lot closer to true opinion than alternative fact. But maybe we should call in LJ for a ruling.cortez the killer wrote:True opinion or alternative fact?beantownbubba wrote:We have a winner. Totally indisputable.dogstar wrote:Logic smogic
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
nicely summarizedCubfan06 wrote:She and the Democratic party ran a dog shit campaign. And that Orange Fucker is in office because of it.
The Dems need to become better organized. Get their shit together and not impede on solid candidates in both 2018 and 2020. They failed the world in 2016 and I'm pointing the finger squarely on them.
Beebs is not a ragey man
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Excellent post, Cubfan.Cubfan06 wrote:The system democrats tried in many ways during the primary to raise Hillary above Barry O, but she didn't have luster. The system Democrats did so again while effectively sandbagging Bernie, with early talk of Super Delegates and their system allegiance pledged towards assisting Hillary since day one. While ignoring the fire in the people's bellies for the movement that Bernie had created, just as Barry O had done 8 years ago. It can't be under emphasized how off putting that was to a lot of Democratic and Independent voters who voted for Obama both terms and championed Bernie on this go round.
Let the outside air in
-
- Posts: 7894
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 9:51 am
- Location: Little Rock, Arkansaw
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
If you want her to visit Wisconsin and Michigan, you should be grateful for the memoir. She's hitting both states on the book tour. Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks?Cubfan06 wrote:How about the fact Hillary lost the primary in Wisconsin to Bernie and didn't make another campaign visit to that state which went blue twice under Obama. Or something like 1 visit to Michigan...I could care less about reading her memoir.
The sooner we put those assholes in the grave&piss on the dirt above it, the better off we'll be
- tinnitus photography
- Posts: 7264
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 6:49 pm
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
John A Arkansawyer wrote:If you want her to visit Wisconsin and Michigan, you should be grateful for the memoir. She's hitting both states on the book tour. Who says you can't teach an old dog new tricks?Cubfan06 wrote:How about the fact Hillary lost the primary in Wisconsin to Bernie and didn't make another campaign visit to that state which went blue twice under Obama. Or something like 1 visit to Michigan...I could care less about reading her memoir.
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Just because this thread was as low down on the page as I can remember, here's something I posted on Facebook earlier today:
Let me say right up front that I do not understand the modern world. But I do understand that old methods, old paradigms, old ways of thinking, acting and reacting will not achieve results. And I do understand that many people including snowflakes, libtards, Democrats, opinion writers and various elites don't seem to understand even that much.
It seems obvious to me that by characterizing Cassidy-Graham as "healthcare legislation" we have already lost most of the battle. This bill has nothing to do with healthcare beyond destroying it; if it's anything beyond irrational Obama hatred, it's tax cutting legislation. It seems painfully obvious to me that attempting to combat this monstrosity by reasoned analysis is the way to lose the rest of the battle. None of the bill's advocates are even attempting to justify it by means of serious analysis of healthcare costs, benefits and outcomes so why oppose it on those bases?
Why aren't we making a big deal about the death panels that will inevitably result from passage of this bill (lack of money for healthcare means rationing of healthcare, but that's not exactly a catchy slogan, is it?). Why aren't we following the money? Who benefits? Does anyone doubt that billions of dollars of uncontrolled and unmonitored block grants will end up in the bank accounts of corrupt state legislators, sleazy nursing home "operators" and all of the other usual suspects? Isn't it worth mentioning that this grant money doesn't even have to be used for healthcare and doesn't that make this Christmas morning for every state legislator out there?
The problems, hypocrisy, cynicism and threats to the general welfare in this bill are close to endless. In their candid moments many Republicans will admit to this. Why do we keep sweating over whether 3 or 4 Senators will vote no? Why aren't we asking why 45 or 48 or 50 Senators will vote yes without giving a moment's thought to what they're doing? Why aren't those Senators being asked the equivalent of "what do you think of the crisis in Fredonia?" in order to expose their stupidity and ignorance?
"Everyone" says that the way to fight bullies is to stand up to them. So why do we continue to act like the nerds in the library instead of slugging it out w/ the bad guys?
What's needed are catchy slogans and viral videos. What's needed are clever appeals to emotion, not reason. You know, the kinds of things elites are supposed to be good at. Stretching the truth should not be a constraint. I don't like typing these words at all. They are in themselves a major concession to what is wrong. But at some point you have to decide that winning is better than being right. We live in a Donald Trump world. Deal with it or die a slow painful death.
Let me say right up front that I do not understand the modern world. But I do understand that old methods, old paradigms, old ways of thinking, acting and reacting will not achieve results. And I do understand that many people including snowflakes, libtards, Democrats, opinion writers and various elites don't seem to understand even that much.
It seems obvious to me that by characterizing Cassidy-Graham as "healthcare legislation" we have already lost most of the battle. This bill has nothing to do with healthcare beyond destroying it; if it's anything beyond irrational Obama hatred, it's tax cutting legislation. It seems painfully obvious to me that attempting to combat this monstrosity by reasoned analysis is the way to lose the rest of the battle. None of the bill's advocates are even attempting to justify it by means of serious analysis of healthcare costs, benefits and outcomes so why oppose it on those bases?
Why aren't we making a big deal about the death panels that will inevitably result from passage of this bill (lack of money for healthcare means rationing of healthcare, but that's not exactly a catchy slogan, is it?). Why aren't we following the money? Who benefits? Does anyone doubt that billions of dollars of uncontrolled and unmonitored block grants will end up in the bank accounts of corrupt state legislators, sleazy nursing home "operators" and all of the other usual suspects? Isn't it worth mentioning that this grant money doesn't even have to be used for healthcare and doesn't that make this Christmas morning for every state legislator out there?
The problems, hypocrisy, cynicism and threats to the general welfare in this bill are close to endless. In their candid moments many Republicans will admit to this. Why do we keep sweating over whether 3 or 4 Senators will vote no? Why aren't we asking why 45 or 48 or 50 Senators will vote yes without giving a moment's thought to what they're doing? Why aren't those Senators being asked the equivalent of "what do you think of the crisis in Fredonia?" in order to expose their stupidity and ignorance?
"Everyone" says that the way to fight bullies is to stand up to them. So why do we continue to act like the nerds in the library instead of slugging it out w/ the bad guys?
What's needed are catchy slogans and viral videos. What's needed are clever appeals to emotion, not reason. You know, the kinds of things elites are supposed to be good at. Stretching the truth should not be a constraint. I don't like typing these words at all. They are in themselves a major concession to what is wrong. But at some point you have to decide that winning is better than being right. We live in a Donald Trump world. Deal with it or die a slow painful death.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
There was a moment there when it crossed my mind that Trump might have learned something from his big deal w/ the Dems re the debt ceiling, hurricane relief, etc. For that brief nanosecond I wondered if Trump might put his absence of ideology, policy and thought to good use and I wondered how both the alt right and anti-Trumpites would react to that. Turns out that, no surprise, there was nothing to wonder about.
But I still think that if Trump ever realizes that he doesn't need the Freedom Caucus to govern, he could be a force to be reckoned with (for substantive reasons, not just for being his awful self). The Wall is the big, perhaps immovable obstacle, no pun intended, but if one side is willing to give on that it seems to me that there are no other insurmountable obstacles to Trump making surprising and surprisingly good deals w/ significant bipartisan support and wouldn't that blow everyone's mind? The list might include:
Substantive revisions to Obamacare that would put it on solid footing while addressing some of the real problems w/ the program (presumably it would have to be called Obamacare repeal, but who cares what it's called, what matters is what it does and if Cassidy-Graham can be called a healthcare bill anything seems possible in the labeling dept).
Real tax reform (as opposed to thoughtless tax cuts for the wealthy or essentially random tax cuts for everyone, deficit be damned).
An immigration deal that covers the dreamers and otherwise limits immigration in sensible ways.
Permanently getting rid of the debt ceiling.
And while it would be a long shot even compared to these long shots, on the Nixon to China theory, some slight movement on gun control, e.g. keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
There would still be plenty to worry about the Trump administration e.g. the corruption/conflicts, environment, government by tweet, numerous foreign policy problems, judicial appointments, etc but that would not diminish the value of what might be accomplished.
Yes I know that this is in the realm of alternative universe fiction but the tantalizing prospect of neutering the freedom caucus and by-passing McConnell and Ryan makes it tantalizing to think about.
But I still think that if Trump ever realizes that he doesn't need the Freedom Caucus to govern, he could be a force to be reckoned with (for substantive reasons, not just for being his awful self). The Wall is the big, perhaps immovable obstacle, no pun intended, but if one side is willing to give on that it seems to me that there are no other insurmountable obstacles to Trump making surprising and surprisingly good deals w/ significant bipartisan support and wouldn't that blow everyone's mind? The list might include:
Substantive revisions to Obamacare that would put it on solid footing while addressing some of the real problems w/ the program (presumably it would have to be called Obamacare repeal, but who cares what it's called, what matters is what it does and if Cassidy-Graham can be called a healthcare bill anything seems possible in the labeling dept).
Real tax reform (as opposed to thoughtless tax cuts for the wealthy or essentially random tax cuts for everyone, deficit be damned).
An immigration deal that covers the dreamers and otherwise limits immigration in sensible ways.
Permanently getting rid of the debt ceiling.
And while it would be a long shot even compared to these long shots, on the Nixon to China theory, some slight movement on gun control, e.g. keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
There would still be plenty to worry about the Trump administration e.g. the corruption/conflicts, environment, government by tweet, numerous foreign policy problems, judicial appointments, etc but that would not diminish the value of what might be accomplished.
Yes I know that this is in the realm of alternative universe fiction but the tantalizing prospect of neutering the freedom caucus and by-passing McConnell and Ryan makes it tantalizing to think about.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Sadly, I've come to the conclusion that Trump does not have specific intentions of passing meaningful legislation (other than the Wall). He is interested in "making deals" and positive (or at least numerous) headlines. Honestly, I think that is about it. If you pull back the curtain, you'll find a dotty, old racist and little else. His positions change based on his feelings that day and who he is influenced by. The common sources on influence are mostly scary.beantownbubba wrote:There was a moment there when it crossed my mind that Trump might have learned something from his big deal w/ the Dems re the debt ceiling, hurricane relief, etc. For that brief nanosecond I wondered if Trump might put his absence of ideology, policy and thought to good use and I wondered how both the alt right and anti-Trumpites would react to that. Turns out that, no surprise, there was nothing to wonder about.
But I still think that if Trump ever realizes that he doesn't need the Freedom Caucus to govern, he could be a force to be reckoned with (for substantive reasons, not just for being his awful self). The Wall is the big, perhaps immovable obstacle, no pun intended, but if one side is willing to give on that it seems to me that there are no other insurmountable obstacles to Trump making surprising and surprisingly good deals w/ significant bipartisan support and wouldn't that blow everyone's mind? The list might include:
Substantive revisions to Obamacare that would put it on solid footing while addressing some of the real problems w/ the program (presumably it would have to be called Obamacare repeal, but who cares what it's called, what matters is what it does and if Cassidy-Graham can be called a healthcare bill anything seems possible in the labeling dept).
Real tax reform (as opposed to thoughtless tax cuts for the wealthy or essentially random tax cuts for everyone, deficit be damned).
An immigration deal that covers the dreamers and otherwise limits immigration in sensible ways.
Permanently getting rid of the debt ceiling.
And while it would be a long shot even compared to these long shots, on the Nixon to China theory, some slight movement on gun control, e.g. keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill.
There would still be plenty to worry about the Trump administration e.g. the corruption/conflicts, environment, government by tweet, numerous foreign policy problems, judicial appointments, etc but that would not diminish the value of what might be accomplished.
Yes I know that this is in the realm of alternative universe fiction but the tantalizing prospect of neutering the freedom caucus and by-passing McConnell and Ryan makes it tantalizing to think about.
Do you think that Trump sees ANY irony in trying to 'help the DREAMers' with Chuck and Nancy, even though he is the sole reason they are in trouble in the first place?
Yeah, it is tantalizing to think about persuading Trump to consider meaningful legislation. I just don't think he has the depth of knowledge nor the passionate belief to really tackle any issue other than the fucking wall. Maybe that is a glass half empty view, but I don't see much evidence to support the alternative.
Love each other, Motherfuckers!
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Between us we have managed what until this moment I would have thought was the impossible: I agree with you 100% while disagreeing with you almost entirely. More later.pearlbeer wrote:Sadly, I've come to the conclusion that Trump does not have specific intentions of passing meaningful legislation (other than the Wall). He is interested in "making deals" and positive (or at least numerous) headlines. Honestly, I think that is about it. If you pull back the curtain, you'll find a dotty, old racist and little else. His positions change based on his feelings that day and who he is influenced by. The common sources on influence are mostly scary.
Do you think that Trump sees ANY irony in trying to 'help the DREAMers' with Chuck and Nancy, even though he is the sole reason they are in trouble in the first place?
Yeah, it is tantalizing to think about persuading Trump to consider meaningful legislation. I just don't think he has the depth of knowledge nor the passionate belief to really tackle any issue other than the fucking wall. Maybe that is a glass half empty view, but I don't see much evidence to support the alternative.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
A "they go low, we send one of his to the morgue" (figuratively, of course) policy is LONG overduebeantownbubba wrote:What's needed are catchy slogans and viral videos. What's needed are clever appeals to emotion, not reason. You know, the kinds of things elites are supposed to be good at. Stretching the truth should not be a constraint. I don't like typing these words at all. They are in themselves a major concession to what is wrong. But at some point you have to decide that winning is better than being right. We live in a Donald Trump world. Deal with it or die a slow painful death.
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
So as I was saying...
I think the 2 key points here are that (i) I fully acknowledge that this is pie in the sky, the planets perfectly aligned, unrealistic wishful thinking and (ii) the key phrase is, as I put it, "Trump might put his absence of ideology, policy and thought to good use." We agree that he has no policies and no plans and doesn't care about much of anything that doesn't line his pockets and to the extent he does care, it's the deal itself, not what it does, that matters. But my thought here is that BECAUSE he doesn't care about substance he might be happy to make deals that actual conservative Republicans would abhor. Because it would be, you know, a deal.
So one could for example provide him w/ a blueprint for improving Obamacare substantially and as long as you called it Trumpcare and described it as repeal and replace, he would sign it. Because he doesn't actually give a shit about the dreamers, he'd be happy to make a deal that lets them stay and even provides them w/ a path to citizenship as long as the bill is described as being tough on immigration. Given that, ahem, flexibility, there is objectively a place where some Democrats and non freedom caucus Republicans can meet and might have long ago if it weren't for all the posturing and bullshit surrounding Obama's presidency and the 2016 presidential race. Since Trump has no ideological sympathy for the freedom caucus point of view and because his re-election chances exist almost wholly apart from anything the caucus may or may not do, he has no inherent need to please or accommodate the caucus. Compare and contrast, say, Boehner, Ryan, McConnell et al. If Trump understood politics well enough to count heads and if he knew how to calculate a majority, he'd realize that there are deals to be made w/out a single vote from the Freedom Caucus. Because he doesn't care what the bills actually say, and because the White House has shown no interest in providing guidance and leadership as to what actual legislation should look like/say, there is room and incentive for bipartisan compromise by those who do care, as long as Trump gets the lion's share of the credit.
Again, there are many hurdles to this happening and I don't minimize them. I say again that even if the scenario generally had a chance, the wall still creates a real problem because that's the one thing Trump is invested in and that the Democrats are entrenched against. But even that suggests that a deal on other issues is still possible, leaving the wall for another day and a different strategic situation (yes I understand that many people would view the wall as the price for giving up some of those other negotiating chips but that's not set in stone, pun semi-intended).
Put another way, in this scenario the impetus for compromise would not come from Trump, he'd be the audience for it. "Have I got a deal for you!" Schumer might say and Trump would listen and if Schumer were to lay out a plausible scenario to passage Trump might well go along, at least on some issues. Because, you know, the deal. The devil is most certainly in the details, but don't you think that if this latest healthcare fiasco craters Trump would be receptive to healthcare legislation presented to him by a completely different cast of characters w/ an assured majority no matter what it said as long as it was labeled repeal and replace and perhaps entitled some version of the Donald Trump Healthcare Improvements Act of 2017? This view DEPENDS on him not caring about the substance.
I think the 2 key points here are that (i) I fully acknowledge that this is pie in the sky, the planets perfectly aligned, unrealistic wishful thinking and (ii) the key phrase is, as I put it, "Trump might put his absence of ideology, policy and thought to good use." We agree that he has no policies and no plans and doesn't care about much of anything that doesn't line his pockets and to the extent he does care, it's the deal itself, not what it does, that matters. But my thought here is that BECAUSE he doesn't care about substance he might be happy to make deals that actual conservative Republicans would abhor. Because it would be, you know, a deal.
So one could for example provide him w/ a blueprint for improving Obamacare substantially and as long as you called it Trumpcare and described it as repeal and replace, he would sign it. Because he doesn't actually give a shit about the dreamers, he'd be happy to make a deal that lets them stay and even provides them w/ a path to citizenship as long as the bill is described as being tough on immigration. Given that, ahem, flexibility, there is objectively a place where some Democrats and non freedom caucus Republicans can meet and might have long ago if it weren't for all the posturing and bullshit surrounding Obama's presidency and the 2016 presidential race. Since Trump has no ideological sympathy for the freedom caucus point of view and because his re-election chances exist almost wholly apart from anything the caucus may or may not do, he has no inherent need to please or accommodate the caucus. Compare and contrast, say, Boehner, Ryan, McConnell et al. If Trump understood politics well enough to count heads and if he knew how to calculate a majority, he'd realize that there are deals to be made w/out a single vote from the Freedom Caucus. Because he doesn't care what the bills actually say, and because the White House has shown no interest in providing guidance and leadership as to what actual legislation should look like/say, there is room and incentive for bipartisan compromise by those who do care, as long as Trump gets the lion's share of the credit.
Again, there are many hurdles to this happening and I don't minimize them. I say again that even if the scenario generally had a chance, the wall still creates a real problem because that's the one thing Trump is invested in and that the Democrats are entrenched against. But even that suggests that a deal on other issues is still possible, leaving the wall for another day and a different strategic situation (yes I understand that many people would view the wall as the price for giving up some of those other negotiating chips but that's not set in stone, pun semi-intended).
Put another way, in this scenario the impetus for compromise would not come from Trump, he'd be the audience for it. "Have I got a deal for you!" Schumer might say and Trump would listen and if Schumer were to lay out a plausible scenario to passage Trump might well go along, at least on some issues. Because, you know, the deal. The devil is most certainly in the details, but don't you think that if this latest healthcare fiasco craters Trump would be receptive to healthcare legislation presented to him by a completely different cast of characters w/ an assured majority no matter what it said as long as it was labeled repeal and replace and perhaps entitled some version of the Donald Trump Healthcare Improvements Act of 2017? This view DEPENDS on him not caring about the substance.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
#notmydotard
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
- Jim&Jewell
- Posts: 112
- Joined: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:36 am
- Location: Conway, SC
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Roy Moore next Senator from Alabama? Guess it’s better than him being Attorney General.
Can you tell me how to tell when I've had enough?
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I see your point, and agree with you 100%, yet disagree with you almost completely.beantownbubba wrote:So as I was saying...
I think the 2 key points here are that (i) I fully acknowledge that this is pie in the sky, the planets perfectly aligned, unrealistic wishful thinking and (ii) the key phrase is, as I put it, "Trump might put his absence of ideology, policy and thought to good use." We agree that he has no policies and no plans and doesn't care about much of anything that doesn't line his pockets and to the extent he does care, it's the deal itself, not what it does, that matters. But my thought here is that BECAUSE he doesn't care about substance he might be happy to make deals that actual conservative Republicans would abhor. Because it would be, you know, a deal.
So one could for example provide him w/ a blueprint for improving Obamacare substantially and as long as you called it Trumpcare and described it as repeal and replace, he would sign it. Because he doesn't actually give a shit about the dreamers, he'd be happy to make a deal that lets them stay and even provides them w/ a path to citizenship as long as the bill is described as being tough on immigration. Given that, ahem, flexibility, there is objectively a place where some Democrats and non freedom caucus Republicans can meet and might have long ago if it weren't for all the posturing and bullshit surrounding Obama's presidency and the 2016 presidential race. Since Trump has no ideological sympathy for the freedom caucus point of view and because his re-election chances exist almost wholly apart from anything the caucus may or may not do, he has no inherent need to please or accommodate the caucus. Compare and contrast, say, Boehner, Ryan, McConnell et al. If Trump understood politics well enough to count heads and if he knew how to calculate a majority, he'd realize that there are deals to be made w/out a single vote from the Freedom Caucus. Because he doesn't care what the bills actually say, and because the White House has shown no interest in providing guidance and leadership as to what actual legislation should look like/say, there is room and incentive for bipartisan compromise by those who do care, as long as Trump gets the lion's share of the credit.
Again, there are many hurdles to this happening and I don't minimize them. I say again that even if the scenario generally had a chance, the wall still creates a real problem because that's the one thing Trump is invested in and that the Democrats are entrenched against. But even that suggests that a deal on other issues is still possible, leaving the wall for another day and a different strategic situation (yes I understand that many people would view the wall as the price for giving up some of those other negotiating chips but that's not set in stone, pun semi-intended).
Put another way, in this scenario the impetus for compromise would not come from Trump, he'd be the audience for it. "Have I got a deal for you!" Schumer might say and Trump would listen and if Schumer were to lay out a plausible scenario to passage Trump might well go along, at least on some issues. Because, you know, the deal. The devil is most certainly in the details, but don't you think that if this latest healthcare fiasco craters Trump would be receptive to healthcare legislation presented to him by a completely different cast of characters w/ an assured majority no matter what it said as long as it was labeled repeal and replace and perhaps entitled some version of the Donald Trump Healthcare Improvements Act of 2017? This view DEPENDS on him not caring about the substance.
Ultimately, Bubba, I hope you are right. I'm with you, man. I hope we can find an acceptable alternative to this mess. I hope we can use Trump's ego against him, to do good.
However, the situation we are in is NOT NORMAL. We all need to wake up everyday and tell ourselves that this is not normal. If your wishful thinking were to come true, that would be great. However, we cannot, under any circumstances, allow Trump policy wins to normalize his behavior. We must hold him accountable for the horrible, horrible ideas he champions and the damage he has done to the country. Like you I'm sure, at the end of the day, I just care about getting the right things done, and protecting those that are vulnerable; I don't care who enacts the policies and gets credit. But, I do fear we would put ourselves in a precarious position if we trade policy (deals!) for accolades and normalize his behavior. I'm fine with giving him credit where credit is due, but I'll never forget. DACA, Trans-Military Ban, Travel Ban, Paris Climate Accord, Pussy Grabbing, EPA, Sessions, DeVos....I can go on (and on and on) here...We can never forget or forgive.
Finally, to really lean into the glass half empty side of things, I'll channel my inner-Eeyore and point out that the only meaningful bipartisan 'deal' Trump has made is on the Debt Ceiling. The Debt Ceiling is, quite literally, an imaginary thing. It is just a silly political tool. He hasn't struck any 'deals' on any real legislation, so I'm not optimistic that the scenario you've laid out has much of a chance. Hillary Clinton recently called Trump a "clear and present danger" to the United States. I think she is right. This isn't normal and we can't ever let it be.
Love each other, Motherfuckers!
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Very fine people/Sons of bitches
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
In violent agreement once more. I don't think I ever said anything about normalizing Trump's attitudes and behavior. I only speculated about working w/ him w/in certain defined parameters, which means compromising on the compromisable not the essential and giving him credit (even too much credit) for the actual good things he might do, not for generally being who he is.pearlbeer wrote:Finally, to really lean into the glass half empty side of things, I'll channel my inner-Eeyore and point out that the only meaningful bipartisan 'deal' Trump has made is on the Debt Ceiling. The Debt Ceiling is, quite literally, an imaginary thing. It is just a silly political tool. He hasn't struck any 'deals' on any real legislation, so I'm not optimistic that the scenario you've laid out has much of a chance. Hillary Clinton recently called Trump a "clear and present danger" to the United States. I think she is right. This isn't normal and we can't ever let it be.
The spark for this speculation was in fact the debt ceiling deal because fwiw I do think it proves what I said it did: That Trump can govern w/out the Freedom Caucus. You and I may think the debt ceiling is imaginary (though I'm not sure I would go quite that far I know what you're saying), but the caucus certainly does not. So the debt ceiling deal is "proof of concept" that an alternative path is possible though I agree the odds of it being taken vary between close to zero and none. OTOH, I suspect you'd agree that presenting Trump w/ a healthcare bill that will pass (i.e. w/ the numbers already in hand and counted), one where he gets to stick it to mcconnell, ryan and everyone else who has "failied him," would be a deal Trump couldn't and wouldn't refuse. Now finding that sweet spot which keeps Obamacare essentially in place but addresses enough of its real and imagined weaknesses to attract the necessary votes is no easy task and I don't want to underestimate it, but if some enterprising folk could make that happen I believe Trump would sign it.
Since you didn't ask, a couple of possible approaches: Minimal coverage standards from Obamacare remain in place. Some federal commission or whatever calculates what it "should" cost to provide that level of benefits county by county and each state gets a block grant equal to the number of uninsured but for Obamacare residents of each county x cost per person in that county for all uninsured residents of all counties in each state. If the state manages to provide that level of care/coverage for less they can keep the difference and apply it to certain specified other government purposes (e.g. preventive care, environmental cleanups, schools, etc) and I can imagine other sweeteners as well. Or the individual mandate is eliminated in return for specifically designated tax funds to be used to pay for Obamacare equal to the number of healthy or low risk people declining care x the average cost of a typical policy by county and those tax funds either reimburses state/fed govt or insurance companies for the missing revenues depending on who actually pays for the missing revenues when the plan is implemented (IOW general tax revenues rather than mandate funds are used to make the actuarial tables work). This approach would also require a fairly big "stick" for declining to purchase insurance in the form of penalties when insurance is purchased. That concept is ALREADY in the law so it might be comparatively easy to implement but OTOH the penalties would probably have to be increased. If I can make these proposals essentially off the back of an envelope I find it difficult to believe that people who know what they're doing can't come up w/ something. And again, I think Trump would sign anything that resembled any of this even though he wouldn't get a single vote from the freedom caucus wing of the GOP and even though it would be a stretch for the rational among us to call this "repeal and replace."
Note that I am not suggesting scrapping the entire crazy system for something that actually makes sense; that is too big a hill to climb right now. Unless it's something that truly comes from outside the box and is so new, creative & brilliant it captures broad attention and support, no comprehensive reform of which I'm aware would ever attract the Congressional voting coalition I'm imagining.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Well, it appears Bubba and I are in complete agreement and have solved all the world's problems. Mods: You may mark this thread as closed.beantownbubba wrote:
In violent agreement once more.
Love each other, Motherfuckers!
- Sterling Bigmouth
- Posts: 660
- Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:10 pm
- Location: Tennessee
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
I try to ignore much political stuff these days, but Trump’s interactions with these NFL & NBA players has to be some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever seen.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
Very fine people/Sons of bitches
Turn it up to 10 and rip off the knob
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
It's ok if Trump tells people that america isn't great, but if athletes say it, they're son of a bitches
And I knew when I woke up Rock N Roll would be here forever
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
So there's some very subtle difference between the group on the left, which Trump excuses, and the pair on the right, which are sons of bitches. Both sets are doing the same thing: Exercising the most-American of all rights to freedom of speech, and yet...there's something different between them. Can't quite put my finger on it...whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
Very fine people/Sons of bitches
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
OMG, say it ain't so...PLEASE say it ain't so...but it is. We are now sentenced to days and days of "discussions" about Trump's comments on Howard Stern. It's gonna be torture.
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
-
- Posts: 7894
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 9:51 am
- Location: Little Rock, Arkansaw
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
"The Neverending Thread for Political Shit" Versus "3DD NC"
Spoiler: The South wins. Again. But this time, I'm okay with it:
Spoiler: The South wins. Again. But this time, I'm okay with it:
Neff sounds like a real charmer: He told Date Lab that he would “not necessarily oppose [Washington’s] destruction by nuclear fireball, even if I am in it at the time” and likes “virtuous” women who value their families over “ambitious career goals.” He also says he doesn’t date much. Strange!
Date Lab writer Michelle Cottle deserves credit for facing Neff’s relationship challenges head-on in the nicest possible way. Neff required “a bit more care than others when being matched,” she writes, because he “can come across as a wee bit defensive.” He hates the city he lives in and the things people do in it, such as using dating apps and bragging about their “B.S. master’s degrees.” When Date Lab asked about his interests, Neff replied that “most of my hobbies allow me to escape women.”
The sooner we put those assholes in the grave&piss on the dirt above it, the better off we'll be
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
so now we know: Roy (Ray???) Moore totes a hooker gun
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing
-
- Posts: 7894
- Joined: Sat May 15, 2010 9:51 am
- Location: Little Rock, Arkansaw
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Now we know how he keeps the goats from talking.whatwouldcooleydo? wrote:
so now we know: Roy (Ray???) Moore totes a hooker gun
The sooner we put those assholes in the grave&piss on the dirt above it, the better off we'll be
-
- Posts: 21799
- Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:52 am
- Location: Trying to stay focused on the righteous path
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
Anybody understand how Mitch McConnell keeps his job? I mean, if u were a rank and file Republican senator wouldn't u be some serious combination of pissed, embarrassed & frustrated & wouldn't you want to blame someone?
What used to be is gone and what ought to be ought not to be so hard
- whatwouldcooleydo?
- Posts: 13693
- Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 3:44 pm
- Location: Desolation Row
- Contact:
Re: The Neverending Thread for Political Shit
the only Rank and File that mattersbeantownbubba wrote:Anybody understand how Mitch McConnell keeps his job? I mean, if u were a rank and file Republican senator wouldn't u be some serious combination of pissed, embarrassed & frustrated & wouldn't you want to blame someone?
Son, this ain't a dream no more, it's the real thing