Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

kowloon

Akabusi wrote: »

You only have to watch Borat to see how Rudy could have skeletons in the closet.

At least one bone.

Spanish Eyes

aloyisious wrote: »

On the issue of the ballot paper, were there separate forms to fill in on the Presidential election and the Senate and House elections or were they all on the one form?

Google ballotpedia.org for a sample ballot paper. Can’t link from my device..

Everything from Prez to Senate and Coroner and all in between appear to be on the same voter paper..

Brussels Sprout

Mike Pompeo is a complete hack who's sole objective is positioning himself to be President in the future. He doesn't actually believe this but he knows that the Republican base love to hear it.

Gbear

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Mike Pompeo is a complete hack who's sole objective is positioning himself to be President in the future. He doesn't actually believe this but he knows that the Republican base love to hear it.

He's a big rapture Christian fanatic type. I wouldn't put anything past him.

Itssoeasy

So I’m assuming that the “I was joking defence” will be used by the administration at some today to explain away that comment. Or maybe it’s a case of them just saying the quiet part out loud and not giving a ****e how it sounds and there is no joke and they mean it.

Overheal

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Mike Pompeo is a complete hack who's sole objective is positioning himself to be President in the future. He doesn't actually believe this but he knows that the Republican base love to hear it.

Go watch his congressional hearings. He's a troll.

Faugheen

StringerBell wrote: »

I wouldn't place too much stock in that though, they often use a line of questioning that plays the devils advocate role also in their hearings.

Hopefully they won't strike it down obviously but with a 6-3 majority I think they are in with as good a chance as they have had. Hopefully they fail to make the case properly!

Edit: Im inclined to agree with the previous poster on Thomas and Alito.

In fairness, Roberts won’t strike it down.

And Kavanaugh in the hearings said that it looked like a ‘very straightforward case’ in that severability of the provision around individual mandates is more appropriate than scrapping the full law altogether.

He pointed to precedent in severability, which is something he holds quite highly.

Plus, wherever Roberts rules, Kavanaugh follows.

serfboard

Itssoeasy wrote: »

They both said why does the whole act need to fall by removing the mandate, and alito likening it to removing a part of a plane and the plane still flies.

If you remove the mandate the ACA will not work.

AbusesToilets

Rjd2 wrote: »

I could be wrong,,,not the first time:pac:

But currently they have 48 seats with 4 to be called, the two in Georgia (Jan Run Offs ) and 2 in Alaska and North Carolina.

Things look fine in Alaska although the count probably will take another 10 years, North Carolina is very close but Thom Tillis might just crawl over the line although can't find much on the current state of play tbf.

Those 2 winning would mean Mitch would need only 1 seat next January which is obviously a relief for him as Loeffer especially is very vulnerable.

He'd obviously would take 51-49 due to how useless Loeffer is, but does mean Biden now and then will be able to pick off senators on certain stuff.

Although obviously someone like Manchin will need to be kept happy as he has speculated about running in 2024 so will want to prove his bipartisanship voting against Biden now and then.

With the majority, McConnell will be able to choose who chairs committees, and what makes it to the Senate floor. Doubtful the Dems will accomplish much in that case.

Brussels Sprout

AbusesToilets wrote: »

With the majority, McConnell will be able to choose who chairs committees, and what makes it to the Senate floor. Doubtful the Dems will accomplish much in that case.

Even if the Democrats win the 2 GA seats it seems they won't be able to get anything through without Republican help. That's because Joe Manchin came out (on Fox News no less) and declared that will not vote to remove the filibuster rule. So even if it's a 50-50 Senate Ted Cruz and likes can just block any legislation that they don't like. And that after the Republicans removed a similar rule 4 years ago to get their supreme court picks on the bench....infuriating.

listermint

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Even if the Democrats win the 2 GA seats it seems they won't be able to get anything through without Republican help. That's because Joe Manchin came out (on Fox News no less) and declared that will not vote to remove the filibuster rule. So even if it's a 50-50 Senate Ted Cruz and likes can just block any legislation that they don't like. And that after the Republicans removed a similar rule 4 years ago to get their supreme court picks on the bench....infuriating.

Couldn't Harris just waltz in and give the deciding vote.

Brussels Sprout

listermint wrote: »

Couldn't Harris just waltz in and give the deciding vote.

If the filibuster is used successfully it never gets to a vote. It's a blocking tactic.

Foxtrol

Faugheen wrote: »

In fairness, Roberts won’t strike it down.

And Kavanaugh in the hearings said that it looked like a ‘very straightforward case’ in that severability of the provision around individual mandates is more appropriate than scrapping the full law altogether.

He pointed to precedent in severability, which is something he holds quite highly.

Plus, wherever Roberts rules, Kavanaugh follows.

I believe the Trump justices aren't stupid. They know that if they push through several unpopular decisions (like the ACA, Roe v Wade) they'll completely turn public opinion against the court, when it is already at a low level. This will likely cause the senate to flip and the dems to be able to completely reorganise the court, either diluting their power or even taking away their job for life.

I see them chipping away at the edges but not going too far extreme in decisions until they had cover, like early in a new GOP president's term.

Water John

Manchin was also on CNN. Dems don't vote enbloc, it always carried a range of opinion. There are lots of changes Manchin will support. You work on what's possible. Ardern in NZ had to drop her key health objective to keep her last Govn't together. She accepted that and got a lot of other things done. Some commentators believed it would damage her but she got a much higher vote in the GE. Now she has a majority but she has given two ministries to the Green party.

marno21

Joe Manchin is a Democratic Senator from the 2nd most Republican state in the country. He's managed to get re-elected twice, even in 2018 when the Republicans flipped 4 Senate seats in Indiana, North Dakota, Missouri and Florida, where the 4 Senators voted against Brett Kavanaugh. He voted for Kavanaugh. Other Democrats would do well to learn from him. He's reading public opinion from his State and voting accordingly rather than blindly following party lines. That's a reason why the Dems now have a sum total of 3 Senators not from blue States/Biden States (Manchin, Tester from MT and Brown from OH), and a Senate minority.

Quin_Dub

marno21 wrote: »

Joe Manchin is a Democratic Senator from the 2nd most Republican state in the country. He's managed to get re-elected twice, even in 2018 when the Republicans flipped 4 Senate seats in Indiana, North Dakota, Missouri and Florida, where the 4 Senators voted against Brett Kavanaugh. He voted for Kavanaugh. Other Democrats would do well to learn from him. He's reading public opinion from his State and voting accordingly rather than blindly following party lines. That's a reason why the Dems now have a sum total of 3 Senators not from blue States/Biden States (Manchin, Tester from MT and Brown from OH), and a Senate minority.

I know what you are saying , but in that case why have a party or be affiliated with one?

If Manchin needs to vote in alignment with his very Republican state , why is he a Democrat other than to gain access to their election infrastructure?

Without question the Democrats need to find a way to better connect with Non-Urban voters across the country , I just wouldn't see Manchin as a template.

Don't get me wrong , he seems like a very stand-up , reliable guy with a solid moral compass etc. but don't think his model carries to other States.

marno21

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I know what you are saying , but in that case why have a party or be affiliated with one?

If Manchin needs to vote in alignment with his very Republican state , why is he a Democrat other than to gain access to their election infrastructure?

Without question the Democrats need to find a way to better connect with Non-Urban voters across the country , I just wouldn't see Manchin as a template.

Don't get me wrong , he seems like a very stand-up , reliable guy with a solid moral compass etc. but don't think his model carries to other States.

He votes with Democrats on many issues, he's not Democrat in name only. He did vote to impeach Trump, and against the Barrett confirmation.

I wouldn't exactly call him a template either, but he is in the 2nd most Republican state - not Florida or Ohio. But his willingness to vote on some wedge issues balances his many votes in favour of Democrat policy objectives.

There needs to be more Democrats that are moderate on certain issues and clear that they're not in favour of extremism.

In saying that, it's going to be a massive issue going forward as population concentrates in urban areas and these areas do not get proportional representation in the Senate or in the Electoral College.

In 2040:

Half the population: NY/IL/FL/GA/NY/NC/PA/TX - 50% of population, 16 Senators
70% of population: NY/IL/FL/GA/NY/NC/PA/TX/MA/MI/AZ/CO/OH/NJ/VA/WA - 70% of population, 32 senators

If 50% of the population has 84% of representation in the Senate it is going to be permanently paralysed.

Foxtrol

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I know what you are saying , but in that case why have a party or be affiliated with one?

If Manchin needs to vote in alignment with his very Republican state , why is he a Democrat other than to gain access to their election infrastructure?

Without question the Democrats need to find a way to better connect with Non-Urban voters across the country , I just wouldn't see Manchin as a template.

Don't get me wrong , he seems like a very stand-up , reliable guy with a solid moral compass etc. but don't think his model carries to other States.

Because purity tests leave you in the situation of the Irish left, completely fragmented, in no position to lead and many times showing no real desire to lead.

Itssoeasy

Foxtrol wrote: »

Because purity tests leave you in the situation of the Irish left, completely fragmented, in no position to lead and many times showing no real desire to lead.

The democrats are a real life version of the Judean people’s front scene in life of Brian. They all think they have the correct policies and in fact none of them do. It’s all well and good being “a big tent party” or a “broad church” as they like to say but if they can’t all sing from at least the same hymn sheet if not the exact part of the hymn sheet then it’s no wonder the tail is wagging the dog in the democrats.

serfboard

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The democrats are a real life version of the Judean people’s front scene in life of Brian. They all think they have the correct policies and in fact none of them do. It’s all well and good being “a big tent party” or a “broad church” as they like to say but if they can’t all sing from at least the same hymn sheet if not the exact part of the hymn sheet then it’s no wonder the tail is wagging the dog in the democrats.

Democrat voters do not have the same discipline as Republican voters do. If a Democrate doesn't like their candidate, they simply will not vote for them.

Whereas the Republican voters attitude can be summed up by a woman I heard being interviewed before the 2016 election - "I'm a conservative, and I'm going to vote conservative no matter what donkey is leading the party".

Christy42

serfboard wrote: »

Democrat voters do not have the same discipline as Republican voters do. If a Democrate doesn't like their candidate, they simply will not vote for them.

Whereas the Republican voters attitude can be summed up by a woman I heard being interviewed before the 2016 election - "I'm a conservative, and I'm going to vote conservative no matter what donkey is leading the party".

I don't know if it is discipline or simply not holding any beliefs very strongly. Curious where a Republican would get to just repeating Bernie's claims as I doubt many actually have strong opinions on publicly funded education.

rossie1977

marno21 wrote: »

Joe Manchin is a Democratic Senator from the 2nd most Republican state in the country. He's managed to get re-elected twice, even in 2018 when the Republicans flipped 4 Senate seats in Indiana, North Dakota, Missouri and Florida, where the 4 Senators voted against Brett Kavanaugh. He voted for Kavanaugh. Other Democrats would do well to learn from him. He's reading public opinion from his State and voting accordingly rather than blindly following party lines. That's a reason why the Dems now have a sum total of 3 Senators not from blue States/Biden States (Manchin, Tester from MT and Brown from OH), and a Senate minority.

Might as well re-name the party mini Republicans if anyone follows the lead of Joe Manchin.

Democrat in name only.

marno21 wrote: »

There needs to be more Democrats that are moderate on certain issues and clear that they're not in favour of extremism.

The vast majority of Dems in the senate are centre right so they don't need more moderates.

The problem is not the Dems. Republicans have continually moved further and further to the right past 30 years.

Just have a look at voting records in the senate last decade between the parties. Only one is on the extremes.

Foxtrol

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The democrats are a real life version of the Judean people’s front scene in life of Brian. They all think they have the correct policies and in fact none of them do. It’s all well and good being “a big tent party” or a “broad church” as they like to say but if they can’t all sing from at least the same hymn sheet if not the exact part of the hymn sheet then it’s no wonder the tail is wagging the dog in the democrats.

The exact same can be said for the GOP, they have plenty of moderate politicians who act the exact same as Manchin.

Big difference is that the GOP, with the help of right wing media, are much better at branding all the Dems as their most radical outliers with only a few outliers being able to cut through it, like Manchin.

Brussels Sprout

Itssoeasy wrote: »

The democrats are a real life version of the Judean people’s front scene in life of Brian. They all think they have the correct policies and in fact none of them do. It’s all well and good being “a big tent party” or a “broad church” as they like to say but if they can’t all sing from at least the same hymn sheet if not the exact part of the hymn sheet then it’s no wonder the tail is wagging the dog in the democrats.

The Democrat's tent is a lot more diverse, in many areas, then the Republican tent and as such it is a lot more difficult for them to tread a line that satisfies everyone.

• Calls for a more European style Democratic Socialism by the likes of Warren/Sanders/AOC were weaponised against them with Hispanics in South Florida.
• Push too hard on BLM and alienate more white working class and even some latinos.
• Talk too much about taxing the rich and lose the Silicon Valley / Wallstreet types who, though small in numer have a lot of clout when it comes to funding campaigns
• Talk too much about Climate change and lose people in the Rust Belt.

In many ways it's far easier for the Republicans. They have their formula and their supporters lap it up. Their main issue is that their support base is shrinking relative to the Democrats. They need to diversify their coalition away from rural whites. They also need to pivot away from dead-end issues like blanket opposition to climate change solutions.

aloyisious

Georgia's Sec of State has ordered a full by-hand recount of every ballot paper for the presidential election. I do not know if this is due to pressure from within the GOP, his party, as he has faced calls from it's members to resign over his stance on recognizing the validity of mailed-in ballot papers. Senators Loeffler and Perdue called on him to resign.

BluePlanet

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

The Democrat's tent is a lot more diverse, in many areas, then the Republican tent and as such it is a lot more difficult for them to tread a line that satisfies everyone.


[*]Calls for a more European style Democratic Socialism by the likes of Warren/Sanders/AOC were weaponised against them with Hispanics in South Florida.

That's just a particular narrative coming from corporate media and the GOP.
I prefer another narrative.

Latinx is a broad social construct.
White latinos are ordinarily more conservative than blacks for example.
In the case of FL, in which the Latinx population has a high percentage of white, they'll trend toward Republicans anyway.
Additionally i think there's a unique scenario that helped Trump here:
Cuban expats are warm to authoritarianism.
Sure, they hated Castro, but only because he was the wrong type of authoritarian.
They were supporters of Batista.
If Latinx votes in large numbers in FL, it will always be an uphill battle for Dems.

btw, FL voted for a $15 minimum wage.
That's one of those social democrat type of initiatives.

BonnieSituation

aloyisious wrote: »

Georgia's Sec of State has ordered a full by-hand recount of every ballot paper for the presidential election. I do not know if this is due to pressure from within the GOP, his party, as he has faced calls from it's members to resign over his stance on recognizing the validity of mailed-in ballot papers. Senators Loeffler and Perdue called on him to resign.

Can he do that before the count is completed?

StringerBell

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Can he do that before the count is completed?

It can't begin before the votes are counted obviously, but assuming they have reached the point where they know that neither candidate is going to win the state by more than the margin for a mandatory recount?

Haven't looked into it at all though.

Larbre34

Half of one percent difference triggers an automatic recount in Georgia. Its happening independent of any of the nonsense on view from the Trump campaign. The Sec State seems like a good guy.

Water John

To illustrate the Dems and Manchin, take a look at Labour in Ireland. In the past LB had a significant presence in rural Ireland. West Cork, Mid Cork, North Kerry and South Tipperary all had LB TDs. This should have been blended in policy terms with its urban base. All those rural areas have been gradually lost. Where is the LB party now?
The Dems in the US must keep active, various constituencies in terms of voter base.