US Politics XIV: Vote for Pedro

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
DaveC said:
trump could pardon him five seconds after the subpoena is issued and then flynn's agreement is null and void.
Click to expand...
Even it pardoned, he's not under control of DOJ and could be subpoenaed to testify. He would also lose his right to plead the 5th, as he can't incriminate himself on something he's already been convicted for.
 
womanfish said:
I get your point. I truly do. I would love for nothing more than the congress to have this beautiful tool to say, look at how awful this guy is, and then send him packing.

But this is complicated and complicated beyond any imagination because of who we are talking about. And now, the fat toad of an AG that is aiding him.



Here's the deal. We all can agree that if he is impeached, he isn't going anywhere. He will not be convicted by the Senate.

Voters actually agree to just keep investigating and not so much jump to impeachment off the bat. Why is this good?



1. Ongoing investigation will be the sort of drip drip of oppo information that chipped away at Clinton with Wikileaks and Comey announcement.



2. Ongoing investigation will highlight the White Houses stonewalling which gives the perception of guilt.



3. Investigations may very well open up a can of worms that will be a kill shot to this orange turd. Looks like McGahn and Mueller are in line to testify. Maybe Lewindowski and then others... The courts seem to be expediting the release of Trumps financial document lawsuit. and I think the Tax Returns are inevitable at this point. Lots to work with in the days to come. All being a new wave of bad news for Trump each week or month.



4. Trump doesn't give 1 shit about impeachment. In fact, he would absolutely LOVE it.

This would be him at every rally.

"Well folks. My real Americans here with me. They did it. They broke every law, and used the FBI and CIA to spy on me, and come up with fake evidence! AFTER I was completely cleared by Mueller. And they impeached me. Can you believe it? Impeached me.

Well guess what folks. They can't stop me, and more importantly, they can't stop YOU! We will win again because we have made this country great and we will make it greater!"



It would be a badge of honor. I could see him wearing an "I was impeached" pin if he could.



So in the end. There may well be investigations that could lead to much more trouble for the president. If nothing less, even more things referred to State AG's, that will end up ruining Trump's life, the day he steps out of the White House.

And more importantly - Dem candidates focus on Healthcare, Roe V. Wade, racist immigration policies, infrastructure, environment, and HEALTHCARE AGAIN.

All while being able to say - Donald Trump obstructed justice, his team met with the Russians 160 times. He is a tax cheat, he is under dozens of investigations in the congress and in NY state. We need to start fresh and get done what the people of this country want!!
Click to expand...
No

He should be impeached because that's what Congress is supposed to fucking do. There's more against Trump than there was against Nixon. Not impeaching him sets an awful precedent for the future. It also emboldens him. He's obstructing Congress' oversight right now because he knows they're too chicken shit to do anything about it. Because the Democrats really suck at this and have no marbles.
 
[tweet]856149439270006784[/tweet]

One party stands for things. They're horrible, awful things, and they are often done cynically and in bad faith ... but they have a clear purpose and set out to accomplish their goals.

The other stands for nothing, and they get steamrolled at almost every turn.
 
I mean, she's not necessarily wrong with her comments. Is that politician in Omaha planning to support any abortion restriction bills? Or is it more that he's personally pro-life, but still acknowledges and respects that women have the right to make their own decisions about their reproductive rights, and will support legislation that allows them to continue to have that right? The former would definitely be a problem. The latter, not so much. I think it is possible for a Democrat to personally be pro-life and, instead of passing anti-abortion bills, support policies and legislation that would actually be beneficial to women (comprehensive sex education, access to birth control, good-paying jobs, affordable/universal healthcare, etc.) that would tackle the issues that lead to many women having abortions in the first place, and still fight to make sure women do have the right to have an abortion if need be. And I say all of that as somebody who is staunchly pro-choice.

If any Democratic pro-lifers were to support anti-abortion bills and refused to support the kinds of policies I just mentioned, however? Then I fully agree the Democratic Party need to make it clear that kind of mentality will not stand or get any support.
 
I wouldn't call her a disappointment, but it's staggering just how much of a nothing politician Pelosi is.
 
Jerry Dunk said:
[tweet]856149439270006784[/tweet]

One party stands for things. They're horrible, awful things, and they are often done cynically and in bad faith ... but they have a clear purpose and set out to accomplish their goals.

The other stands for nothing, and they get steamrolled at almost every turn.
Click to expand...

glad you're still around, i was worried after sunday that you were gone again :up:
 
But it was Joe Biden’s moment, and it sure still seems to be Joe Biden’s moment. He has dominated the polls since he entered the race last month. Before Biden announced, he was at a measly 29 percent in the Real Clear Politics average of national polls, only 6 percentage points ahead of progressive favorite Bernie Sanders, who not all that long ago looked like a genuine co-front-runner. Since then, Biden has surged to 40 percent, kicking Sanders down to the mid-teens. In the past week, Biden has posted intimidating double-digit leads in polls from the early-contest states of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina. His dominance of the Democratic Party’s moderate wing has helped stall the rise of Mayor Pete Buttigieg while also squeezing the ability of candidates like Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris from positioning themselves as more viable progressive alternatives to Sanders.

It’s not just Biden’s rising poll numbers that suggest that the activist left is out of step with most Democrats; it’s the ideological makeup of the entire Democratic Party. Fifty-six percent of Democrats self-identify as “moderate” and 9 percent even embrace “conservative,” according to an April poll from the Judy Ford Wason Center for Public Policy at Christopher Newport University. While leftist activists pine for the end of the legislative filibuster to grease the skids for partisan legislation, a December GW Politics poll found that 66 percent of Democrats said they prefer elected officials who “make compromises with people they disagree with” over those who “stick to their positions." Only 36 percent of Republicans said the same.

It’s too early to declare this the year of anything, whether progressive change or centrist Bidenmania. But Biden’s commanding lead has left the party’s resurgent left with a question: What to do if it never stops being Biden’s moment. Despite circulation of Biden's 1970s opposition to school busing and Anita Hill's rejection of his apology for his handling of the Clarence Thomas hearings, his appeal crosses nearly every demographic group, with the mild exception of voters under 35; he still leads with young voters, just not by as much as with other groups.

And Biden’s lead is at least in part because of his relative moderation and not in spite of it. Even voters who disagree with him seem to be drawn to his centrism. Polls from CNN and Monmouth University found that Democratic primary voters put the ability to defeat Trump ahead of ideological purity when picking a presidential nominee. It’s true that a recent poll from ABC and the Washington Post seemed to show the opposite result, with 47 percent of Democrats saying they preferred a candidate “whose positions on the issues come closest to yours” and only 39 percent said they favored one “most likely to defeat” Trump. But the cross tabulation showed that it was largely moderate and conservative Democrats who wanted an ideologically like-minded candidate, while liberal Democrats tilted toward the more electable candidate. Democrats in both ideological camps, it seems, are nervous about a nominee too far to the left.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/14/joe-biden-2020-226872
Click to expand...


so let's center (haha) the conversation on how things are, and now how we wish them to be.

given Biden's wide, growing lead, especially among the Democratic "base" -- no, not the white "woke" left, but with minority voters, it seems we have to confront two things:

1. any nominee with the hint/whiff/stench of "socialism" is going to be Donald Trump's only hope of winning in 2020; this does for the business class what "infanticide" and "judges" does for the religious right -- it causes them to hold their noses and cast a ballot for a gruesome person

2. actual Democrats who vote aren't as Left as Twitter makes you think


it also seems to me that the social democratic wing of the Democratic Party has done an enormous amount of good these past few years. Medicare-for-all is absolutely a mainstream position now, whereas it wasn't in 2016. these socialists recognized that to get their platform going, they needed to slowly take over the party, and did so by running as Dems, winning, and pulling the rest of the party left by getting the party to take their ideas seriously. we don't live in a parliamentary democracy, so if the party isn't talking to you, you change the party from within, slowly, incrementally, and by winning elections.

the rest of the country isn't there yet. general election candidates need to speak to the broadest audience possible. but change is coming. and it could be in the form of Joe Biden. right now, it seems that Blue voters want a return to normalcy, modest and measured reforms, and an end to the daily Reality Show coming out of the white house.

or this take could age poorly. we don't know yet. i'm eagerly awaiting the debates, especially to see how Warren performs so i can imagine what she'll be like on the stage next to Trump. we don't get too many side-by-side comparisons, so i think that's important when choosing which candidate i'd support. but Biden's big lead has to be taken into consideration if we're to understand the current state of the race.
 
Last edited:
Irvine511 said:
a December GW Politics poll found that 66 percent of Democrats said they prefer elected officials who “make compromises with people they disagree with” over those who “stick to their positions." Only 36 percent of Republicans said the same.
Click to expand...

i find it baffling that anyone thinks this is something to celebrate and/or be proud of. "we're willing to compromise our principles and the other party isn't, hooray for us!" :huh:
 
giphy.gif
 
https://twitter.com/lizagoitein/status/1129412114467233792?s=21

Pelosi will go down as someone just as responsible for all this shit as Senator [emoji217]

Her “not worth” it on impeachment is going to lead us down a path there’s no coming back from.

Is there anyone in the Dem party who actually has balls to do their job ?

Could AOC become speaker ? I feel like she wouldn’t have hesitated
 
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Anti-money laundering specialists at Deutsche Bank recommended in 2016 and 2017 that multiple transactions involving legal entities controlled by Donald J. Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, be reported to a federal financial-crimes watchdog.

The transactions, some of which involved Mr. Trump’s now-defunct foundation, set off alerts in a computer system designed to detect illicit activity, according to five current and former bank employees. Compliance staff members who then reviewed the transactions prepared so-called suspicious activity reports that they believed should be sent to a unit of the Treasury Department that polices financial crimes.

But executives at Deutsche Bank, which has lent billions of dollars to the Trump and Kushner companies, rejected their employees’ advice. The reports were never filed with the government.

The nature of the transactions was not clear. At least some of them involved money flowing back and forth with overseas entities or individuals, which bank employees considered suspicious.
Click to expand...

Oh, Trump's a money launderer. Oh my. I can't believe it. Nobody could have predicted that. I always thought he was such an HONEST BROKER.
 
I have to believe he’ll go the way of Jeb!

His polling is strong but let’s see where he’s at by the fall season

Still better than Trump but it would feel a little like Groundhog Day
 
Yeah, Jeb was not a former vice president. It makes a significant difference. Jeb's campaign was an all-time failure just for how much money was put in, but I don't really see an obvious comparison between any of the many Dem candidates and his particular situation in 2016.
 
It's beyond delusional of Biden to think that once Trump is gone it will be kumbaya. He is just a symptom of a much more serious underlying disease. In fact it's a massive disservice that he's so revolting because it has concentrated everyone on him and not the deeply disturbing and significant % of people who support him and their true views about the world we live in.
 
Look... He's appealing to moderates. I know I know, you don't have to blah blah blah. Except you do... that's how the Democrats took back the House in 2018. Suburbanites were the real difference maker in 2016.

The only way a progressive agenda is ever being accomplished in this country is to control everything. If you want any hope of controlling both houses, you need a blow out in 2020; a wave that carries a couple if underdogs down ballot across the finish line.

So yes, it's delusional to think that McConnell will change. Which is why you absolutely need to neuter him in 2020. The presidency is not enough.

A leftist is not carrying a wave, and thus will be completely ineffective in the White House. And the reality is the party that wins the White House in 2020 will probably lose at least one house in 2022. So if you want anything to get done, anything to get reversed... you need a fucking blowout in 2020.
 
I was on the fence with impeaching Trump, because it won't remove him from office. I know it'll die in the Senate, but this is insane now! How many more impeachable offenses do the Dems need, before they do something??
 
Last edited:
The tide turned against Nixon when impeachment hearings began. The public is too stupid to read anything about his crimes

This needs to be on tv

Democrats, think of the ratings!!!! HUUUUGEEE. BIGLY!!!
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
Look... He's appealing to moderates. I know I know, you don't have to blah blah blah. Except you do... that's how the Democrats took back the House in 2018. Suburbanites were the real difference maker in 2016.

The only way a progressive agenda is ever being accomplished in this country is to control everything. If you want any hope of controlling both houses, you need a blow out in 2020; a wave that carries a couple if underdogs down ballot across the finish line.

So yes, it's delusional to think that McConnell will change. Which is why you absolutely need to neuter him in 2020. The presidency is not enough.

A leftist is not carrying a wave, and thus will be completely ineffective in the White House. And the reality is the party that wins the White House in 2020 will probably lose at least one house in 2022. So if you want anything to get done, anything to get reversed... you need a fucking blowout in 2020.
Click to expand...
"We can't have a leftist, we need a moderate or else we could risk not getting power back."

"We can't have a leftist, we ran a moderate last time and they won, which is proof that moderates work."

It's never the right time for a leftist, according to the logic of the party that loses governorships and state houses and the Senate and often the House, and the Presidency last time. The people just fucking love moderates.
 
anitram said:
It's beyond delusional of Biden to think that once Trump is gone it will be kumbaya. He is just a symptom of a much more serious underlying disease. In fact it's a massive disservice that he's so revolting because it has concentrated everyone on him and not the deeply disturbing and significant % of people who support him and their true views about the world we live in.
Click to expand...

Ok, Ok. This is getting a little ridiculous now. I get it, there are several people on the forum who will take any sort of middle of the road, or bipartisan type statement from Biden and say he is crazy and out of touch and delusional!!!

But lets just try and live in reality for a moment. Let's get really crazy and imagine a wild world that a politician says something or promises something that people want to hear, but he or she really doesn't believe will actually come to pass. I know, this is WAY out there stuff. Politicians usually only tell the straight truth and never say anything hopeful or aspirational, knowing its pretty much a load of shit.

Of COURSE Biden knows that Repubs are not going to come together and hold hands and work to get things done for the better of the country. Just like Warren knows that forgiving every person 50k of their student loans just isn't gonna happen. But they say it because it makes people feel better, it makes them know what that candidate will try and do, even if it doesn't work. And let's be honest. If there is a true blowout in 2020, and its clear people reject Trumpism, and Trump is gone... Its a much better chance that some Repubs try and work together, even in some small way, than if someone eeks out a win by a small percentage and the Senate stays in Repub control.

Now in case you haven't been paying attention to what the non-Twitter portion of the Democratic party (about 80%) is looking for. It's to cut the shit, try and work together to get something good done for the American people. Make some headway with education costs and healthcare and protecting women's reproductive rights, and the environment, and gun laws, and sensible immigration, etc...

And like Headache pointed out. These Dem voters are the ones that brought the largest percentage victory in the history of midterms in 2018. Lots of these were independents and even moderate Republican women, that had enough of Trump. And these are the ones that need to be heard again in 2020. Cause god damn it, they VOTE. You can hear all the whiny twitter bullshit, and high school walkouts all day long, but they vote in horribly low numbers. It's all bluster and no action.

Right now, you see Biden 10, 20 points up because the large majority of the party wants stable, honest, sensible, knowledgeable, leadership that is open to working across the isle in some ways to get things done. Along with someone they know can win, and can stand head to head with Trump.

The statements we are hearing right now from all of the candidates are about branding, and trying to stake out the little section of the party for themselves. With this many people it gets a bit difficult to stand out.
Warren's statements about Fox News, Buttigeig about his journey as a gay man and how that plays into religion in our country now, Harris on equal pay, Biden on restoring the country to a pre-Trump normalcy, Sanders on wealth inequality, etc...

I for one, just want the debates to start. I want to see who will shine, and who will head for the exits.
 
Jerry Dunk said:
"We can't have a leftist, we need a moderate or else we could risk not getting power back."

"We can't have a leftist, we ran a moderate last time and they won, which is proof that moderates work."

It's never the right time for a leftist, according to the logic of the party that loses governorships and state houses and the Senate and often the House, and the Presidency last time. The people just fucking love moderates.
Click to expand...

Seriously?

Democrats flipped seven governorships, six state legislative chambers, and more than 300 state House and Senate seats on election night.

In some states, the consequences are obvious. Maine elected Democrat Janet Mills (Moderate) as its next governor and put Democrats in complete control of the Maine Legislature, which should bring a rapid end to a year-long fight over Medicaid expansion in the state. Tens of thousands of low-income Mainers should soon get health insurance, now that Republican Gov. Paul LePage’s obstruction of a voter-approved ballot referendum is coming to an end, and 70,000 people will gain health insurance.

Democrats even made some important gains in states where they didn’t win legislative control. In Pennsylvania, for example, they merely broke the GOP supermajority in the Senate. After Pennsylvania Republicans last year considered impeaching the state judges who ruled that the state’s congressional maps should be redrawn — which would have required a supermajority in the Senate — that is still a notable achievement for Democrats. Gretchen Whitmer will have to contend with a GOP legislature as Michigan governor, but she still broke full Republican control over the state.

The biggest changes will come in states where Democrats won legislative chambers and the governor’s office. Democrats secured trifectas — control of the governor’s mansion and both state legislative chambers — in Maine, Connecticut, Colorado, Illinois, Nevada, New Mexico, and New York on election night. They will now have total control of 13 states, versus 21 states under full Republican control.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, how many "leftist" victories have we seen that show how much people fucking love leftists? The proof is in who actually wins right? If a leftist can't even win the nomination or primary... than the support just isn't there. It's not a grand conspiracy, its the will of the electorate.
 
Last edited:
Jerry Dunk said:
"We can't have a leftist, we need a moderate or else we could risk not getting power back."



"We can't have a leftist, we ran a moderate last time and they won, which is proof that moderates work."



It's never the right time for a leftist, according to the logic of the party that loses governorships and state houses and the Senate and often the House, and the Presidency last time. The people just fucking love moderates.
Click to expand...

We've had this discussion already. This presidency has proven that the office of the president can be highly effective as an empty vessel. He or she is needed to direct the ship in time of crisis, not be a complete fuck up, and help push the agenda of the party who voted said candidate in.

You need to win elections. We are too vast a nation with too many differing opinions for a one size fits all approach to NATIONAL elections. The GOP has understood this for years. It's what put the Democrats back in control of the house in 2018.

The agenda is what matters, not the candidate.

If there's a candidate who appeals to a broad swath of the electorate, then that's the best candidate. It's then on the Democratic leadership to advance the agenda.

I fully agree that the Democratic party needs to have a more progressive agenda for the country. We certainly disagree on how far left we need to pull right off the bat, but we can work on that. But in order to do this power needs to be grasped by any means necessary. A sweeping rebuke of Trumpism and the GOP as a whole must take place in 2020. If that means that the nice old white guy has to say some nice things about Republicans in order to swing voters (because again, he's not talking to politicians... he's talking to voters) than so be it.

The gerrymandering that led to the GOP dominance in local elections is being undone one court case at a time. Trumpism is driving even right leaning moderates and independents to the left. This is a time to seize power back, by taking the White House, and by putting the right candidates in the right races. That means leftist candidates in the +10 blue districts to push the agenda further left, and purple candidates in the swing districts to maintain power. And it means someone who can win in a rout at the top of the ticket.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Headache in a Suitcase
  • Locked
  • Sticky
Reminder - Forum Downtime for Software Update Begins January 23, 2024.
Replies
0
Views
289
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Janet H
Forum Downtime - software update 1/23-24
Replies
13
Views
694
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
Janet H
Mobile App Changes
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
Janet H
Janet H
dan_smee
I listened to No Line on the Horizon right through tonight for the first time in about 10 years…
2 3
Replies
83
Views
2K
lazarus
lazarus
MrsSpringsteen
Gilead States Of America
Replies
16
Views
925
MrsSpringsteen
MrsSpringsteen

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom