Jump to content

us politics and elections thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Here's the magic: Since Trump doesn't give a **** about inequality or declining real wages it doesn't matter.

It's literally a chain email that boomers forward to each other.    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/canadian-health-care/

Posted Images

8 minutes ago, Andrews_31 said:

My money is on the latter.

the issue i have with the 'dems bad' response, at least in this case, is that are are fundamentally no good alternatives. another shutdown isn't tenable because the gop loves it when government appears dysfunctional and doesn't actually care about the people hurt by an extended shutdown. 

in fact nothing the senate does has any bearing on the rest of the actors involved because none of them are beholden to each other. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, achilles return said:

no matter what happens in the senate there's absolutely no pressure on ryan to allow a vote in the house.

I guess the flip side would be while most Americans support doing something to protect the DACAs that support flakes seriously when the budget is on the line and the GOP starts using their "Dems are holding the military hostage" BS. 

I just don't think that's a fight they could have won without it being a pyrrhic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, mdrake34 said:

 

Quote

Neal described her political views to The Daily Freeman as “a little Libertarian,” “a lot liberal” and "mostly progressive.”

“I have this amazing ability to be able to take really complicated policy and break it down into edible sound bites, which is something most porgoressive liberals cannot do,” she told the newspaper.

hmm

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-02-07/the-nra-should-disclose-any-russian-ties

Woooow
 

Quote

The NRA Should Disclose Any Russian Ties

Is it running and gunning with Putin allies?
by
The Editors
Quote

The National Rifle Association has long offered its expertise in politics and public relations to gun groups in Australia, Brazil, Canada and elsewhere. The question now is whether during the 2016 presidential campaign the NRA embraced a very different sort of international mission: serving as a conduit to Donald Trump’s campaign for Russian interests.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is reportedly investigating whether the NRA helped funnel money from Russians into the election, which would violate U.S. election law prohibiting the use of foreign money. In recent years the NRA has developed relationships with several well-connected Russians, including Alexander Torshin, an ally of President Vladimir Putin who is deputy governor of the Russian central bank.

Torshin, who has been implicated in money laundering by Spanish authorities, is also an NRA member. In 2016 he is reported to have met with Donald Trump Jr. at the NRA’s annual meeting in Kentucky, and in 2015 NRA leaders met with Torshin in Moscow.

The NRA has said that the FBI has not contacted it about Russian funds. Curiously, however, the gun group has so far failed to take the simple step of denying that it accepted Russian money at all. The NRA reported spending more than $55 million in the 2016 election, including $30 million on Trump -- more than the organization has spent on any candidate in its history.

Democratic Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, has sent letters to the U.S. Treasury Department and to the NRA requesting information on the group’s ties to Putin allies. Committee chairman Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, should do the same.

The public has the right to know if the NRA served as a backdoor for Putin’s sabotage of the election -- especially given the NRA’s role in lobbying Congress and state governments, and funding political campaigns. Did the NRA receive any money from Russia-linked individuals or entities? Did it facilitate meetings between Russians and members of the Trump campaign? To what end?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2018 at 4:15 PM, WhenFalconsWin said:

They knew the polls weren't wrong, it was a ploy to get the GOP to stay home because they had no chance if Hillary had a big lead and they would be wasting their time going to the polls.  But the ploy didn't work.  But in the end the Dems knew Hillary wouldn't win, the writing was on the wall.  They even canceled her $1 million dollar fireworks display because the knew she wasn't breaking the class ceiling.  

Breaking News: The polls werent wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the Russians will find it more difficult to be as effective in the 2018 elections as they were against Clinton simply because there is no "head" on the ticket. Even if we keep going down the "discredit the rule of law" road, that's really only helping Trump, and he's not really running this year...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WhenFalconsWin said:

Did you go back and read the post?  It has nothing to do with a line of logic.  

This is what you wrote: They knew the polls weren't wrong, it was a ploy to get the GOP to stay home because they had no chance if Hillary had a big lead and they would be wasting their time going to the polls.  But the ploy didn't work.  But in the end the Dems knew Hillary wouldn't win, the writing was on the wall.  They even canceled her $1 million dollar fireworks display because the knew she wasn't breaking the class ceiling.  

So although it has nothing to do with a line of logic, it doesnt appear that absence of logic was a design. 

You've theorized that the polls were right in predicting a HRC win and that those polls were disseminated as an attempt to suppress republican voter turnout to ensure a win which was reflected by the polling? And that this didnt work and GOP voters DID turn out and won the election despite the polls being correct? The polls said HRC would win but they knew she wouldnt win so they cancelled a celebration? 

Yeah, thats all sorts of messed up. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Democrats choosing to target more districts should also result in a bit more intra-party diversity. Which, while challenging, should also help the party really drill down on core beliefs held by all Democrats, even if some differences remain on other issues. 

Maybe its a small needle to thread but I think it would be best for the longterm outlook. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...