Page 2 of 27 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 396

Thread: 2019 American Political Scene

  1. #16
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,164
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Pretty sure most of my hair will be gray by the end of the year. At this point I expect this "trade war" to continue spiraling out of control. Would not be surprised to see full-blown Constiutional crisis depending on the Mueller Report. I really wouldn't be shocked to see enough GOPers defect and start nuking the Presidency so someone could get set-up for a 2020 run.

    Dem hopefuls to declare this year?
    -Warren (obviously already running)
    -Beto (I don't see why he wouldn't at this point)
    -Booker
    -Harris
    -Gillibrand
    -Biden
    -Brown
    -Klobuchar? (she's slimy as shit, but seems to be pretty much Teflon, at least in MN)

    I don't vote for Democrats, but I'll totally make an exception for The Rock (even though he's already decided not to run). The least offensive of the above candidates is probably Biden, who is also the least likely to run. The rest of them piss me off more than Obama or HRC ever did.
    This is why I want Trump to win another term. The Country should get the benefit of the person they voted for. Just like (an odd aside here) Britain should get to leave EU (leave means leave) and enjoy the benefits of that.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  2. #17
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Pretty sure most of my hair will be gray by the end of the year. At this point I expect this "trade war" to continue spiraling out of control. Would not be surprised to see full-blown Constiutional crisis depending on the Mueller Report. I really wouldn't be shocked to see enough GOPers defect and start nuking the Presidency so someone could get set-up for a 2020 run.

    Dem hopefuls to declare this year?
    -Warren (obviously already running)
    -Beto (I don't see why he wouldn't at this point)
    -Booker
    -Harris
    -Gillibrand
    -Biden
    -Brown
    -Klobuchar? (she's slimy as shit, but seems to be pretty much Teflon, at least in MN)

    I don't vote for Democrats, but I'll totally make an exception for The Rock (even though he's already decided not to run). The least offensive of the above candidates is probably Biden, who is also the least likely to run. The rest of them piss me off more than Obama or HRC ever did.
    It is really hard to get terribly excited about Middle-of-the-Roaders like the list above (with the exception of Warren, who's left-of-center).
    And, that's one of the biggest problems in American politics today: there is no excitement about normal, centrist politicians.
    If you're not bat-shit crazy, you're ignored by the media.
    Sad.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  3. #18
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,643
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    It is really hard to get terribly excited about Middle-of-the-Roaders like the list above (with the exception of Warren, who's left-of-center).
    And, that's one of the biggest problems in American politics today: there is no excitement about normal, centrist politicians.
    If you're not bat-shit crazy, you're ignored by the media.
    Sad.
    Warren would excite me if I were a Trump voter. A poster child for 'ivory tower elites' (read: people with a tertiary education who don't vote GOP) who spent ages telling people she was native American, and with worse political instincts than a house plant. She or Bernie would be a godsend to him - fortunately he appears to be struggling already.

    I wouldn't worry too much about an 'excitement deficit' this far out. The credible ones will start to emerge by mid year.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,626
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    i could say the same for the GOP and Schwarzenegger...oh wait, I -did- vote for him, lol.



    an odd group of folks to be pissed off about...none of them evoke much emotion from me. all of them standard Dem, policies won't vary much. AFAIK the only person in that whole bunch that evokes more than a "meh" reaction for me is Gillibrand (and that in a negative way).
    Most of the front-runners are all conservative bugbears, which is essentially the position you get yourself into when you start running for President in 2017 (or earlier, in the case of Warren). Sherrod Brown is just another trade-nativist and the MN Senator is skeezy as hell. Absent any of the other bologna, and taking out Biden, the best of the bunch is probably Booker.

    I admit that O'Rourke's fanbase annoys me far more than O'Rourke himself does and it's difficult for me to separate the two. I suspect he, along with Booker, would hopefully direct the nation in a way that's not too ridiculously left, as opposed to Harris or Warren. I also suspect he would be much less effective than Booker, though that may just because he looks like a nerd that you'd give swirlies too and Booker looks like he can go a round or two in the UFC ring.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    The Soviets staged their own coup against their own puppet Hafizullah Amin for being "too commie". Do some reading.

    Nor were they withdrawing from Poland.. they were there to help impose martial law from 1981-83.
    The Soviets aren't the first to coup one of their erstwhile allies during a counter-insurgency campaign. The US did the same thing in Vietnam because the ruling government was ridiculously corrupt and incompetent. If you aren't holding that against the US, you can't hold it against the USSR.
    Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989. By 1989 Solidary was leading the governing coalition in Poland. The Baltic human chains were around that time as well, but can't remember the exact year.
    Yeah, in the context of 1981, you would arm the Mujahdeen, and you might even keep doing it in 1989, but with hindsight 20/20, you aren't accomplishing anything. By 1991 the Soviet Union doesn't even exist and Russia doesn't even border Afghanistan, and even if it did, Russia can't even stomp out insurgents in its own country. You just don't get anything, and you make it easier for the Taliban to take hold in the 90s. We'd be way better off if Afghanistan had turned into something like Uzbekistan as opposed to the hellhole it is now. It's not like the Red Army can use it as a springboard to invade Iran or Pakistan.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,553
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    The Soviets aren't the first to coup one of their erstwhile allies during a counter-insurgency campaign. The US did the same thing in Vietnam because the ruling government was ridiculously corrupt and incompetent. If you aren't holding that against the US, you can't hold it against the USSR.
    Berlin Wall collapsed in 1989. By 1989 Solidary was leading the governing coalition in Poland. The Baltic human chains were around that time as well, but can't remember the exact year.
    Yeah, in the context of 1981, you would arm the Mujahdeen, and you might even keep doing it in 1989, but with hindsight 20/20, you aren't accomplishing anything. By 1991 the Soviet Union doesn't even exist and Russia doesn't even border Afghanistan, and even if it did, Russia can't even stomp out insurgents in its own country. You just don't get anything, and you make it easier for the Taliban to take hold in the 90s. We'd be way better off if Afghanistan had turned into something like Uzbekistan as opposed to the hellhole it is now. It's not like the Red Army can use it as a springboard to invade Iran or Pakistan.
    Who else staged a raid on their own puppet? The Polish elections were in June 1989 and only two years later did Soviet forces begin withdrawing. Then the Hungarians opened the border - after the Solidarity victory in Poland. Putin was still in Dresden though when the Berlin Wall fell. Gorbachev came to power in 1985 being pivotal to all. Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan started in May 1989.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,721
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Yeah, in the context of 1981, you would arm the Mujahdeen, and you might even keep doing it in 1989, but with hindsight 20/20, you aren't accomplishing anything. By 1991 the Soviet Union doesn't even exist and Russia doesn't even border Afghanistan, and even if it did, Russia can't even stomp out insurgents in its own country. You just don't get anything, and you make it easier for the Taliban to take hold in the 90s. We'd be way better off if Afghanistan had turned into something like Uzbekistan as opposed to the hellhole it is now. It's not like the Red Army can use it as a springboard to invade Iran or Pakistan.
    In context, you need a Stalin to win Afghanistan and I don't know if that would be a good thing for us in the West.

    Do recall how the last time Afghanistan was conquered - by Genghis Khan. His soldiers, on the penalty of death for failure, were ordered to collect 300 heads each. That's men, women, and children. If he/she had a head, he/she was going to lose it or the soldier lost his.

    Stalin got rid of his Chechen problem by deporting the population to Siberia and he emptied Central Asia of men of fighting age into his WWII armies by threatening their families with the same Siberia deportation. I don't think even Putin got the stomach for this kind of butchering.

    Within context, a man such as Stalin would not only have conquered Afghanistan but would also have kept the USSR AND the Warsaw Pact together. As bad as Afghanistan is, it ain't nowhere close to the 39,000+ nukes aiming at us.

  7. #22
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,238
    Good morning, Mr President.
    These are the people who will be taking over the key House committees, and making your life miserable for the next two years.
    Oh, and by the way: I quit.

    House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence — Adam Schiff (D-CA). 18 year House veteran. He voted for the invasion of Iraq, because “our intelligence was dead wrong on that, on Saddam at that time.” Following Supreme Court striking down campaign finance reform, Rep. Schiff introduced a constitutional amendment that would have reversed the Citizens United and other decisions. Introduced a successful amendment to tightly restrict gathering foreign intelligence within the US, NSA metadata telephone monitoring and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Co-authored with Mike Pence and Chris Dodd the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act of 2010. After receiving a briefing by the CIA, Rep. Schiff pointed out that President Trump was lying in his comments about CIA findings.

    Oversight Committee — Elijah Cummings (D-Md), 13 term House veteran and Congressional Progressive Caucus member. Rep. Cummings has a long track record in areas such as defending whistle-blowers, securing administrative electronic records. In his new role, he will be in charge of investigating the President’s personal business affairs and he and his companies’ relationships with foreign governments. As ranking minority leader, he unsuccessfully filed for subpoenas to investigate migrant children separated from their families, former EPA chief Scott Pruitt’s ethics and the administration’s handling of Hurricane Maria.

    Judiciary Committee — Jerry Nadler (D-NY), and a member of the House since 1992 and a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. As committee chair, Rep. Nadler held hearings to bring impeachment charges against President George W. Bush (2008). To bring charges against Mr. Trump, he says he would need “charges so grave and evidence so clear” that even GOPers would support impeachment. He is on the record supporting freedom of choice and freedom to marry.

    Ways and Means Committee — Richard Neal (D-Ma) has been in the House since 1989. He is a long-time opponent of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) and has advocated requiring contractors for the government to pay federal taxes on workers hired through off-shore companies. He has been highly active in trade issues, mainly in reducing the cost of living through lower import barriers. Rep. Neal was one of the key barriers to President George W. Bush’s efforts to privatize Social Security. He voted against the invasion of Iraq. Under a never-tested 1924 law, the Ways and Means Committee Chair can request from the IRS any individual’s tax returns.

    Financial Services — Maxine Waters (D-CA)
    Foreign Affairs Committee — Eliot Engel (D-NY)
    Energy and Commerce — Frank Pallone (D-NJ)
    Natural Resources — Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)
    Veterans’ Affairs — Mark Takano (D-CA)
    Science, Space, and Technology — (Ms) Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  8. #23
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,224
    Judiciary Committee — Jerry Nadler (D-NY) To bring charges against Mr. Trump, he says he would need “charges so grave and evidence so clear” that even GOPers would support impeachment.
    Absolutely correct attitude to have. Pelosi needs to do some of that party discipline shit and rein in idiots like Tlaib.

    Ways and Means Committee — Under a never-tested 1924 law, the Ways and Means Committee Chair can request from the IRS any individual’s tax returns.
    Yet another Tsar Bomba that's about to explode in Trump's face. Shoulda stayed in New York there Donnie.

    Oh and for those that're complaining that this shouldn't be used as a "political weapon" or some such bullshit, there is ample reason to investigate Donald Trump and his entire organization for tax evasion and fraud.
    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if the Senate determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role… because impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”
    ~ Lindsey Graham

    "The notion that you can withhold information and documents from Congress no matter whether you are the party in power or not in power is wrong. Respect for the rule of law must mean something, irrespective of the vicissitudes of political cycles."
    ~ Trey Gowdy

  9. #24
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,113
    Absolutely correct attitude to have. Pelosi needs to do some of that party discipline shit and rein in idiots like Tlaib.
    Tlaib got some public finger-wagging (and probably something stronger in private), but in the end, party discipline is about the votes.

    the GOP tried scoring some political points here, but given the proclivities of POTUS they retreated from the issue pretty quickly.

    by the way, something interesting i've noticed-- Trump has insulted just about everyone EXCEPT Nancy Pelosi, even though it's not reciprocated. "Cryin' Chuck" is probably wondering why she gets the respect and he doesn't, lol.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  10. #25
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,113
    Warren would excite me if I were a Trump voter. A poster child for 'ivory tower elites' (read: people with a tertiary education who don't vote GOP) who spent ages telling people she was native American, and with worse political instincts than a house plant. She or Bernie would be a godsend to him - fortunately he appears to be struggling already.
    unfortunately i agree, even tho Warren actually knows what she's talking about. but she looks like this when she's trying to kick back:

    Name:  elizabeth-warren-beer-t.jpg
Views: 369
Size:  38.6 KB

    yet this also shows the engrained misogyny that's still rampant in US politics. look at Mitt Romney-- blue-blood family, graduated from Stanford, completely tone-deaf. national politician.

    ivory tower elite? George W Bush, graduate of Yale and Harvard Business School.

    Paul Ryan. characterized as the "wonky conservative" (even tho his numbers NEVER added up) and advocated extremely unpopular policies, yet was seen for a while as future Presidential material.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  11. #26
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    unfortunately i agree, even tho Warren actually knows what she's talking about. but she looks like this when she's trying to kick back:

    Name:  elizabeth-warren-beer-t.jpg
Views: 369
Size:  38.6 KB
    I thought the best possible candidate was someone the average voter would like to have a beer with ... I guess that only works with GOPers.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  12. #27
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,238
    John Bolton is the last adult standing.
    God help us.

    https://www.ft.com/content/f199a438-...1-4ff78404524e
    John Bolton puts brakes on Trump withdrawal from Syria
    US national security adviser insists Turkey must agree not to attack Kurdish militias
    Laura Pitel, Financial Times, January 6, 2019

    The White House’s top security official has given the first indication that President Donald Trump is rethinking a decision to rapidly withdraw US troops from Syria, saying Turkey must first promise not to attack anti-regime Kurdish militia before American forces pull out.

    Speaking to reporters in Jerusalem before travelling to Turkey on Monday, John Bolton said Washington was demanding guarantees for Kurdish forces who formed the backbone of the US campaign against Isis jihadis but now fear an assault by Turkey.

    “We do not think the Turks ought to undertake military action that is not fully co-ordinated with and agreed to by the United States at a minimum so they do not endanger our troops, but also so that they meet the president’s requirement that the Syrian opposition forces that have fought with us are not endangered,” said Mr Bolton.

    Asked if that meant that the withdrawal of an estimated 2,000 US military personnel in the region would not take place until Turkey ensured the safety of Kurdish fighters, Mr Trump’s national security adviser said: “Basically, that is right.”

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish president, has repeatedly vowed to launch a military offensive in north-eastern Syria to clear the region of members of the YPG militia, which has close links to insurgents who have waged a three-decade armed campaign in Turkey.

    Following the US president’s surprise announcement last month that Isis had been defeated in Syria and that American troops would soon depart, Mr Erdogan restated his plan to attack the group, as well as promising that Turkey would take over the battle against Isis.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  13. #28
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Dec 06
    Posts
    1,149
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    unfortunately i agree, even tho Warren actually knows what she's talking about. but she looks like this when she's trying to kick back:


    yet this also shows the engrained misogyny that's still rampant in US politics. look at Mitt Romney-- blue-blood family, graduated from Stanford, completely tone-deaf. national politician.

    ivory tower elite? George W Bush, graduate of Yale and Harvard Business School.

    Paul Ryan. characterized as the "wonky conservative" (even tho his numbers NEVER added up) and advocated extremely unpopular policies, yet was seen for a while as future Presidential material.
    I'm not sure it is misogyny. If Warren was chanting "Build that wall!" the republican base would have turned out in droves to her rallies and cheered the video where she kicks back with a beer and pointed out that she's just like them.

  14. #29
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,113
    well, notice that none of the three GOP politicians named have been for the wall (i think), yet neither the GOP or the media talks about their "likability" or their "ability to connect".

    i notice that similarly with Nancy Pelosi. she's often used as a bugaboo, yet what differentiates her from another Dem politico like Biden?
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  15. #30
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,626
    Uhhhhhh...
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.fdb7cd61bb3f
    Romney’s problem: Americans don’t like him as much as Obama, polls say
    Biden comes across as more likable than Pelosi or Warren. Warren probably only seems likable if you are already progressive, and "instagram beer session" comes across as pure pandering mimickry of Occasio-Cortez. Romney was definitely painted as an out-of-touch, rich boy capitalist, Dubya was shredded in the national media for being a buffoon, and Paul Ryan got slightly more favorable treatment but had his leadership routinely questioned (since Tea Party Revolt was the story of his tenure). He also never ran for President.

    Becoming President is hard, everyone is going to carry a liability that can cost them the election.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2018 American Political Scene
    By astralis in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 2014
    Last Post: 31 Dec 18,, 00:27
  2. 2017 American Political Scene
    By YellowFever in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 2571
    Last Post: 29 Dec 17,, 21:34
  3. American political duplication between Riyadh and Israel
    By ahmed in forum International Politics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 29 Apr 07,, 22:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •