-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening
- Thread starter Ogodei
- Start date
- Status
45 making the bold move of tweeting at people that don't give a fuck who he is.
Because his cover was probably blown if too many dots got connected after Trump's intel leak.
Putin: "Good job wrecking your relationships with your allies and NATO. Today I want you to get rid of any spies you have in my country."
Trump: "Yes, sir, right away sir."
Good, now don't turn your back on us when the Democrats actually do pass gun laws and get pummeled at the polls by gun nuts.
I wonder how this plays, I know a lot of contrarian, "both parties are full of shit" queens in the drag circles I've interacted with.
Well, the information IS in the article.
And the quoted portion, actually.
Well assets where being killed according the to Steel hearings. They disclosed someone close to Putin was an asset with direct confirmation that Putin himself gave the go ahead to the election meddling operation. Trump would happily give them all up to cover his ass.
So they didn't get murdered when trump blabbed about it. Or tweeted it.
Edit:
Also this decision was made after the Lavrov meeting which was the day after he fired Comey, no one knew wtf was going on and they were probably rightfully freaking out.
If this is Kamala's new angle, it's a good one. All the "Copmala" shit is a smear. Fact is, she has progressive record as a prosecutor and AG (minor missteps aside). She has actual things she's accomplished in CA, and it's the one thing that sets her apart from her field. She should run on that, not from it.
Exciting! Trump loves fighting losing battles against leverage holders.
They say that now, wait until Trump gets TrumpTV launched after he (hopefully) loses next year and spends all day whining about how unfair everyone was to him (including Fox News) and how his presidency was just four wasted years.
Anyway, more proof that Warren is one of the good guys:
.@ewarren endorses the Justice Democrats-backed Jessica Cisneros in her primary challenge against Rep. Henry Cuellar: https://www.texastribune.org/2019/0...texas-us-rep-henry-cuellars-democratic-prima/
Cuellar represents a heavily Democratic district in Texas but voted with him 69% (nice) of the time in the last Congress.
In fairness, since the new Congress took over he's only voted with the administration's position 5% of the time according to FiveThirtyEight, but this could be out of fear of a primary challenge more than anything else (and also Pelosi being far less likely to bring up conservative legislation).
https://t.co/GElPrpQOSU
Thank God he responded, I was worried the news wasn't going to gain traction
Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible.
11:01 AM - 8 Nov 2013
Ah, so there are documents. How come he always denies stuff when there are documents?
Please do it Fred
He also says that Biden could beat Trump in Michigan in 2020 so I wouldn't be surprised if he endorses Biden after announcing retirement
Of course Airmen, flying a military plane, can just decide where to refuel and stay without anyone approving the flight or funds beforehand...
I think back to something Cohen (I think?) said. When Trump tells these easily disproven lies, the point isn't that you believe him. The point is that you go along with his preferred reality.
And when we're in a moment where Republicans either fall in line behind the lie or resign, Democrats tut-tut on Twitter, and the news media calls him out for one news cycle before it's on to the next thing, going along with Trump's preferred reality is almost what happens.
Guiliani is the gift that keeps on giving
good, Lipinski is garbage
I'm not sure this post belongs here...but damn if it didn't hit me hard.
Dreamcast the goat.
I remember my best friend growing up got one on launch. As soon as we got it hooked up excited as can be, the power went out. It was absolute torture.
Around like 2009, 2010 i got a brand new one sealed from I think Thinkgeek for a hundred bucks. They out of nowhere had a bunch of stock I think they were the winning bidders on a warehouse full of em.
Which also reminds me 1999 as the year of my political awareness starting. Man that 2000 bullshit was terrible.
I have an autographed copy of Al Gore's "The Assault on Reason".
I remember my best friend growing up got one on launch. As soon as we got it hooked up excited as can be, the power went out. It was absolute torture.
Around like 2009, 2010 i got a brand new one sealed from I think Thinkgeek for a hundred bucks. They out of nowhere had a bunch of stock I think they were the winning bidders on a warehouse full of em.
Which also reminds me 1999 as the year of my political awareness starting. Man that 2000 bullshit was terrible.
I have an autographed copy of Al Gore's "The Assault on Reason".
Last edited:
I think the reality most voters are having to deal with (and why we saw such massive turnout in 2018) is that no, you can not just trust the system to ensure that everything will be fine, the only person who can truly hold Trump, Republicans, Democrats, whoever you want to blame at any given moment accountable is you.
There are no failsafes in the Constitution or law that prevents a total lunatic from assuming power. On paper, the Electoral College is supposed to do that, but in practice the electors are generally partisan hacks (for good reason), so no help there.
The only real line of defense for checks and balances are Congress, but voters gave Trump a Republican Congress to deal with initially, and partisan polarization has become too extreme to allow party members (on either side, the Democrats less so) to step too far out of line. There's a reason the only Republican Congressman to call for Trump's impeachment immediately dropped the party label. There's also the judiciary, but hey, guess what? That's been stacked with Republican appointees who will rubber stamp any Trump action that comes before them (Roberts nixed the Census question, but only because Trump wasn't subtly evil enough). The conservative majority on the Supreme Court? Appointed exclusively by Republican presidents who came into power after losing the popular vote, including Gorsuch whose nomination was stolen from Obama.
Ironically a lot of the time it was the nihilistic, faux-realist "both sides are the same, maaan" morons who were scrambling for anything to get us out of the specific jam of having Trump be our president, sharing articles in December of 2016 about how the Electoral College could still totally make Bernie the president, proudly boasting that congressional gridlock would prevent Trump from getting any super-conservative justices on the Court and that we could just flood their hotline to pressure them into making favorable decisions (which goes against, you know, the entire point of the courts being technically nonpartisan and insulated from populist concerns).
The truth is, for a long time politics was just something people put their blind faith into that our elected officials were working with our best interest at heart, and that it was something you could safely ignore outside of a few months surrounding the presidential election. This is especially true for the eight years during which Obama was president - liberals did not take Republicans seriously, sat out elections and watched as Republican governors and state legislatures ravaged public services state by state, because ultimately Obama held the veto pen and could prevent anything REALLY bad from happening. This also led to a lot of misplaced blame - I had liberal friends ask me in earnest why Obama didn't just demand Rick Snyder resign during the Flint water crisis, as if this was some unique power the President had and was simply choosing not to enforce. Or why he wasn't pushing for a constitutional amendment to ban Citizens United, something that even at the Democrats' peak of power under his presidency would absolutely not have passed. This mindset carried on through Clinton's candidacy - even if they didn't vote for her, liberals felt it was safe to assume that she would win the presidency and prevent bad legislation and judges from happening at the federal level.
If there is one silver lining of Trump's presidency, it is that it is exposing the limitations of our system, both in stopping crazy assholes from taking power and exploiting executive power to say, lock children up in cages as well as his ability to actually do anything. He signed an executive order on day 1 that "repealed Obamacare" and those same liberals were asking me if this meant that Obamacare was repealed. No, it doesn't, because the President can't just executive order away giant social programs. Just like how your lord and savior Bernie Sanders couldn't just sign an executive order giving everyone free healthcare and college, or bully Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell into legislating them if need be.
Of course, that's only a silver lining if Trump loses, but civic engagement remains the same. If Trump loses and everyone breathes a sigh of relief because thank God, that asshole is gone, I don't have to care about politics anymore and turnout drops to 30% in the next midterm and Republicans win everything so they can stymie the next president, the pain and suffering under Trump's term will amount to absolutely nothing.
I don't know exactly when I got on the Gaming-Age forums, but it was well before I got my launch Dreamcast. Wow.
(In my head canon, this is the real continuance of that place.)
Teen Vogue wrote an article about Warren's efforts to get more women to run for office
Kind of works to undercut the "Warren's a bad candidate because she underperformed Clinton in her home state" narrative too - she did so because she wasn't even really trying, and a Senate race isn't going to attract nearly the same awareness a presidential campaign will.
Anyway, good on her. I hope this points to a President Warren who takes an active interest in candidate recruitment and success even during midterm cycles, as opposed to Obama who basically blew all of that off and just let 2010 happen.
Kind of works to undercut the "Warren's a bad candidate because she underperformed Clinton in her home state" narrative too - she did so because she wasn't even really trying, and a Senate race isn't going to attract nearly the same awareness a presidential campaign will.
Anyway, good on her. I hope this points to a President Warren who takes an active interest in candidate recruitment and success even during midterm cycles, as opposed to Obama who basically blew all of that off and just let 2010 happen.
- Status