US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening

cameron · Sep 15, 2019

ABC News @ABC

Sen. Ted Cruz on calls to impeach Justice Brett Kavanaugh amid report of another allegation: "I think that follows up with the rather shameful circus we saw during the confirmation hearing... it really is another sign of how nasty and divided the time is." http://abcn.ws/2mirTIw

9:40 AM - Sep 15, 2019

Walter Shaub @waltshaub

Eyewitnesses often get attacked by supporters of the one whose conduct was witnessed. Before that happens, I'd like to add that Max Stier is well respected by both sides of the aisle, nonpartisan, smart and absolutely devoted to good government without regard to who's in power. https://twitter.com/JaneMayerNYer/status/1173204905533853703 …

Jane Mayer @JaneMayerNYer

And Max Stier is no slouch of a witness- he is a Rhodes Scholar, Stanford Law grad, fmr. Supreme Court Clerk, runs a bipartisan center for public service and is the star of Michael Lewis' last book. https://twitter.com/clarajeffery/status/1173036314817511425 …

8:00 AM - Sep 15, 2019

8:24 AM - Sep 15, 2019

shiba5 · Sep 15, 2019

Just read some of the #KavanaughLied tweets. The FBI failed it's duty to investigate a serial sex abuser and now he has a lifetime appointment.
What can we even do anymore?

Fuck Collins.

dlauv · Sep 15, 2019

shinra-bansho said:
How. The. Fuck. Is this still the state of public opinion in the US?

It's not.

Support for an assault weapons ban is stronger among Democrats, at 86 percent, based on the poll. Forty-six percent of Republicans and 58 percent of independents said they are in favor of a ban.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/457481-two-thirds-support-assault-weapons-ban-fox-news-poll

And here's the support for mandatory buybacks.

Linkura · Sep 15, 2019

shinra-bansho said:
??? Half your country is pretty much irredeemably abhorrent.

I mean... yeah?

shinra-bansho · Sep 15, 2019

Maybe it's how Gallup phrases their question, or that they haven't done one recently.

Politico/Morning Consult poll: Nearly 70% of all voters would back a ban on assault rifles. (In a New York Times op-ed in August, Biden cited that statistic.) More than 91 percent supported requiring background checks for all gun sales.

Fox News poll: 67% supported banning assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons. The poll found 90% support for background checks on all gun buyers including at shows and private sales.

NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll: 57% said Congress should pass a ban on the sale of semi-automatic assault guns such as the AK-47 or the AR-15. The poll found 83% support for requiring background checks for gun purchases at gun shows or other private sales

Washington Post/ABC News poll: 56% support a ban on the sale of assault weapons. 89% support requiring background checks for all potential gun buyers.

HuffPost/YouGov poll: 59% favor an assault weapons ban and 81% favored background checks.

Although these were all immediately around the El Paso shooting.

Toth · Sep 15, 2019

Can they also drag that worthless Flake and his fake 'emotional distress' with Kavanaugh?

dlauv · Sep 15, 2019

shinra-bansho said:
Maybe it's how Gallup phrases their question, or that they haven't done one recently.
Although these were all immediately around the El Paso shooting.

Huge step up from 40%.

You realize the 40% number you posted was from 2018, right? Am I missing a poll?

2018 Oct 1-10 For 40% Against 57%

Edit: Here's another good one.

shinra-bansho · Sep 15, 2019

dlauv said:
Huge step up from 40%.

You realize the 40% number you posted was from 2018, right? Am I missing a poll?

I was just looking at Gallup data since they have a time series.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/1645/guns.aspx

chadskin · Sep 15, 2019

Tamanon said:
Meh... there's a difference between them saying it, and them playing a clip of Beto saying it. Either way, it probably helped his national profile a bit more, but killed his VP chances.

And his Senate chances. So dumb.

shinra-bansho · Sep 15, 2019

On buybacks, it doesn't look like there's clear consensus in polling.

A Quinnipiac poll released Aug. 29 found that 46% of Americans favored a "mandatory buyback of assault weapons, which would mean that people who own assault weapons would be required to turn them in and be compensated with money," while 49% opposed the idea. In a sharp partisan divide, 71% of Democrats said they support the idea while just 18% of Republicans backed it.

The Monmouth University survey found that 56 percent approve of a ban on assault rifles and semi-automatic weapons, while 38 percent oppose it.
Pollsters also found that 53 percent disagree with implementing a mandatory buyback program for assault weapons owned by private citizens, compared to 43 percent who support it.

Guns are stupid though and should all be destroyed.

Amibguous Cad · Sep 15, 2019

Kirblar said:
Yes, he is economically illiterate. Want more housing available at cheaper prices? You. Build. More. Fucking. Housing.

Look, I was once fucking blown away by the Coase theorem, and Pigovian taxes and the idea of Pareto optimality, too. It looked like there were positive-sum policy choices to be made everywhere, that a properly designed system of property rights and structured markets could build a world much more prosperous than the one we had, one where the gains from trade could be fully realized with a little bit of good will and a technocrats' savvy.

And, actually, I still agree with that. I just don't think naive free marketers consider the political economy of the situation (this is why leftists should be reading libertarians: a grounding in public choice theory and analysis of the political economy of regulation is really useful here). It is possible, in theory, to implement globalization policies such that the displaced workers are no worse off than they were before... but we didn't use tax revenue from NAFTA to pay for a massive public works make work TVA program. Instead, we got anemic and wholly inadequate job training programs. Turns out if you don't have a good analysis of political economy the only parts of your agenda that get implemented are the ones rich people like.

There's this old joke about a theoretical physicist going to a dairy and asking to solve some problem or another, and after a few hours he comes back with "I've got a solution, but it only works for perfectly spherical cows." Economists live in perfectly spherical cow land a lot, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You have to know what the rules are before you can see how real-world situations differ from them. You need to know v = gt before you can account for air resistance. And you need to know why price controls are such a terrible idea in a vacuum before you can consider where the market mechanism has broken down so badly that it's the least bad option.

So I completely agree, at least with the quoted sentiment. If you want lower prices, you build more housing, period, end of story. But I'm not some omnipotent Soviet city planner or Sim City god. I'm constrained by what is possible in the current system. And like, not being facetious at all, if you've got a plan for breaking the back of NIMBYs and making huge cities start to build more affordable housing I'd love to hear it. But in the meantime, landlords are often a softer target than NIMBYs in this environment, and rent control is easier to mobilize popular support for than fast-tracking building permits. And until we reach the millenium, when the lion shall lay down with the lamb and the NIMBY break bread with the homeless, rent control is the best way of making the most of a shitty situation, of at least making sure some of the windfall profits from appreciating land values find their way to people who aren't landlords.

Amusingly, the Brookings article contains this little gem:

Brookings said:
The economic magnitude of the effect of rent control removal on the value of Cambridge's housing stock is large, boosting property values by $2.0 billion between 1994 and 2004. Of this total effect, only $300 million is accounted for by the direct effect of decontrol on formerly controlled units, while $1.7 billion is due to the indirect effect. These estimates imply that more than half of the capitalized cost of rent control was borne by owners of never-controlled properties. Rent controlled properties create substantial negative externalities on the nearby housing market, lowering the amenity value of these neighborhoods and making them less desirable places to live. In short, the policy imposed $2.0 billion in costs to local property owners, but only $300 million of that cost was transferred to renters in rent-controlled apartments.

Which, translated from economist-speak, means that the majority of the costs of rent control are in the fact that people don't want to live next to the poors.

Boo. Fucking. Hoo.

dlauv · Sep 15, 2019

Yeah, but it's still polling higher than Bernie's or Warren's immigration and healthcare plans. The idea that it's a catastrophic talking point is probably inaccurate. Especially the idea that Texans wouldn't entertain the idea in the slightest. Two of the shootings in the past month have been here - with AR-15s no less.

Madison · Sep 15, 2019

shinra-bansho said:
Guns are stupid though and should all be destroyed.

100%

cameron · Sep 15, 2019

Chuck Todd @chucktodd

I asked @clairecmc what Democrats should do with the latest allegation against Kavanaugh.

"I'm not sure honestly. That was such a mess. And what it did for those of us who were running, it crystallized how bad Washington is." #MTP

10:03 AM - Sep 15, 2019

Matthew Yglesias @mattyglesias

Kavanaugh's return to the news reminds me that I think congressional Democrats quietly feel that anti-K protestors pushed them too far in opposition in ways that hurt them in senate races, and this plays a big part in explaining why they demobilized mass resistance in 2019.

They don't want protests that would dramatize Trump's corruption and lawless stonewalling of legitimate investigations because they're afraid of where mass pressure might end up pushing them.

Trump is already unpopular, the thinking goes, so better not to rock the boat.

Ah ... yes ... as I was saying ... McCaskill's view is she'd have been better off if 10-20 Dems had taken a dive and the whole thing hadn't been a big story. https://twitter.com/chucktodd/status/1173235870419365895?s=21 …

10:12 AM - Sep 15, 2019 · Washington, DC

lmcfigs · Sep 15, 2019

the FBI is almost completely useless when it comes to holding these people accountable

Diablos · Sep 15, 2019

shiba5 said:
Just read some of the #KavanaughLied tweets. The FBI failed it's duty to investigate a serial sex abuser and now he has a lifetime appointment.
What can we even do anymore?

Fuck Collins.

Nothing. It's better to not think about it because he's there for life. There is literally nothing anyone can do.

shiba5 · Sep 15, 2019

Diablos said:
Nothing. It's better to not think about it because he's there for life. There is literally nothing anyone can do.

It's hard to not get extremely demoralized by this disgusting shit.

lmcfigs · Sep 15, 2019

Amibguous Cad said:
Look, I was once fucking blown away by the Coase theorem, and Pigovian taxes and the idea of Pareto optimality, too. It looked like there were positive-sum policy choices to be made everywhere, that a properly designed system of property rights and structured markets could build a world much more prosperous than the one we had, one where the gains from trade could be fully realized with a little bit of good will and a technocrats' savvy.

And, actually, I still agree with that. I just don't think naive free marketers consider the political economy of the situation (this is why leftists should be reading libertarians: a grounding in public choice theory and analysis of the political economy of regulation is really useful here). It is possible, in theory, to implement globalization policies such that the displaced workers are no worse off than they were before... but we didn't use tax revenue from NAFTA to pay for a massive public works make work TVA program. Instead, we got anemic and wholly inadequate job training programs. Turns out if you don't have a good analysis of political economy the only parts of your agenda that get implemented are the ones rich people like.

There's this old joke about a theoretical physicist going to a dairy and asking to solve some problem or another, and after a few hours he comes back with "I've got a solution, but it only works for perfectly spherical cows." Economists live in perfectly spherical cow land a lot, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You have to know what the rules are before you can see how real-world situations differ from them. You need to know v = gt before you can account for air resistance. And you need to know why price controls are such a terrible idea in a vacuum before you can consider where the market mechanism has broken down so badly that it's the least bad option.

So I completely agree, at least with the quoted sentiment. If you want lower prices, you build more housing, period, end of story. But I'm not some omnipotent Soviet city planner or Sim City god. I'm constrained by what is possible in the current system. And like, not being facetious at all, if you've got a plan for breaking the back of NIMBYs and making huge cities start to build more affordable housing I'd love to hear it. But in the meantime, landlords are often a softer target than NIMBYs in this environment, and rent control is easier to mobilize popular support for than fast-tracking building permits. And until we reach the millenium, when the lion shall lay down with the lamb and the NIMBY break bread with the homeless, rent control is the best way of making the most of a shitty situation, of at least making sure some of the windfall profits from appreciating land values find their way to people who aren't landlords.

Amusingly, the Brookings article contains this little gem:

Which, translated from economist-speak, means that the majority of the costs of rent control are in the fact that people don't want to live next to the poors.

Boo. Fucking. Hoo.

Yeah I was going to make a comment about kirblar living in an Econ textbook. I don't think he's wrong that the superior thing to do is build more apartments rather than rent control. but "economically illiterate" is very much an exaggeration. It's maybe not the best solution to the problem, but these are actual policies in the real world in major cities. And Sander's plan for housing also includes creating 2 million new units. So the criticism is strange.

KingK · Sep 15, 2019

Amibguous Cad said:
Look, I was once fucking blown away by the Coase theorem, and Pigovian taxes and the idea of Pareto optimality, too. It looked like there were positive-sum policy choices to be made everywhere, that a properly designed system of property rights and structured markets could build a world much more prosperous than the one we had, one where the gains from trade could be fully realized with a little bit of good will and a technocrats' savvy.

And, actually, I still agree with that. I just don't think naive free marketers consider the political economy of the situation (this is why leftists should be reading libertarians: a grounding in public choice theory and analysis of the political economy of regulation is really useful here). It is possible, in theory, to implement globalization policies such that the displaced workers are no worse off than they were before... but we didn't use tax revenue from NAFTA to pay for a massive public works make work TVA program. Instead, we got anemic and wholly inadequate job training programs. Turns out if you don't have a good analysis of political economy the only parts of your agenda that get implemented are the ones rich people like.

There's this old joke about a theoretical physicist going to a dairy and asking to solve some problem or another, and after a few hours he comes back with "I've got a solution, but it only works for perfectly spherical cows." Economists live in perfectly spherical cow land a lot, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. You have to know what the rules are before you can see how real-world situations differ from them. You need to know v = gt before you can account for air resistance. And you need to know why price controls are such a terrible idea in a vacuum before you can consider where the market mechanism has broken down so badly that it's the least bad option.

So I completely agree, at least with the quoted sentiment. If you want lower prices, you build more housing, period, end of story. But I'm not some omnipotent Soviet city planner or Sim City god. I'm constrained by what is possible in the current system. And like, not being facetious at all, if you've got a plan for breaking the back of NIMBYs and making huge cities start to build more affordable housing I'd love to hear it. But in the meantime, landlords are often a softer target than NIMBYs in this environment, and rent control is easier to mobilize popular support for than fast-tracking building permits. And until we reach the millenium, when the lion shall lay down with the lamb and the NIMBY break bread with the homeless, rent control is the best way of making the most of a shitty situation, of at least making sure some of the windfall profits from appreciating land values find their way to people who aren't landlords.

Amusingly, the Brookings article contains this little gem:

Which, translated from economist-speak, means that the majority of the costs of rent control are in the fact that people don't want to live next to the poors.

Boo. Fucking. Hoo.

Excellent fucking post, btw

Diablos · Sep 15, 2019

shiba5 said:
It's hard to not get extremely demoralized by this disgusting shit.

It really is. But short of impeaching Kavanaugh there is no way for him to be removed unless he voluntarily steps down. Collins et al have failed the country.

OmniOne · Sep 15, 2019

I still think Collins will not run.

Autodidact · Sep 15, 2019

OmniOne said:
I still think Collins will not run.

Please.

Stinkles · Sep 15, 2019

Ithil said:
You say this like they don't go "SOCIALIST COASTAL ELITE GUN GRABBING SOCIALIST" about every Dem candidate of every race.

Sure but she's the shorthand "proof" and bonus - a threateningly attractive woman of color.

Beto is a Trump favorite too so he's now a fantastic asset for the NRA. I think the GOP and the NRA might be a bad combo this year though. Their shit is extremely polluted and we're only seeing the tip of LaPierre's luxurious dues-funded iceberg.

skycamefalling · Sep 15, 2019

dlauv said:
It's not.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/457481-two-thirds-support-assault-weapons-ban-fox-news-poll

And here's the support for mandatory buybacks.

I want black choppers descending on red states, liberal storm troopers kicking down doors to take the guns. Televised gun destructions. Gigantic firework displays powered by bullets and gun powder.

Amibguous Cad · Sep 15, 2019

If you really wanted to be neoliberal about it you could grant a property right to current renters in their ability to buy the place at rent controlled prices. This would allow people displaced by gentrification to at least get a windfall to start their lives someplace else at, in addition to allowing people to stay indefinitely if they wanted.

Sheldon · Sep 15, 2019

dlauv said:
lol, Didn't he make a big deal about not worrying about what Republicans will think back in July? Why's he acting like a worm?

Pete Buttigieg went to Harvard, earned a Rhodes scholarship, learned seven languages and ran for President as the mayor of a small town in Indiana only to agree with Chris Cillizza on politics.

Linkura · Sep 15, 2019

Sheldon said:
Pete Buttigieg's went to Harvard, earned a Rhodes scholarship, learned seven languages and ran for President as a mayor of a small town in Indiana only to agree with Chris Cillizza on politics.

Yeouch.

Madison · Sep 15, 2019

Lol Pete was cancelled months ago get with the program

lmcfigs · Sep 15, 2019

who signs up to go to Afganistan after graduating Harvard. what an asshole

JVID · Sep 15, 2019

it's not like assault type weapons are going to become more favorable to the public between now and the election. more people WILL die. and every time it happens Betos proposal will seem less "insane".

dlauv · Sep 15, 2019

JVIDICAN said:
it's not like assault type weapons are going to become more favorable to the public between now and the election. more people WILL die. and every time it happens Betos proposal will seem less "insane".

yeah i hesitated to call it "politically evergreen" because that seems insensitive and we haven't seen much post-debate polling, but i agree

Kusagari · Sep 15, 2019

Are we still pretending Pete doesn't suck?

Blue Skies · Sep 15, 2019

JVIDICAN said:
it's not like assault type weapons are going to become more favorable to the public between now and the election. more people WILL die. and every time it happens Betos proposal will seem less "insane".

The sad truth

Stinkles · Sep 15, 2019

shinra-bansho said:
How. The. Fuck. Is this still the state of public opinion in the US?
So weird.
??? Half your country is pretty much irredeemably abhorrent.

I remind myself of this every day in traffic as I watch a calamitous cavalcade of dangerous idiocy play itself out on the freeway like a ballet of reckless dullards -- as easily thirty percent of drivers are texting, tailgating, obliviously camping in the passing lane or swerving from lane to lane as they steer with their knees while answering email on their phone and applying makeup with their "free" hand -- or accelerating to prevent you from merging or changing lanes because you were foolish enough to reveal your plan by using your signals. And that's just the regular stupidity with no politics or racism or mysoginy in it.

I will say that some chunk of the people who don't want assault rifles banned are rationally betting that a plateau is an achievable goal and knee-jerk reject additional government mandates even as they abhor guns.

There will also be some percentage of anal literalists who just want to correct misconceptions about the difference between an AR15 and a hunting rifle of the same caliber - the same folks who derail discussion to correct the use of magazine vs clip and so on - yet vote for sensible gun regulation on the rare occasion it gets on a ballot.

American poll respondents may supply opinions that are counter to their voting and philosophy - and many Americans including lots of liberals have a reflexive reaction to government over reach.

If the poll was phrased, "do you support a voluntary nationwide buyback of AR15 and other assault rifles and a ban on large capacity magazines and future restrictions on rate of fire and capacity for powerful long guns?" You'd probably see a different response balance.

I'm glad Beto tore off the rhetorical band aid but practically speaking there's no appetite for his approach at the national level and sadly incrementalism will have a better shot.

SatelliteOfLove · Sep 15, 2019

The thing Coons and Co. are failing at is not just pointing out the nuts will spin this but to damn them for spinning it.

lmcfigs said:
the FBI is almost completely useless when it comes to holding these people accountable

It was never to be. Remember back a year to how it happened. Federal police used as a veneer on a farce.

Stinkles said:
Sure but she's the shorthand "proof" and bonus - a threateningly attractive woman of color.

Beto is a Trump favorite too so he's now a fantastic asset for the NRA. I think the GOP and the NRA might be a bad combo this year though. Their shit is extremely polluted and we're only seeing the tip of LaPierre's luxurious dues-funded iceberg.

+ $30m Russian money and Torshin's little visits.

Like, it's an anchor, certainly, and will blow up when the inevitable probably-white supremecist terrorist unloads on an airport or something, but the people desperate to not face facts they support losers who increasingly fall in the polls who are some of the worst scum of the earth will still bring forth the most unimaginable pain grasping for that excuse to avoid that shame.

dead souls · Sep 15, 2019

Sheldon said:
Pete Buttigieg went to Harvard, earned a Rhodes scholarship, learned seven languages and ran for President as the mayor of a small town in Indiana only to agree with Chris Cillizza on politics.

Buttigieg is trash. I don't know how anyone can like him. Just 100% elitist scum.

cameron · Sep 15, 2019

Kamala Harris @KamalaHarris

I sat through those hearings. Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people. He was put on the Court through a sham process and his place on the Court is an insult to the pursuit of truth and justice.

He must be impeached.

11:03 AM - Sep 15, 2019

Chikor · Sep 15, 2019

shiba5 said:
Just read some of the #KavanaughLied tweets. The FBI failed it's duty to investigate a serial sex abuser and now he has a lifetime appointment.
What can we even do anymore?

Fuck Collins.

We can start by stop hoping that the FBI is gonna be a magical solution for political problems.
It's a pretty shit agency and it has a really bad history and track record.

DinosaurusRex · Sep 15, 2019

lmcfigs said:
who signs up to go to Afganistan after graduating Harvard. what an asshole

Someone who plans on running for President.

Chikor said:
We can start by stop hoping that the FBI is gonna be a magical solution for political problems.
It's a pretty shit agency and it has a really bad history and track record.

So much this

lmcfigs · Sep 15, 2019

Brett Kavanaugh is self-impeaching everyday

shinra-bansho · Sep 15, 2019

I read something that rang true to me about Harris. She used to have moments on the Senate Judiciary that boosted her profile and popularity. And she managed to effectively make one again against Officer Joe.

But I think since then her campaign has been trying to manufacture more moments and it doesn't work.

Stinkles · Sep 15, 2019

He is to gun violence as

cameron said:
Kamala Harris @KamalaHarris

I sat through those hearings. Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people. He was put on the Court through a sham process and his place on the Court is an insult to the pursuit of truth and justice.

He must be impeached.

11:03 AM - Sep 15, 2019

oh you think having the FBI whitewash a rapist to fasttrack him to 5he supreme court was peak fuckery?

What if we gave the lawyers who helped him lie to Congress and smear his victims an extremely coveted award normally reserved for the prosecution of mafia and terrorists?

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/09/barr-justice-department-award-brett-kavanaugh/

Barr might just be more disgraceful than McConnell and I hope the pie faced cretinous traitor gets investigated when this is over.

shiba5 · Sep 15, 2019

Chikor said:
We can start by stop hoping that the FBI is gonna be a magical solution for political problems.
It's a pretty shit agency and it has a really bad history and track record.

You're right. I had the naive hope for basic competence.

legacyzero · Sep 15, 2019

I could stand to sit through more hours of Brett screaming like a psychopath, sure.

Royalan · Sep 15, 2019

Biden is giving a stirring speech on race right now, but all it's doing is highlight a central problem for him with me.

It's easy for a Democrat to preach about the sins of the past. It's easy to get up in front of a black congregation on a Sunday and preach about slavery. Preach about Jim Crow and even talking about the harm of white supremacy. It's easy and it sounds good.

But what's the plan going forward? What do you see for Black people in the future? What is the pathway to this better tomorrow our ancestors built, fought and suffered for? What are the issues, and the misconceptions, that are making things difficult for us today? And you don't have to talk in numbers and spreadsheets on that. That wouldn't be appropriate. But all this oratory power and certainty Biden is employing to remind us of where Black come from and how bad we had...apply some of that to what are future could look like with you?

When Harris, Booker (and Warren to a lesser extent, but that she's included at all here is why she's easily my second choice) talk to Black people, the past is only a point of reference. The meat of their conversations with black people is ALWAYS in "this is what a better future looks like, and here are the plans I have to get there."

Biden can only talk about the past. Heck, when he tries to talk about the future is usually when he fucks up.

Chikor · Sep 15, 2019

shiba5 said:
You're right. I had the naive hope for basic competence.

We are all bombarded with soft propaganda telling US how awesome of a crime fighting agency it is. Fuck, we have whole TV shows dedicated to that. But if you look at history, it has been mostly shit.

I mean, look at fucking Mindhunters, criminal profiling is somewhere between tarot reading and "scientists hate him: follow these 5 simple steps to catch a serial killer". Yet to this day we still act like they're some sort of super geniuses who protect us from serial killers with that garbage.

Royalan · Sep 15, 2019

Chikor said:
I mean, look at fucking Mindhunters, criminal profiling is somewhere between tarot reading and "scientists hate him: follow these 5 simple steps to catch a serial killer". Yet to this day we still act like they're some sort of super geniuses who protect us from serial killers with that garbage.

~Black People be Knoooooowiiiinnnnn~

chadskin · Sep 15, 2019

JVIDICAN said:
it's not like assault type weapons are going to become more favorable to the public between now and the election. more people WILL die.

That's why all the top five candidates support background checks, red flaw lags, a ban on the sale of new assault weapons and voluntary gun buy-back programs, and other than Biden they also support a federal gun licensing system. But I don't think they should undermine their GE chances to entertain the musings of a fledgling campaign trying to remain relevant.

Absent · Sep 15, 2019

cameron said:
ABC News @ABC

Sen. Ted Cruz on calls to impeach Justice Brett Kavanaugh amid report of another allegation: "I think that follows up with the rather shameful circus we saw during the confirmation hearing... it really is another sign of how nasty and divided the time is." http://abcn.ws/2mirTIw

9:40 AM - Sep 15, 2019

Walter Shaub @waltshaub

Eyewitnesses often get attacked by supporters of the one whose conduct was witnessed. Before that happens, I'd like to add that Max Stier is well respected by both sides of the aisle, nonpartisan, smart and absolutely devoted to good government without regard to who's in power. https://twitter.com/JaneMayerNYer/status/1173204905533853703 …

Jane Mayer @JaneMayerNYer

And Max Stier is no slouch of a witness- he is a Rhodes Scholar, Stanford Law grad, fmr. Supreme Court Clerk, runs a bipartisan center for public service and is the star of Michael Lewis' last book. https://twitter.com/clarajeffery/status/1173036314817511425 …

8:00 AM - Sep 15, 2019

8:24 AM - Sep 15, 2019

I hope you're happy, Collins.

Linkura · Sep 15, 2019

Absent said:
I hope you're happy, Collins.

She doesn't give a single fuck. Old white woman who won't have to deal with the consequences.

Meanwhile I've told my husband I'd strongly consider sterilization- if I could find a doctor to do it for a woman with no kids- if they fuck with Roe v. Wade. A med I take comes with a high risk of severe birth defects, such as anencephaly. I take the pill, but if that doesn't work, abortion is a fallback. If they take that away, absolutely no way in fuck am I carrying a child with severe birth defects.

This is something Simply Susan will never have to worry about. She's a fuck you, got mines.

US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening

I shed

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer

has a title.

I shed

has a title.

Prophet of Truth - One Winged Slayer

I shed

I can say DEI; you can't.

I can say DEI; you can't.