US PoliERA 2018 |OT10| McConnell is "mule piss"
- Thread starter Midnight Jon
- Start date
- Status
Kidnapping a prime minister and bombing a bus full of children are past criticisms. Just like 9/11. Nobody needs to hear about it.
Meh I'm not going to get pissed with Schumer over some early morning faux pas after he was kinda baited by Kornacki
He clearly wanted to talk about healthcare.
I'm far more upset with him over him bending over to Turtle's deal regarding judges (even with some Obama nominees in the deal)
He clearly wanted to talk about healthcare.
I'm far more upset with him over him bending over to Turtle's deal regarding judges (even with some Obama nominees in the deal)
Democrats are angry but Schumer says "Let's play nice." And then Trump calls him Cryin' Chuck.
Dems need to purge their current high profile members from power and bring up lesser known but more working class people. Otherwise the right will always have these boogeymen and women to point to to rile up the right and independents against them. You can't shit on new people as easily because no one has pre-formed opinions. No matter what Chuck and Nancy do, the right hate hate hate them and have talking points queued up. It doesn't matter what the right thinks of them of course, but it poisons the well of independents and nonvoters.
Schumer has too much of a non-confrontational personality to be the leader the party needs right now. Sure he can get all huffy and puffy in front of a camera but when it comes time to call people out directly, he melts. He doesn't want a fight. He needs to go.
I don't know that my beef with Sen. Schumer is specific to him or to the transactional generation he represents, but this is just not the message to be repeating right now. Don't feed the dumb conversation about what is or is not PC, or whether we want to be PC or not, because it's dumb and really repetitive.
In another time, his attitude and temperament would have been appropriate. Right now, he needs to at least not say those things while pining for the "good old days" when the Republicans were the opposition and not the enemy. But they're the enemy and they've said as much. McConnell's greatest accomplishment was denying Judge Garland a seat and fighting President Obama to the bitter end. At least don't be so flaccid in front of a competitor like that, sheesh.
In another time, his attitude and temperament would have been appropriate. Right now, he needs to at least not say those things while pining for the "good old days" when the Republicans were the opposition and not the enemy. But they're the enemy and they've said as much. McConnell's greatest accomplishment was denying Judge Garland a seat and fighting President Obama to the bitter end. At least don't be so flaccid in front of a competitor like that, sheesh.
There's no reason to throw out everyone, just the ones that are bad. Nancy is a good leader, Chuck is not. No need to tie them to each other.
Schumer became leader only last year, and they've already destroyed his reputation and made him into a figure of ridicule. It takes them no time.
I want him to go for the sake of our party. I don't want Republicans choosing my leadership.
*Chuck does something bad*
"Fuck him. Also get rid of Nancy too!"
Every. Time.
But to be fair, Schumer has been in the spotlight for a long ass time. We need new blood. Pass the torch.
Nancy is a debatable pick for speaker, maybe someone more progressive could step up instead but she also has a decent record and she can get the votes when they are needed.
Chuck absolutely has to go.
Chuck absolutely has to go.
Wasserman and Nate Silver actually had an interesting exchange on Twitter, in which Wasserman said:
The replies show MI-07 and CO-03, which for some reason Cook hasn't moved to Lean R, to be two of those districts.
Basically, 538's model shows a few more pickups (35-40 as opposed to Cook's 30-35) because Silver assumes we'll gain a few more Likely R seats; he just doesn't know which ones. Wasserman responded that he could make a case for moving 20 Solid R seat to Likely R and, in his own concern trolly Wasserman way, implied that he expects at least a few to be won by Democrats.
The replies show MI-07 and CO-03, which for some reason Cook hasn't moved to Lean R, to be two of those districts.
Nancy is one of the most progressive voices in the House. You'll have to look at some really young and inexperienced people to find someone more progressive and they are not nearly qualified to be Speaker.
Suddenly someone with an unimpeachably progressive record who has already been Speaker and presided over the most productive Congress since the Great Society is a "debatable pick."
What the hell do people want?
What the hell do people want?
To be excited! And for someone the Republicans can't attack!
So no one.
I'm going to boil this down to its essential truth:
That being said, I wouldn't mind seeing Schumer go.
Get rid of Schumer because he's overly conciliatory and unwilling to force the caucus into line on important symbolic votes, not because he's a "current high profile member." Before 2016, literally all he was known for was being an asshole on the Iran thing. Anybody we put in that position is going to be a lightning rod for GOP attacks and slander, and they're going to become one in very short order.
Basically, give Nancy her gavel back and take Schumer's from him.
Basically, give Nancy her gavel back and take Schumer's from him.
It's not that Pelosi isn't "progressive," it's just that she's been constricted by the political reality.
She had two years of unified Democratic control where her House passed a public option, a cap & trade bill, the DREAM Act, among other things that the Senate stalled on and didn't pass before the Republicans took over.
A "more progressive" Speaker isn't going to outmaneuver Republican majorities and presidents on big ticket items*. Much like the Kavanaugh fight, there's only so much you can do in the minority - oftentimes the fight is lost before it's even started. That doesn't mean you shouldn't fight anyway, but pinning the blame on the caucus leader with less members is irresponsible and ignorant.
*I'm not including your run-of-the-mill budget bills here, where Pelosi actually has scored some significant policy wins dealing with Trump and Ryan. She's very good at what she does and a far better dealmaker than Schumer, considering her caucus has less sway than the Senate which often falls on one vote.
"And just 38 percent of registered voters who are 18 to 34 years say they're almost certain to vote."
That would be more than double 2014.
That number also matches that study recently that projected ~35% turnout among young voters.
I respect him as a pollster, but this non-poll article gets a bit of a side eye.
You mean the same guy that didn't want to nuke the filibuster when we had a fucking trifecta!?
Damn, some of you don't learn your lesson, we do not need people in charge who are going in with the thought of compromise. When I say this, I also mean with the more conservative bastion of the Democrats.
Over 40% turnout would be incredible for that demographic.
People will still bitch about young people not showing up because they'll ignore the context.
Every time Chuck makes an asshole out of himself or runs with the strategy of "Give the GOP at least 90% of what it wants," I'm just going to mournfully shake my head and say or type:
"Mazie would have known what to do."
"Mazie would have known what to do."
Ok I am a little tired today what does the Republican base Dog Whistle Trump that is prattling about with the "Country" tweet refer too?
New voter registration in Arizona is double what it was in 2014. It's especially good with young voters. In fact, the state has already passed young new voters of the 2016 election.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...urges-ahead-2018-midterm-election/1672458002/
https://www.azcentral.com/story/new...urges-ahead-2018-midterm-election/1672458002/
It's just him going "I'm not ASHAMED to be an AMERICAN and I'm not AFRAID to make sure EVERYONE knows."
I mean, Reid did nuke the filibuster for judicial/executive appointments, but he should have done it for the legislature as well, yes.
Frankly I think he'd be more open to the idea now, anyway. It's not like it was just Reid in 09-10, Obama really sold and believed himself to be this post-partisan President, repairing the bridges, healing the divides etc. I don't think there was much appetite within the party apparatus as a whole to get rid of it, especially since they had 60 anyway so in theory it wasn't an obstacle.
Lately though we've been seeing the younger crop of senators bring up removing it and I could see the idea gaining far more momentum with the next Democratic President.
Keep in mind that even McConnell, who's as ruthless as they come won't do it, even with Trump regularly pressuring him to do it. I understand the GOP has more to lose without it than the Democrats do, but pinning Reid for this seems a bit unfair.
I thought it was interesting that Hirono endorsed the deal Schumer made with the judges.
Perhaps she just didn't want to speak too out of line, or maybe she just felt the Obama judges were worth it.
40% turnout in 18-34 year old voters would be... I don't have the numbers in front of me, but wouldn't that basically be a death knell for the GOP? Assuming the other demographics don't match the upswing (and I'm not sure they can, in some cases - there's not room for the number of 65+ voters to double).
- Status