Politics Episode 7: Remake of Episode 4

[Gromnir]

 

As coup attempts go, this one is creative: https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-create-panel-remove-trump-office-quietly-picks-democratic-support-124521145.html

Yeah...that's not a good solution. These dummies never realize the simple fact that once you set a precedent...for example, stealing a supreme court justice...it often comes back to bite you in the butt later on, 

 

maybe not a great example.  the likelihood o' a Court Justice dying or becoming incapacitated during an election year is smallish.  is possible such will not happen again in your lifetime. 'course Justice appointment were not actual particular political 'til relative recent in history.  Justice is qualified? well then, you got a new Justice. am personal able to recall a time before bork were a verb.

 

perhaps a better example were the democrats under obama killing the filibuster for all Presidential appointees save for SCOTUS. bad precedent. were no surprise when republicans removed filibuster for SCOTUS appointees, yes?  is gonna be many Presidential appointees over the next few decades who we is gonna look back with benefit o' hindsight and wish it were a bit more difficult to manage a senate confirmation. 

 

steal a Justice? based 'pon history such were a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.  heck, would shock us to once again be witness to the unlikely confluence o' all relevant circumstances which made such an appointment delay possible.  am actual giving mitch mcconnell credit for pulling off the political feat.  nothing mcconnell did before, or will do in the future, is gonna have as much impact on the American political landscape than his delay o' the Court appointment.  he bet a hard six, and won. congrats to the old buzzard.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited July 2, 2017 by Gromnir

[Bartimaeus]

Definitely small, but given that it's happened five times in the last hundred years or so (most recently under Reagan), it's probably likely to happen again...unless the SC gets more politicized than it is, and justices start resigning early in order to help pack the court - as of now, that doesn't seem to be the case, though, as justices seem to (wisely) hold themselves separate from any party or political leanings. It is pretty unlikely, though, that the Democrats will ever make them pay for it, that I'll agree to. It's actually more likely that they'll lose even more ground in the SC unless things hold as they are until around 2021, at the very earliest (...assuming a Democrat presidency). That's a lot to ask for of both Kennedy and especially Ginsberg, and, well, the odds are against it. If something like this were to happen again, it's probably most likely during the Trump/Pence presidency, actually, if the Dems manage to wrestle control of the Senate this upcoming election cycle: I could see them going full obstructionist with any new picks. An unfortunate sign for the state of our democracy if that ends up being the case...but hey, we were obviously already there before any such scenario.

 

As for McConnell...that's the unfortunate truth, I suppose.

[Gromnir]

Definitely small, but given that it's happened five times in the last hundred years or so

no it hasn't. again for this situation to be relevant one needs a Justice to die or become incapacitated during the final year o' a President's term, and one needs have the party opposing the President in control o' the senate. don't expect to see this again any time soon.  is highly unlikely to bite any current senator in the arse, and why would they care if 100 years from now something similar happens? 100 years from now, even if there is a republican party, chances are it will be much different from the current republicans.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Bartimaeus]

I agreed to that already - your original statement did not include the "opposing party" bit, which is what I was replying to with that: "the likelihood o' a Court Justice dying or becoming incapacitated during an election year is smallish."

Edited July 2, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[Gromnir]

I agreed to that already - your original statement did not include the "opposing party" bit, which is what I was replying to with that: "the likelihood o' a Court Justice dying or becoming incapacitated during an election year is smallish."

no good reason for ignoring our later comments.

 

*shrug*

 

your whole point were 'bout this kinda thing biting folks in the keister.  is a smallish chance o' this kinda thing coming back to haunt the republicans anytime soon.  to bite in the arse, need have opposition in control of the senate during a Presidential election year when a Justice dies or becomes incapacitated.  should be obvious why mcconnell and other republicans weren't worried seeing as how they had nothing to lose.

 

even then, five times in 100 years would still be extreme rare, no?  with medical tech being what it is nowadays, the complete unexpected death o' a Justice is actual becoming less likely.  kennedy and ginsburg is the folks most likely to retire or die soonish.  am suspecting ginsburg will hold onto the bench with cold dead hands for as long as possible.  any similar scenario involving antagonistic President and senate is at least three years remote.  

 

"it often comes back to bite you in the butt later on."

 

nope. chances is possible but pretty darn slim for any current serving senator to need face a butt mangling. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Malcador]

As coup attempts go, this one is creative: https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-create-panel-remove-trump-office-quietly-picks-democratic-support-124521145.html

Wouldn't that end up with Pence in charge?

 

Need some way of eliminating everyone until Mattis is in charge.

[Guard Dog]

The Democrats are just as tragically stupid as the Republicans with this impeachment and other Trump removal talk. Take a good look at what's going on around here. Trump completely undermines his own team's best efforts everytime he opens his mouth or turns on his phone. The Obamacare Lite or whatever they are calling the Senate Healthcare bill today is dead meat and every hates the House version (the AHCA). The Republicans have been calling for the repeal and replacement of the ACA for eight doggone years. They had eight doggone years to decide what to do. Clearly they never expected to be able to do it because they never invested any serious thought on HOW to do it. And now the best idea they can come up is half-assed Obamacare. All their supporters who hated the ACA will hate half-assed ACA. The Democrats and their supporters don't want anything they do to succeed they will hate it no matter what. If I was the leader of the DNC I'd tell everyone to just STFU and stay out of the way while the Republicans do what they always do: piss off so many of their own supporters they get stay home in droves in 2018 and 2020 and the party gets creamed in the elections. Republican voters get very angry when voting Republican gets them Democrat Lite. 

 

As for getting rid of Trump, why on earth would the Dems want that? Pence is smart, pragmatic, and practical. He might even do a decent job as President. If you give him three years he might even be hard to beat. He's not likely to make a fool of himself and pick stupid fights with media nobodies. Three more years of Trump tweeting, bombast, and general jackassery and all they have to do in 2020 is not run another Hillary Clinton (yes that mean you Elizabeth Warren). 

 

Personally I hope they keep it up. I hope they get right in the pig pen with him and mud wrestle him until you can't tell one from the other. I'd like nothing better that for the whole country to see what a sad, sick joke their two political parties have become. Maybe then they will realize there are other choices, some of which have some very good ideas. 

[HoonDing]

Guess Trump is gonna tweet Remove Kebab video tomorrow.

[Bartimaeus]

 

I agreed to that already - your original statement did not include the "opposing party" bit, which is what I was replying to with that: "the likelihood o' a Court Justice dying or becoming incapacitated during an election year is smallish."

no good reason for ignoring our later comments.

 

*shrug*

 

your whole point were 'bout this kinda thing biting folks in the keister.  is a smallish chance o' this kinda thing coming back to haunt the republicans anytime soon.  to bite in the arse, need have opposition in control of the senate during a Presidential election year when a Justice dies or becomes incapacitated.  should be obvious why mcconnell and other republicans weren't worried seeing as how they had nothing to lose.

 

even then, five times in 100 years would still be extreme rare, no?  with medical tech being what it is nowadays, the complete unexpected death o' a Justice is actual becoming less likely.  kennedy and ginsburg is the folks most likely to retire or die soonish.  am suspecting ginsburg will hold onto the bench with cold dead hands for as long as possible.  any similar scenario involving antagonistic President and senate is at least three years remote.  

 

"it often comes back to bite you in the butt later on."

 

nope. chances is possible but pretty darn slim for any current serving senator to need face a butt mangling. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

"no good reason for ignoring our later comments."

 

Well, uh, isn't that kind of exactly what you're doing to me? From the rest of my post, it was clear that I understood what you were getting at and agreed, right? "It is pretty unlikely, though, that the Democrats will ever make them pay for it, that I'll agree to." After that, I even said things were more likely to get worse for the dems in this area than anything else (as I also mentioned, as you just did, that Ginsburg and Kennedy are the most likely to go, either of which would hurt the dems, Ginsburg especially). I mean, I didn't know if you knew off-hand that it had happened five times over the past hundred years, which is why I mentioned it when you said it hadn't...and then I proceeded to agree with you in the rest of my post.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Bartimaeus

[Elerond]

The Democrats are just as tragically stupid as the Republicans with this impeachment and other Trump removal talk. 

 

It isn't necessary best strategy for Democrats as party, but for individual democrats it seems to be work well. As they get constantly free time in press, their base likes every mention of such, it also worked quite well for individual republicans during Obama's presidency (them talking impeaching Obama or removing him from office because he isn't born in USA and so on). 

[Zoraptor]

Guess Trump is gonna tweet Remove Kebab video tomorrow.

 

But what logo will Accordion Man's head be replaced with?

 

I do have to admit to being highly amused by descriptions of Trump clothesling Vince McMahon as showing him 'assaulting' someone and inciting violence. Much of the point is that CNN's 'news' is as fake as wrestling, and it's doubly fake violence as well. Pearl Clutching MSM, Sad!

 

After all, the guy being 'assaulted' put Trump in the wrestling hall of fame and Trump employs his wife as Secretary for Small Business or whatever.

[Malcador]

Had expected them to elect some sort of SA/Codex style poster before a typical Twitter ****-poster, to be honest.

[Blarghagh]

Much of the point is that CNN's 'news' is as fake as wrestling, and it's doubly fake violence as well.

And Trump fake wrestling represents the publicity he enjoys from the back on forth with CNN as if he's not deliberately inciting this bull. Solipsism and narcissistic personality disorder, I tell ya!

[Valsuelm]

 

Much of the point is that CNN's 'news' is as fake as wrestling, and it's doubly fake violence as well.

And Trump fake wrestling represents the publicity he enjoys from the back on forth with CNN as if he's not deliberately inciting this bull. Solipsism and narcissistic personality disorder, I tell ya!

 

 

[Agiel]

Just so you know, the person who created that .gif also posted this (name censored to keep language reasonably clean):

 

 

It's looking more <<The Plot Against America>>  by the day.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Agiel

[Valsuelm]

Is that supposed to mean they're all Jewish? Or all Zionists?

 

CNN is undoubtedly a pro Israel organization, as is pretty much every other 'mainstream media' outlet in the U.S.. That's nothing new.

[Agiel]

I'd say that it means they're all Jewish, an attitude couched in a phobia towards the "10 ft tall subterranean Jewish lizard bankers"; the far-Right in the US is quite happy to help all the Jews go the Holy Land... at which point they better learn to accept the Lord Jesus as their saviour if they know what's good for them since that was supposed to be what pre-saged the Rapture.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Agiel

[Valsuelm]

I'd say that it means they're all Jewish couched in an attitude that stinks of a phobia towards the "10 ft tall subterranean Jewish lizard bankers"; the far-Right in the US is quite happy to help all the Jews go the Holy Land... at which point they better learn to accept the Lord Jesus as their saviour if they know what's good for them since that was supposed to be what pre-saged the Rapture.

 

huh?

 

 

I didn't realize they were 10ft tall.

 

lol

 

Edited July 3, 2017 by Valsuelm

[Agiel]

I think we're rapidly approaching the point in which for security's sake all files on White House staff computers will have to be transcribed via 1950's typewriter for the following administration, then the computers summarily thrown into incinerators and the ash and cinders locked in a electro-magnetic-shielded sealed vault at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Who knows what kind of malware got onto those machines.

Edited July 3, 2017 by Agiel

[Orogun01]

This thread is weird.

[Valsuelm]

This thread is weird.

 

Considering it's a bad remake of a previous thread, weird is about as good as it's going to get.

[Gorth]

Closing the thread due to arbitrary length. More weirdness here