All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[Tami]

[BeastieRunner]

Any mother jokes yet?

[PaulBullion]

Man, "Whatever..." with that garbage. It's just playing Trump's game. "Scoring Points" probably didn't get a single person in the "For" or "Against" camps to rethink so much as one second of what they think is the correct approach.

If anything, Trump being able to say "Nancy, it's called transparency." shot most of whatever points folks think she "scored" to pieces. Dude got to come right back around to playing his usual jive three card monte.

The bitter tears of all of you Pelosi haters have been delicious. DELISH!

[BeastieRunner]

Well, I wans't expecting that. Que the song, we got another witch!

It looks like the National Enquirer just flipped on Trump. They now confess to burying stories and suppressing them for the purpose of influencing the election. All in coordination with Trump. They specifically cite him in the court docs, and have provided a **** ton of money trail evidence, including a video with Trump, "Bury this, my Russian friends want this gone. Bury. It." Video looks sketchy as Hell, though. Dollars to donuts it's been faked.

National Enquirer owner admits to paying off Playboy model to protect Trump.

Publisher of National Enquirer Cops to Hush-Money Payment: American Media won't be prosecuted, signs plea deal.

The National Enquirer Flips On Donald Trump In Playmate Hush Money Scandal: The National Enquirer’s parent company, AMI, has offered “substantial and important assistance” in an investigation into hush money payments.

Federal prosecutors give National Enquirer publisher immunity over hush-money payment to purported Trump lover.

Publisher of National Enquirer admits paying hush money to help Trump ahead of 2016 election: AMI worked "to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations" about Trump ahead of the 2016 election.

[Tami]

Trump Moves to Deport Vietnam War Refugees

What's next? Korean war? WWII? How far back will he go?

The Trump administration is resuming its efforts to deport certain protected Vietnamese immigrants who have lived in the United States for decades—many of them having fled the country during the Vietnam War.

This is the latest move in the president’s long record of prioritizing harsh immigration and asylum restrictions, and one that’s sure to raise eyebrows—the White House had hesitantly backed off the plan in August before reversing course. In essence, the administration has now decided that Vietnamese immigrants who arrived in the country before the establishment of diplomatic ties between the United States and Vietnam are subject to standard immigration law—meaning they are all eligible for deportation.

The new stance mirrors White House efforts to clamp down on immigration writ large, a frequent complaint of the president’s on the campaign trail and one he links to a litany of ills in the United States.

[Mister Mets]

Pence's only chance to be President is if Trump is impeached. He will never actually win an general election for it.

He's not going to beat Trump in a primary.

His two best shots are if Trump opts not to run again (see LBJ in 1968) or if Trump is forced out/ resigns. Pence does seem like he would continue running for a full term afterwards.

Moderates don't swing elections. Never have. Over the last several years the more ideological candidate won. Trump ran as a far right candidate, Hillary ran to the center as fast as she could once Sanders was dispatched. Obama was portrayed as a socialist leftist in 2012, Romney was portrayed as a moderate who could work effectively in a Democratic state with a Democratic Congress in a primary full of far right loons. Obama ran as a leftist in 2008, McCain was running as the maverick centrist who wasn't afraid to defy his part (even if that's bs). Gore and Kerry were always viewed as more moderate than Bush.

People mistakenly believe there is this mythical group in the middle that wins elections. And the candidate that run to the middle always lose. You know why? Because people fucking hate centrist candidates. They remind them of every sleezy do nothing politician that maintains the status quo they hate. You know who really sits out elections? The people in the base who won't vote if they don't believe in the candidate.

Clinton wasn't running a moderate campaign. Her stated positions and party platform were pretty left-wing.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/25/polit...aft/index.html
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...her-presidency
https://berniesanders.com/democrats-...party-history/

I'm unfamiliar with any argument about how Hillary promised to be more of a centrist than Obama. Did she say she would walk back any of Obama's programs?

Trump also isn't ideologically that extreme. His attitude and rhetoric were problems, but some of his policy suggestions were more moderate (He was against cuts to Social Security and Medicare, He was against foreign intervention in Iraq and Afghanistan.)

There are two interesting larger arguments on the whole moderation VS base turnout argument.

There is the question about whether it's better to go for the center or to go for the base. Moderates will get swing voters, while extreme candidates might get higher turnout on the base. It is worth noting that candidates who win where their party is weak are moderates. Joe Manchin is the most moderate Democratic Senator, and he got reelected in West Viirginia. Phil Scott, Larry Hogan and Charlie Baker are Republican Governors who got reelected in some of the most liberal states in the country.

The other argument for the left is whether it's important to defeat Trump even if it means compromising, or to use this opportunity to implement as much of their agenda as possible when the opposition is so weak. The problem with the latter approach is that it gets hard for centrists and Republicans to be convinced that the left truly sees Trump as a serious threat to the nation's safety if the left is unwilling to give up anything to beat him, and instead view him as an opportunity to go further than otherwise.

Yet another Republican with a funding source that leads back to Putin. smh. You'd think more of the GOP would be looking over their shoulder at their brothers and sisters in Congress. Are there any untainted ones left?? maybe Jeff Flake? but he's gone after this month.

And yes, the Supreme Court needs to take a closer look at their controversial Citizen's United decision. Now can we get an investigation started on Yertle the Turtle McConnell and his dark money sources? Paging Mr. Mueller.....



Thanks for bringing this up. I was going to post this. If Kavanaugh and Roberts continue to vote along these lines, it looks like the Evangelicals got the shaft for backing Trump's Supreme court pick.

It's a bit premature. The case is largely about whether Medicaid recipients have standing to challenge states’ determination of which groups qualify as Medicaid providers.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...-denying-cert/

Part of the rationale for not bringing this further is that granting every person on Medicaid the standing to sue could overwhelm the courts and a state’s ability to decide which providers belong in their Medicaid programs.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...ing-cases.html

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Trump Moves to Deport Vietnam War Refugees

What's next? Korean war? WWII? How far back will he go?

Vietnamese=non white, therefore, kick them out. Simple as that to a raging xenophobe like Trump.

[BeastieRunner]

I swear, everytime this thread says Clinton, Mets and 30 appear.

[JCAll]

I swear, everytime this thread says Clinton, Mets and 30 appear.

[Dalak]

I swear, everytime this thread says Clinton, Mets and 30 appear.

Beetlejuice requires you to say his name thrice, but if you say the magic C word only once . . .

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I swear, everytime this thread says Clinton, Mets and 30 appear.

Pavlov’s Dog, yo.

[Tami]

GOP senator on Trump allegations: I don't care

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) shrugs off news that federal prosecutors implicate President Trump in two crimes committed by his former attorney Michael Cohen.

If you haven't, you need to listen to/watch this video.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

All right. I'm still not a fan of Nancy P. but how can I not support anyone who dunked that hard on Trump in his own office on national television? She gets my support for speaker based entirely on how great a job she did of making him look small. He hates her!

[Tazirai]

GOP senator on Trump allegations: I don't care



If you haven't, you need to listen to/watch this video.

Orrin Hatch didn't have a good day on Twitter lol.

[Mister Mets]

I swear, everytime this thread says Clinton, Mets and 30 appear.

Among other things, I don't have to convince you guys to have a low opinion of Trump. I do talk about other stuff. That post was largely about the question of how to deal with Trump in 2020.

Looking at my last few posts, the topics were

- The War in Yemen (Do we want the Houthi in control?)
- Has Alexandra Ocasia-Cortez made more than one mistake? Why does the right dislike her?
- Can the Democrats impede Meuller's investigation in the rush to impeach Trump?
- Disputes about Federal Land in the West.
- Should we have private land ownership at all/ why does renting exist?
- Will MAGA be viewed the same way as Nazism?
- What was the basis of Kavanaugh and Roberts declining to hear a Medicaid/ Planned Parenthood case?
- What might Pence do in 2020?
- Was Hillary Clinton a moderate? Was Trump far-right? Do moderates swing elections?

Discussion about the losing candidate in the last presidential election is going to come up every now and then in a political discussion, as it's relevant to big questions (IE- Should the Democratic party moderate? Should they go further to the left?) I'll note that the emphasis on the thing I chose to talk about rather than what I actually said implies that there isn't disagreement with the substance of my point.