All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Tami]

Rep. Collin Peterson likely to vote against impeachment as it's 'too divisive'

Rep. Collin Peterson, who previously said he opposed impeaching the president as he seeks to hold on to Minnesota's 7th District, has not been moved to change his opinion by the public hearings that has laid out the case against Trump.

Democrats are filing two articles of impeachment against the president: the first for abuse of power, relating to his efforts to solicit investigations against Democratic rival Joe Biden from the Ukraine while withholding financial aid: the second for obstruction of Congress by ordering government officials not to testify and refusing to hand over subpoenaed documents relating to Ukraine.

Nonetheless, Rep. Peterson is likely to vote against impeaching Trump, even though the votes will likely pass the House given the size of the Democratic majority.

Peterson was one of just two Democratic representatives to vote against launching the impeachment in the first place, and on Monday told a CNN reporter he will likely vote against all articles of impeachment because it would be "too divisive."

[GindyPosts]

Rep. Jeff Van Drew, anti-impeachment Democrat, expected to switch parties after Trump meeting



Oh boy, that's not going to go over well in NJ.

More info

Van Drew party switch imminent

I don't think is going to hurt the Democrats, but it will be a jerking off moment for the right wing bloggosphere. The man has a longstanding record of conservative viewpoints and managed to only get elected on the Democratic ticket after so many tries, so in effect, he was a DINO. The issue is that Republicans now have to contend with an unpopular candidate in a vulnerable seat that's going to be most likely kicked out of office in 2020 and replaced with, you guessed it, another Democrat. So, in essen

However, this does raise the issue Democratic parties throughout the states as well as the DCCC have going against them, and that is how they pick and choose their candidates for battle, as well as which candidates they are willing to support and which ones they just will leave fending off the wolves by themselves. As much as I haven't been a fan of the Trevor Noah incarnation of the Daily Show, this video highlights a case of what happens when a candidate is stuck fighting what the Democratic Party has deemed an automatic loss, to which it's more baffling when they choose to support more questionable candidates like Van Drew, who has a 100% supportive rating from the NRA, and opposed increasing the state's minimum wage & supporting same sex marriage. Then again, they keep Collin Peterson around in Minnesota despite him literally being the ultimate DINO.

[numberthirty]

Well, if this is your analogy of choice than you are agreeing with me. There is no legislative comparison that has any basis for giving Bernie the nod as an "executing" master.
Even your video had scant examples and that was all about his time as mayor. I'm making no judgement on his ideological or electoral accomplishments, only judgements on how successful he has been executing plans into realities. (Because you chose that path)

You just want to take a swing and hope. Fine, just say that.

Sanders has an approach for the here and now. An approach with a record of actually working even against resistance from Democrats and Republicans. While you seem to doubt it, you are doubting it based on Biden's accomplishments in a past that might as well be "The Stone Age".

That anyone is even entertaining the idea that someone who made deals in Congress back then as a strength is baffling. Back then has literally nothing to do with now.

Reagan would be a "Far Left Maverick" in today's Republican Party. The idea that you will be able to easily reach a reasonable compromise with it based on past Congressional achievement is one that I would have to hear someone break down in detail just so that I wouldn't laugh at the very assertion.

That said, what have you seen the current GOP do(exactly) that leads you to believe that Biden's past approach hits anything except "Serious Resistance..." in the here and now?

[numberthirty]

...

How do you know in advance that Sanders is Tyson and not the ten boxers Buster Douglas beat the holy hell out of before he fought Tyson?

But that is a big part of what happened.

...

First, not in advance. I am basing my take on what I have seen thus far. In the scenario that roughly equates to that fight, we are in a third round where Tyson hasn't just laid out Douglas yet.

Second, Biden is Tyson is that scenario. Not Sanders.

While Biden does have a career that would seem to point to he should be having very little trouble here, that has not been the case thus far.

[Tendrin]

I don't agree with a lot of what he says in general but I think his analysis is correct regarding why Tulsi and other fringe candidates can't win and could never have won (the nomination) -

Dooooo not give this guy any v iews ever. He's really that horrible.

[Gray Lensman]

Dooooo not give this guy any v iews ever. He's really that horrible.

I'm not up on who the political channels on YouTube happen to be. Who is this guy?

[numberthirty]

I'm not up on who the political channels on YouTube happen to be. Who is this guy?

While I'm not "100%" certain, I think someone used to link to this guy's videos a ways back.

While I only watched one, I got kind of a "Morton Downey Jr.(But Less Of An Actual Thinker)..." vibe off of the videos. Absolutely took a minute to consider if it was "Anywhere Near On The Level..." versus "Bit..."

[worstblogever]

It seems congressional Republicans were pissed that they had to come home on a weekend.

I think Nadler was correct on the decision. It seems congressional Republicans used procedural motions to delay the vote, and there was a potential optics problem if the vote occurred in "the dead of night."

I'm really curious about why Bevin issued hundreds of pardons.

Was he doing it to be obnoxious, or is he concerned about overpolicing? What's interesting in the response is that you've got outrage from many of the same corners where people are calling for a lot more pardons.

Yeah, you're not going to be able to remove any judges by executive order.

That would be a unanimous supreme court decision.

We can complain about how Presidents use executive orders, but even those still have limits (IE- You can't have an executive order changing the constitution.)

I forgot about how Republicans tried to impeach Obama during the six years they had the House. The mainstream media has been remarkably quiet on this.

That party line vote must have occurred without any media coverage whatsoever.

Psst... 81 people I've profiled alone called for Obama's impeachment publicly. From everything from non-scandals as created by the Bush administration, to Solyndra, to the IRS Scandal, to Benghazi, to...

I don't know where your head may have been placed for the eight years that you missed all that empty talk that they couldn't execute because THERE WAS NO CRIME.

Difference is, Trump blatantly and knowingly committed crimes. And still is. And your party consists of spineless cowards who would like that to stand.

[Tendrin]

I'm not up on who the political channels on YouTube happen to be. Who is this guy?

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Styxhexenhammer666

Warwick grossly underestimates or outright denies several aspects of the Holocaust.[18] In particular, Warwick doesn't question that the Holocaust took place, but questions what proportion of deaths came through execution instead of famine or disease.
He insists that Zyklon B (which is mostly hydrogen cyanide) was a mostly harmless delousing agent, and Auschwitz was burning through so much of the stuff mostly trying to keep lice from spreading the typhus epidemic brought about by Allied firebombing.[19] This is false as Zyklon B was used in Auschwitz's gas chambers to kill Jewish people.[20] He does admit that maybe the gas was used for the occasional execution; which is an understatement as most Nazi gas chambers used Zyklon B.[21] In the same vein, the "shower" of Auschwitz is supposed to have been an actual shower. The "showers" were in fact disguised gas chambers.[22]
Warwick gave five stars to the obscure book Black Nazis! A Study of Racial Ambivalence in Nazi Germany's Military Establishment:

[Theleviathan]

Sanders has an approach for the here and now. An approach with a record of actually working even against resistance from Democrats and Republicans. While you seem to doubt it, you are doubting it based on Biden's accomplishments in a past that might as well be "The Stone Age".

That anyone is even entertaining the idea that someone who made deals in Congress back then as a strength is baffling. Back then has literally nothing to do with now.

You can't have it both ways: "Biden got stuff done because he made deals Bernie wouldn't" and "Bernie got a lot done" Which is it? If Bernie got things done, he also must have compromised and made deals. No? Yeah, didn't think so. So as an "Executor" he's got no track record. As you made the analogy - you want the puncher's chance.
You openly acknowledge the past reality doesn't favor your candidate. So please, stop pretending otherwise. It's one of his flaws but that doesn't mean he can't. But arguing Biden vs. Bernie on execution favors Bernie is like arguing Buster Douglas vs. Tyson on record favored Buster. It's silly.

[Celgress]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Styxhexenhammer666

I was unaware of this. I have deleted the video link in my original post.

[numberthirty]

You can't have it both ways: "Biden got stuff done because he made deals Bernie wouldn't" and "Bernie got a lot done" Which is it? If Bernie got things done, he also must have compromised and made deals. No? Yeah, didn't think so. So as an "Executor" he's got no track record. As you made the analogy - you want the puncher's chance.
You openly acknowledge the past reality doesn't favor your candidate. So please, stop pretending otherwise. It's one of his flaws but that doesn't mean he can't. But arguing Biden vs. Bernie on execution favors Bernie is like arguing Buster Douglas vs. Tyson on record favored Buster. It's silly.

Put simply, there can be more than one way by just taking a minute to acknowledge actual reality.

Biden's past accomplishments in a system that no longer exists are largely a non-issue because of the simple fact that it no longer exists. Unless you have some recent examples of notable change being made through the GOP deciding to compromise, Biden's accomplishments during a time when they would just amount to a relic or days long since past.

On the other hand, Sanders has a record of getting things done by using a strategy outside of what had been accepted up until that time. The "Past Reality..." that you mention is largely not worth even taking the time to consider because it no longer exists.

As for Tyson/Douglas(politely), you are getting the wrong thing out of it.

It is not "Sanders" versus "Biden".

It is "Biden" versus "Republican Nominee". The takeaway from "Tyson"/"Douglas" was that a lot of people lost their bets by placing them based on Tyson's record up until that fight.

The issue here is that we are already past the point in the fight where it was clear that the Mike Tyson with the record didn't show up to the fight that night, and folks are still placing bets on him instead of even second guessing the obvious reality that the guy whose record bets were based on is not in the ring.

[numberthirty]

As for what Sanders accomplished and why it matters, I'll spare the regulars me going into various quotes from this piece. If someone wants to take a look at the details, the piece is here...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/u...ington-vt.html

Bernie Sanders vs. The Machine

[Mister Mets]

As for what Sanders accomplished and why it matters, I'll spare the regulars me going into various quotes from this piece. If someone wants to take a look at the details, the piece is here...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/27/u...ington-vt.html

Are these applicable to the White House? Getting allies elected in Burlington is a different task than getting Senators elected in red (meaning conservative not socialist) states.

[Tendrin]

I was unaware of this. I have deleted the video link in my original post.

It's good, man. Appreciate the deletion. Holocaust deniers deserve no views.