All purpose news and politics thread part VI: This Is Not The Time For Posing

[Iron Maiden]

This entire family is just repulsive.

"The $3,000-a-month toilet for the Ivanka Trump/Jared Kushner Secret Service detail" via The Washington Post

And just wait until Trump is out of office. I think they will still be getting Secret Service protection for the whole family.

[Robotman]

And just wait until Trump is out of office. I think they will still be getting Secret Service protection for the whole family.

Well if the Senate votes to “remove” he’ll lose the taxpayer funded security detail.

[TheDarman]

Well if the Senate votes to “remove” he’ll lose the taxpayer funded security detail.

Trump has a bone to pick with forty-three Republicans in the Senate already. And a number of them are up in 2022.

Rubio, for instance, is already being targeted by the Trump family. Apparently Ivanka is considering a Senate run against him in 2022. So is Murkowski, who has been super vocal about her opposition to Trump as of late--even stating that she thought the House did the right thing by impeaching him. Given their new open primary, I'd expect Trump to try to throw his weight behind a Republican opponent there, especially with Murkowski likely to vote to indict him. Richard Shelby, too, in Alabama didn't vote to sustain either objection. He will likely be a target of ire of Trump's in a state where tying yourself closely to him will get you elected pretty easily. Crapo (Idaho), Grassley (Iowa), Paul (Kentucky), Moran (Kansas), Blunt (Missouri), Hoeven (North Dakota), Portman (Ohio), Lankford (Oklahoma), Tim Scott (South Carolina), Thune (South Dakota), Lee (Utah), and Johnson (Wisconsin) all "betrayed" Trump in his view.

Frankly, if I were these Republicans, I would burn Trump before he can burn them.

[DrNewGod]

Trump has a bone to pick with forty-three Republicans in the Senate already. And a number of them are up in 2022.

Rubio, for instance, is already being targeted by the Trump family. Apparently Ivanka is considering a Senate run against him in 2022. So is Murkowski, who has been super vocal about her opposition to Trump as of late--even stating that she thought the House did the right thing by impeaching him. Given their new open primary, I'd expect Trump to try to throw his weight behind a Republican opponent there, especially with Murkowski likely to vote to indict him. Richard Shelby, too, in Alabama didn't vote to sustain either objection. He will likely be a target of ire of Trump's in a state where tying yourself closely to him will get you elected pretty easily. Crapo (Idaho), Grassley (Iowa), Paul (Kentucky), Moran (Kansas), Blunt (Missouri), Hoeven (North Dakota), Portman (Ohio), Lankford (Oklahoma), Tim Scott (South Carolina), Thune (South Dakota), Lee (Utah), and Johnson (Wisconsin) all "betrayed" Trump in his view.

Frankly, if I were these Republicans, I would burn Trump before he can burn them.

The only thing apt to silence Trump, no matter what happens in the Senate, is incarceration or death. They can't possibly build a fire hot enough to burn him out of burning them too. This dude's number one hobby is spiteful retaliation, and that's not changing any more than the propensity of Trump voters to blindly follow his every word will.

As to the discussions of the fate of each party, it seems to me the white supremacists hold on power will decline, just because they'll steadily become a smaller percentage of the population. I don't think that likely to happen soon tho, and in the meantime, they will make one hell of a mess.

[Amadeus Arkham]

Man, it’s pretty interesting timing that the news of Chris Evans return as Captain America comes a week after the insurrection where terrorists were wearing the symbol while committing their attempted coup. It almost feels Cap saw this attack on television and it prompted him to come out of retirement to serve the country as a symbol of integrity and decency once again.

[TheDarman]

The only thing apt to silence Trump, no matter what happens in the Senate, is incarceration or death.

I think that they need to actually fight. If they want to reclaim their party from Trump, and not just be getting marching orders from him, they need to try to burn him out. There will be a few crazies that they will infuriate, no doubt, but they might be able to build inroads with voters they lost favor with (namely suburban voters).

They can't possibly build a fire hot enough to burn him out of burning them too. This dude's number one hobby is spiteful retaliation, and that's not changing any more than the propensity of Trump voters to blindly follow his every word will.

I'm sure he will try. But, the fact of the matter is, there is no difference between voting to impeach him now and having voted to certify election results. He views you as an enemy. You might as well cripple him and try to persuade your voters that he is the weak, cowardly one and not you. Because Trump is going to come after them saying that. And if you don't stand up to it--well, ask Sessions how well his last primary went.

As to the discussions of the fate of each party, it seems to me the white supremacists hold on power will decline, just because they'll steadily become a smaller percentage of the population. I don't think that likely to happen soon tho, and in the meantime, they will make one hell of a mess.

I agree. White supremacists are an important part of the coalition of the party. But they weren't AS IMPORTANT before Trump. Trump emboldened them. The decision the party makes now is about whether they try to get the people who were voting for them before (Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 and was more competitive among white, suburban women) or if they stick with the new coalition that Trump found (a far more electorally efficient coalition by the way) to combat the Obama coalition. It will be a decision made off of cynicism and short-sightedness if they permanently burn the bridge with the moderate parts that delivered them victory in 2004.

[Powerboy]

Man, it’s pretty interesting timing that the news of Chris Evans return as Captain America comes a week after the insurrection where terrorists were wearing the symbol while committing their attempted coup. It almost feels Cap saw this attack on television and it prompted him to come out of retirement to serve the country as a symbol of integrity and decency once again.

EXACTLY! Captain America certainly does not represent the American reality but he represents the American Ideal. Perhaps no president could meet that ideal but Trump is the antithesis of it.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I think that they need to actually fight. If they want to reclaim their party from Trump, and not just be getting marching orders from him, they need to try to burn him out. There will be a few crazies that they will infuriate, no doubt, but they might be able to build inroads with voters they lost favor with (namely suburban voters).



I'm sure he will try. But, the fact of the matter is, there is no difference between voting to impeach him now and having voted to certify election results. He views you as an enemy. You might as well cripple him and try to persuade your voters that he is the weak, cowardly one and not you. Because Trump is going to come after them saying that. And if you don't stand up to it--well, ask Sessions how well his last primary went.



I agree. White supremacists are an important part of the coalition of the party. But they weren't AS IMPORTANT before Trump. Trump emboldened them. The decision the party makes now is about whether they try to get the people who were voting for them before (Bush got 40% of the Hispanic vote in 2004 and was more competitive among white, suburban women) or if they stick with the new coalition that Trump found (a far more electorally efficient coalition by the way) to combat the Obama coalition. It will be a decision made off of cynicism and short-sightedness if they permanently burn the bridge with the moderate parts that delivered them victory in 2004.

You know before 9/11 a lot of conservative Muslim Americans voted Republican because on culture issues i.e. opposition to gay marriage and feminism, as well patriarchy, they were in-synch. But Post-9/11 the GOP became openly imperialist (not saying the Dems aren't imperialist but they don't brag about it) and drove away voters because they decided to become neo-Crusaders instead, and they flocked to the Dems and a lot of them have moderated their views on this over time. Likewise there are conservative Hindu Indians who are ideologically in synch with the GOP but vote Dems because of the racism.

The GOP can become a conservative party on the model of the UK Tories or Germany's CDU led by Merkel, both of whom for all its problems aren't so irredemably toxic as the GOP seems on the path of becoming.

[rogersmcfeely]

Add animal abuse to the list of crimes Trump's minions must answer for.

[Wildling]

Add animal abuse to the list of crimes Trump's minions must answer for.

File it under the guys gluing MAGA hats to pigeons and calling themselves P.U.T.I.N.

They give a bad name to decent inbreeders everywhere.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Sometimes it feels like these dudes are going through the legal code deliberately to find laws to break.

[BeastieRunner]

Sometimes it feels like these dudes are going through the legal code deliberately to find laws to break.

Welcome to the Trump legacy.

That is how his term felt to most of us, too.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Steve Kornacki does a cool profile of the 10 Republicans who voted to Impeach Trump. He points out that 5 of them came from districts that are either competitive (where Trump won by a small margin) and in 2-cases where GOP won districts that voted for Biden. But the other 5 come from heavily Trump-voting counties.

[Mister Mets]

I disagree.

While the House majority is certainly in trouble (Democrats only hold onto the majority by four, maybe five (when other elections are called), seats), it is important to recognize that Republicans are defending way more vulnerable seats in 2022 for the Senate than Democrats are.

While North Carolina has been difficult for Democrats to win, they won't have to contend with an incumbency advantage for their Republican opponent. And that is true with Pennsylvania, which has been better for Democrats when Trump isn't on the ballot. The Lieutenant Governor, who seems reasonably popular in the state, is the one running for, and most likely to get, the Democratic nomination for the seat.

Georgia may be problematic given that Warnock won the state by a little over two points against an unelected incumbent who was perceived to be widely out of touch and riddled with scandal. But Stacey Abrams may turn that race into a spectacle as she might run for governor again. And, given Kemp's issues with Trump, she may be running against someone without an incumbency advantage and someone who would have argued to overturn Georgia's election in 2020--a point that certainly helped Democrats swing the race three points in their direction.

Arizona is an interesting case. I'm unsure if it will be like Virginia...or more like North Carolina. Their swing towards Democrats seems to be more emblematic of an issue with Trump than with the Republican Party. But the Arizona GOP seems intent to censure all Republicans who don't stand with Trump. I don't see how a candidate who isn't a threat to democracy doesn't make his or her way to that ticket. And Kelly is a great candidate on paper and will have an incumbency advantage as well.

Florida is another odd opportunity. While it has drifted towards Trump's GOP in recent years, there are rumors that Ivanka Trump wants to run for Rubio's seat. If there is a bruising primary in Florida, that could open up a reasonably united Democratic Party to take away a seat in another swing state. Especially if Biden isn't the socialist that Trump made him out to be in this race.

Meanwhile, Ron Johnson is running a state that elected his Democratic partner by over ten points in 2018. Johnson has also tied himself quite closely to Trump, despite Trump losing the state this time after barely eeking out a win in 2016. While Wisconsin is a weird state, it has been better for Democrats, especially without Trump at the top of the ticket.

And, while Roy Blunt did do the right thing and vote to certify the election, he only won a state by 2.8% that Trump won by nearly double digits in 2016, and by more in 2020. With Trump's ire coming after him, I imagine that he will at least be weakened in the general. And a candidate like Jason Kander could bring him down there too. It may not be likely, but it is a vulnerability.

The truth is that Democrats are defending two vulnerable seats in Arizona and Georgia. Meanwhile, Republicans are defending competitive seats in North Carolina and Pennsylvania (which will both be open seats in 2022), Florida (because it is still a swing state of sorts), Wisconsin (a state with a pretty unpopular incumbent), Missouri, Iowa (depending on whether or not Grassley runs again), and maybe Ohio (though I think that Portman is probably safe--middle of the road enough to scrape by).

This is even conceding the House majority may be in trouble, but it is important to recognize, also, that the current majority is even in an arrangement of seats that were created for the explicit purpose of locking Democrats out of control of the chamber for ten years at least. Democrats have control of far more state houses and governor mansions this time than they did back in 2011 after a rough mid-term. I see no reason to conclude that the map will be that much worse for Democrats than it has been in prior years.

Republicans do have a chance at pickups in New Hampshire and Nevada.

In 2016, Kelly Ayotte lost by less than a quarter of one percent in New Hampshire. Nevada was also pretty close in 2016 (under two and a half points) and was also close in the last presidential race. It's likely to be more competitive than Missouri.

Much of it will depend on candidate quality, and the political environment. Midterms tend to go poorly for the party in the White House, but Republicans did nominate Roy Moore, and Corey Stewart.

[Jack Dracula]

The only thing apt to silence Trump, no matter what happens in the Senate, is incarceration or death. They can't possibly build a fire hot enough to burn him out of burning them too. This dude's number one hobby is spiteful retaliation, and that's not changing any more than the propensity of Trump voters to blindly follow his every word will.

As to the discussions of the fate of each party, it seems to me the white supremacists hold on power will decline, just because they'll steadily become a smaller percentage of the population. I don't think that likely to happen soon tho, and in the meantime, they will make one hell of a mess.

Consider that he no longer has Twitter or any of his regular avenues of mass communication to engage with his base. Those hour-long rants to Fox & Friends aren't likely to happen after he leaves office. Hannity may even quit taking his calls.