All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

[numberthirty]

But I get it -- Trump bragging about sexual assault wasn't a "dealbreaker" for him and the Republican tendency to treat "minorities" as second-class citizens in this country is not a "dealbreaker" for you.

Wrong.

The scenario you are laying out doesn't track. The guy didn't get and never had a chance of getting my vote.

[aja_christopher]

Wrong.

The scenario you are laying out doesn't track. The guy didn't get and never had a chance of getting my vote.

And he still won -- mainly because a lot of people didn't "vote against" someone like him getting into office by voting "for" the Presidential candidate who didn't brag about sexual assault.

People who really "care" step up and stop this kind of thing from happening instead of pointing the finger at everyone else but themselves.

You and Mets can make excuses all day -- but Trump remains the result of your virtual apathy in the face of racism, sexism, and Islamophobia.

[numberthirty]

It's like saying "The guy didn't stand up to Democratic Party crookedness and ineptitude by voting against HRC."

Not voting for you is one less vote for that sort of thing.

[aja_christopher]

It's like saying "The guy didn't stand up to Democratic Party crookedness and ineptitude by voting against HRC."

No -- it's like saying one candidate is bragging about sexually assaulting women and one is not, but both are equally bad so I'm not voting for either.

It's exactly like that so stop trying to pretend otherwise.

[numberthirty]

No -- it's like saying one candidate is bragging about sexually assaulting women and one is not, but both are equally bad so I'm not voting for either.

It's exactly like that so stop trying to pretend otherwise.

Not really.

[numberthirty]

For instance...

- "Bad Enough Not To Earn A Vote."

and

- "Easily Band Enough Not To Earn A Vote."

are not equal even though they are both bad enough that you will not vote for either of them.

[Kevinroc]

12 months into Trump's term.

Still bitching that Democrats nominated Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Sounds about right for 30.

[aja_christopher]

12 months into Trump's term.

Still bitching that Democrats nominated Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Sounds about right for 30.

Because that's a lot easier than bitching at himself for not voting against the racist, sexist, Islamophobe who is now our president.

Everyone makes mistakes -- it's when you don't learn from them that you have a problem.

[Baseman]

Because that's a lot easier than bitching at himself for not voting against the racist, sexist, Islamophobe who is now our president.

Everyone makes mistakes -- it's when you don't learn from them that you have a problem.

But he didn't vote for Trump though.Unless I'm misunderstanding.You can't really blame someone for a mistake they didn't make.

[master of read]

But he didn't vote for Trump though.Unless I'm misunderstanding.You can't really blame someone for a mistake they didn't make.

his argument is that 30 didn't vote. at all.

thus according to aja, 30 is responsible through inaction.

me though? i voted for hil, simply because i saw the kind of man trump is and didn't want him to be in power with that kind of mindset and personality.

and boy, was i right in thinking that.

[Darkspellmaster]

But he didn't vote for Trump though.Unless I'm misunderstanding.You can't really blame someone for a mistake they didn't make.

Yeah, but if I remember right, he didn't vote at all.

[Kirby101]

Yeah, but if I remember right, he didn't vote at all.

He thought Hillary would be just as bad, or worse. Probably still does.

[Mister Mets]

Franken should have thrown down an ultimatum that he'd step down when Roy Moore does the same.

When it came out that Bob Livingston, a Congressman who was very close to becoming Speaker of the House during the Lewinski scandals, had had an affair, he announced his plans to resign, and called on Bill Clinton to do the same.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/20/us...ted=all&src=pm

Nothing came of that.

A conservative blogger for Hot Air did have some interesting speculation that Franken's statement about resigning in the next few weeks was a way to allow him to reverse course after Moore's likely election.

Despite their momentary ardor for cleansing Congress of creeps, rank-and-file Democrats won’t like that one bit. Why does their guy have to go when the Republicans’ guy doesn’t? He’s confessed to nothing, even in the course of resigning. Congressional Democrats will be leery too, having set a relatively low bar for disqualifying misconduct in making an example of Franken. No violent assaults, no examples of workplace harassment, some groping which Franken himself insists was innocent contact, and no process for determining the credibility of the allegations. Some Dems will inevitably be accused of worse than what Franken has been accused, possibly in the next few weeks before he’s left the chamber, and the party will have no choice but to push them out too to honor the Franken precedent.

Do they really want to tie their own hands that way? When Roy Moore is in the Senate giving floor speeches?

The obvious question arises: Did Franken delay his exit from the Senate this morning because he thinks the political winds are about to change rapidly, in time for him to withdraw his resignation? And if so, did the “brave” Democrats who pushed him yesterday to resign do so knowing that Franken would leave himself a few extra weeks until after Alabama votes, time enough to walk back his resignation under more favorable political circumstances? It’d be unbelievably cynical if Schumer et al. pounded the table for Franken to go expecting that he wouldn’t have to follow through if Moore is elected. Franken could give another floor speech in a few weeks insisting that after having deliberated further and listened to the many, many, many Republicans chanting “the people have spoken” in defense of Moore, the only proper thing for him to do is to let the people of Minnesota render their own verdict on him in 2020. In the meantime he’ll fully comply with the ethics committee’s investigation into his behavior, just as Moore will be expected to do.

It seems like it would be a difficult thing to walk back, though.

You can't argue that you care about preventing something, while simultaneously enabling it.

Well, you can -- but no one should take you seriously when you do so.

Kind of like when you send your "sentiments" regarding my experiences with racial profiling yet continue to support the party that has so little issue with it that some of them have already tried to codify it into law (Guiliani) or been pardoned for engaging in it to the point of criminality (Arpaio).

When people really "care" about changing something, they don't continue to enable it.

But I get it -- Trump bragging about sexual assault wasn't a "dealbreaker" for him and the Republican tendency to treat "minorities" as second-class citizens in this country is not a "dealbreaker" for you.

What specific policies do you want to see on racial profiling that are important enough to make being a single issue voter the only moral decision.

[SUPERECWFAN1]

This is a difference than a man having an affair that became public rather than a man who is a pedophile. I mean honestly Moore should step down. Republicans are absolute garbage right now.

[Baseman]

his argument is that 30 didn't vote. at all.

thus according to aja, 30 is responsible through inaction.

me though? i voted for hil, simply because i saw the kind of man trump is and didn't want him to be in power with that kind of mindset and personality.

and boy, was i right in thinking that.

Would it have mattered if he did?Was Clinton just one vote away from victory if not then its a moot point.