Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[barton]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/politics/north-dakota-voter-id.html

Just want to chronicle the boomerang effects as they multiply across America.  The voter suppression effort on the rez in ND may actually lead to HIGHER voter turnout this year.  Article explains how.



That was a good piece by Krug Man.  Thanks, Boyd.  Neatly exposes the Cornyn lie of the week.  Red will deny and obfuscate.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Black folks love me!

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/democrats-worried-losing-black-voters-ahead-midterms-trump-115203541--abc-news-topstories.html

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/politics/north-dakota-voter-id.html

Just want to chronicle the boomerang effects as they multiply across America.  The voter suppression effort on the rez in ND may actually lead to HIGHER voter turnout this year.  Article explains how.

I think this is a pattern we've sen elsewhere with Voter ID.  After the vote suppression effort becomes law, it is met with an unsustainable effort to counteract its effects.  The advocates for the original law can then point to those voter turnout numbers as proof that the law doesn't actually suppress votes.  Then next election, when everyone has moved on to other things, the law bears fruit for its advocates.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Good reading for those who refuse to believe that Trump's violent rhetoric amounts to incitement; it isn't only on Trump, but also his enablers in the GOP.  Saying that Trump's language, attacks, and encouragement of physical threats was irresponsible wasn't so controversial for Marco Rubio a few years ago. Now he is too much of a chicken-shit to say it.  So this is also on him:

https://crooked.com/articles/gop-problem-from-hell/

As much as I loathe Trump, it's not all on him. Only an extreme partisan or an idiot would say that.

You are welcome to point out where anyone is saying this is "all on him."  You can start with the post you quoted.

Guess you don't read what you post, or if you do, infer well from what was written. Saying the GOP has folded under the influence of Trump is essentially saying that the divisive times are Trump's doing.

Don't play the bullshit parsing game here, fella.

You're just redstate in blue underwear.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Good reading for those who refuse to believe that Trump's violent rhetoric amounts to incitement; it isn't only on Trump, but also his enablers in the GOP.  Saying that Trump's language, attacks, and encouragement of physical threats was irresponsible wasn't so controversial for Marco Rubio a few years ago. Now he is too much of a chicken-shit to say it.  So this is also on him:

https://crooked.com/articles/gop-problem-from-hell/

As much as I loathe Trump, it's not all on him. Only an extreme partisan or an idiot would say that.

You are welcome to point out where anyone is saying this is "all on him."  You can start with the post you quoted.

Guess you don't read what you post, or if you do, infer well from what was written. Saying the GOP has folded under the influence of Trump is essentially saying that the divisive times are Trump's doing.

Don't play the bullshit parsing game here, fella.

You're just redstate in blue underwear.

You attribute an argument to me that I did not make, then claim I am playing a "bullshit parsing game" when I point that out.  I'm not the one here who is playing games, fella.

I said the GOP shares blame for Trump's continued rhetoric of hate and violence.  They absolutely do.  If they came out against it, and used their powers of oversight to build real consequences against it, it would stop.  But yeah, "The divisive times" are Trump's doing.  And the doing of his GOP enablers.  And the doing of FOX news.  And the doing of media platforms (including Facebook) that echo hate, and provide safe spaces for white supremacists and other "deplorables." 

If you have an actual argument against any of that, have at it.  If you are only interested in burnishing some kind of imagined non-partisan bonafides that fool absolutely no one here, you are welcome to that too.  Just don't expect another response from me.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Marco Rubio
Nikki Haley
Ted Cruz
Paul Ryan
Mitt Romney
Lindsey Graham
Rick Perry...

All were willing to call out Trump for his politics of division and violence when Trump was a candidate. 

None of those people are idiots.  Although to be fair a few of them could be said to be "extreme partisans"...though not by a card-carrying independent of unimpeachable integrity like MrUtley3.

[barton]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/30/us/politics/north-dakota-voter-id.html

Just want to chronicle the boomerang effects as they multiply across America.  The voter suppression effort on the rez in ND may actually lead to HIGHER voter turnout this year.  Article explains how.

I think this is a pattern we've sen elsewhere with Voter ID.  After the vote suppression effort becomes law, it is met with an unsustainable effort to counteract its effects.  The advocates for the original law can then point to those voter turnout numbers as proof that the law doesn't actually suppress votes.  Then next election, when everyone has moved on to other things, the law bears fruit for its advocates.

The law won't bear fruit so well if the United State Senate keeps a Republican majority because Heitkamp is defeated.  She has powerful support from Standing Rock and Turtle Mountain and Spirit Lake.  If it turns out even 10% of the 30,000 voting age native americans were turned away from polling stations (due to various glitches and the strong chance of them closing before the tribal rep can process them new address letters), that might mean the difference in such a tight race.  These are not people who are going to forget bureaucratic disenfranchisement.  Like the Rosebud and Pine Ridge people I meet around here, they are very politically "activated."  They know what getting screwed over by bureaucrats is like, and get pretty sick of it.  And idiocy like the blue ink/black ink thing, or the sheriff not assigning a 911 coordinator with regular office hours, provokes an anger that won't evaporate later. 

But generally, I agree with you.  Boomerang effects do often go for nought. 

[Driver125]

All were willing to call out Trump for his politics of division and violence when Trump was a candidate. 

Yes….but then he won and it was “Whoa, hold on….he won? Uh, maybe he’s not so bad after all.”

[NeedsAdjustments]

All were willing to call out Trump for his politics of division and violence when Trump was a candidate.

Yes….but then he won and it was “Whoa, hold on….he won? Uh, maybe he’s not so bad after all.”

Nikki Haley in 2016:

"I know what that rhetoric can do. I saw it happen" in Charleston.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/282092-nikki-haley-on-trump-i-know-what-that-rhetoric-can-do

If you know what that rhetoric can do, yet give it cover behind false both-sidesim now, you own some responsibility for its effects.  Its that fucking simple.

[NeedsAdjustments]

Why Conservatives were so convinced that the Kavanaugh accusers were paid to bring false accusations against him by party loyalists...because that is what they would do!

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/10/special-counsel-refers-scheme-targeting-mueller-to-fbi/574411/

[facilitatorn]

Projection is a symptom of so many conservative disorders.

[facilitatorn]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/trumps-final-push-to-lock-down-the-senate-could-have-the-opposite-effect?ref=home

An interesting read on where gropy is sticking his tentacles.

[josh]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/politics/donald-trump-ending-birthright-citizenship/index.html

Trump decides he can unilaterally overturn the Constitution.

I am sure that Redd and Kiid and Bambi will have fine defenses of it.

You guys would know - having bowed at the feet of the Executive Orderer in Chief

You tell us

Can he do this, legally?

I know you think he shouldnt.

If you can't tell the difference between Obaba's EOs and this EO you have no business ever expressing an opinion on legality issues.

As for your typically erroneous nickname for Obama, he issued fewer than GWB who issued fewer than Bill Clinton who issued fewer than Ronald Reagan, whose tally was exceeded by Dwight D. Eisenhower.

FDR gave more per year than Obama did in his entire 8 years combined.

And Trump is doing more per year than anybody since Carter (though only slightly faster than Reagan's), though still under a sixth of FDR's rate.

Some historical perspective might be useful to you.

But probably not.

[josh]

This is from 2012.

The numbers are higher now, partially because the interest rates are up. But as one looks to point fingers at Obama's economic failures, it helps to actually pause to understand reaility.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Good reading for those who refuse to believe that Trump's violent rhetoric amounts to incitement; it isn't only on Trump, but also his enablers in the GOP.  Saying that Trump's language, attacks, and encouragement of physical threats was irresponsible wasn't so controversial for Marco Rubio a few years ago. Now he is too much of a chicken-shit to say it.  So this is also on him:

https://crooked.com/articles/gop-problem-from-hell/

As much as I loathe Trump, it's not all on him. Only an extreme partisan or an idiot would say that.

You are welcome to point out where anyone is saying this is "all on him."  You can start with the post you quoted.

Guess you don't read what you post, or if you do, infer well from what was written. Saying the GOP has folded under the influence of Trump is essentially saying that the divisive times are Trump's doing.

Don't play the bullshit parsing game here, fella.

You're just redstate in blue underwear.

You attribute an argument to me that I did not make, then claim I am playing a "bullshit parsing game" when I point that out.  I'm not the one here who is playing games, fella.

I said the GOP shares blame for Trump's continued rhetoric of hate and violence.  They absolutely do.  If they came out against it, and used their powers of oversight to build real consequences against it, it would stop.  But yeah, "The divisive times" are Trump's doing.  And the doing of his GOP enablers.  And the doing of FOX news.  And the doing of media platforms (including Facebook) that echo hate, and provide safe spaces for white supremacists and other "deplorables." 

If you have an actual argument against any of that, have at it.  If you are only interested in burnishing some kind of imagined non-partisan bonafides that fool absolutely no one here, you are welcome to that too.  Just don't expect another response from me.

So you think only the GOP and Trump are responsible for the topic political culture.

Understood.

Fella.