IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Congressional hearings , donald trump , impeachment , Trump administration , Trump controversies , Trump impeachment

Reply
Old 14th February 2021, 02:10 PM   #2721
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,241
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Maybe in a classic murder case, physical evidence makes the case stronger.
And complete lack of said physical evidence makes it very much weaker, if not way beyond a reasonable doubt, hey wot, Vix?
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 02:25 PM   #2722
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,241
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Will you bother with an election, or has he already decided he's won it?
I know if I die before the 2024 election, I'm going to rise up and vote anyway just to piss Trump off.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 02:25 PM   #2723
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,685
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Will you bother with an election, or has he already decided he's won it?

I'll only bother with an election if he runs against Georgia Gov. Stacey Abrams.
__________________
"We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” – Joe Biden October 24, 2020
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 02:27 PM   #2724
Bogative
Graduate Poster
 
Bogative's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1,685
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I know if I die before the 2024 election, I'm going to rise up and vote anyway just to piss Trump off.

It's the Democrat way.
__________________
"We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.” – Joe Biden October 24, 2020
Bogative is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 02:28 PM   #2725
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,270
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Trump 2024
Gosh, I for one sure hope so. It’ll throw a monkey wrench into every other Republican presidential wannabe’s campaign machinery.

Oh wait, you think he could then go on to win? That’s cute.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 02:31 PM   #2726
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,241
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
It's the Democrat way.
And it's the Trumplican way to believe it actually happens.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 03:48 PM   #2727
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 31,412
I saw a post on another site earlier today that speculated that the lack of witnesses was down to McConnell.

The theory was that it's in the House rules that they can only conduct other business while there's an agreement to do so between both parties. That's how come for the last week they've been able to do normal Senate stuff in the mornings and hold the trial in the afternoons. But if McConnell didn't want witnesses he couldn't have stopped them from being called, but he could threaten to withdraw his support of conducting other business and drag the process out - leaving the Democrats unable to actually do the work of government. And the Democrats thought actually getting **** done in the middle of a pandemic was more important than calling witnesses which wouldn't affect the outcome of the trial anyway.

It certainly seems a plausible hypothesis.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 03:52 PM   #2728
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,928
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
How well does H.R.1 - For the People Act of 2021 meet what you desire?
Looks good at a glance, with the Senate GOP be blocking it?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 03:58 PM   #2729
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,928
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I saw a post on another site earlier today that speculated that the lack of witnesses was down to McConnell.

The theory was that it's in the House rules that they can only conduct other business while there's an agreement to do so between both parties. That's how come for the last week they've been able to do normal Senate stuff in the mornings and hold the trial in the afternoons. But if McConnell didn't want witnesses he couldn't have stopped them from being called, but he could threaten to withdraw his support of conducting other business and drag the process out - leaving the Democrats unable to actually do the work of government. And the Democrats thought actually getting **** done in the middle of a pandemic was more important than calling witnesses which wouldn't affect the outcome of the trial anyway.

It certainly seems a plausible hypothesis.
I don't see it. It was down to the House Managers, adding witnesses at the last stage was the normal procedure. They had even already voted to have witnesses. So it was the House's option to take it back.

Clearly the GOP's big threat was that they'd drag the proceedings out if the House called any witnesses. Seems to me Raskin held the cards nonetheless. There wasn't any reason for witnesses, the compromise made sense from the House's POV.

Bottom line, they did indeed prove the case against Trump.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 04:07 PM   #2730
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,643
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
Will you bother with an election, or has he already decided he's won it?
It's already been rigged.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 04:08 PM   #2731
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,418
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I saw a post on another site earlier today that speculated that the lack of witnesses was down to McConnell.



The theory was that it's in the House rules that they can only conduct other business while there's an agreement to do so between both parties. That's how come for the last week they've been able to do normal Senate stuff in the mornings and hold the trial in the afternoons. But if McConnell didn't want witnesses he couldn't have stopped them from being called, but he could threaten to withdraw his support of conducting other business and drag the process out - leaving the Democrats unable to actually do the work of government. And the Democrats thought actually getting **** done in the middle of a pandemic was more important than calling witnesses which wouldn't affect the outcome of the trial anyway.



It certainly seems a plausible hypothesis.
I'm dubious.

What authority would allow McConnell to do that?

He is no longer majority leader.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 04:13 PM   #2732
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 31,583
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
What authority would allow McConnell to do that?

He is no longer majority leader.
There's still a bajillion and one unwritten gentleman's agreements between the parties.

All you have to do is ask yourself what authority the Majority and Minority Leaders have at all and way since those aren't actual positions that exist and the answer is the same.
__________________
Yahtzee: "You're doing that thing again where when asked a question you just discuss the philosophy of the question instead of answering the bloody question."
Gabriel: "Well yeah, you see..."
Yahtzee: "No. When you are asked a Yes or No question the first word out of your mouth needs to be Yes or No. Only after that have you earned the right to elaborate."
JoeMorgue is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 04:47 PM   #2733
Delphic Oracle
Philosopher
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 5,418
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
There's still a bajillion and one unwritten gentleman's agreements between the parties.



All you have to do is ask yourself what authority the Majority and Minority Leaders have at all and way since those aren't actual positions that exist and the answer is the same.
They are actual positions. Enhanced salary, a separate budget for office and staff specific to those leadership roles, different letterhead, all of it.

Anyways, McConnell threatened to stamp his feet and gridlock Congress. We backed down. Now he has to not gridlock Congress or he'll be shown as totally untrustworthy.

We sure showed him.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 14th February 2021 at 04:51 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 05:31 PM   #2734
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,521
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
McConnell wanted right wing judges, and he got them. But now that the republicans are out of power, they won't be getting any more for at least 4 years, maybe more.

And while he wanted right-wing judges, I suspect he didn't care which right wing judges were picked. Had he been smart, perhaps he might have decided to reject Drunky McRapeface... Trump would have picked someone just as right-wing as a replacement, but likely without the baggage. And perhaps fewer moderates or democrats would be as fired up to vote against the republicans as a result.

And yes, they got their millionaire tax cuts, but those are unlikely to last much longer now that the democrats have taken control.
We'll see on that last one. Truth is, those tax cuts that some (but not all) lower-income folks got are just about set to expire - meaning folks are about to see their taxes shift upwards, while the super-rich get to keep their cuts.

If dems play this well, they can use Biden's position to blame this on the GOP. I'm not convinced that some goofball like Sinema or Manchin won't wreck things, however.

As for Drunky, that ended once Toupee Fiasco went around mocking the woman who (very credibly) accused him of attempted sexual assault. Whoite supremacists are very protective of women that are meek and submissive (thus the weird Asian fetishes they often have - the stereotype is for them to submit to the wonderful white man), but women who speak up are another matter. They got their order on who to hate, and this time it was Ford - in addition to Pelosi and Hillary Clinton, as two other prominent white women that "don't know their place.

(a discussion of Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, and Harris is in order, but again, just look to Bagative's avatar for a good example of that, and what in implies)

ETA: It's really no different than him waiting until the last credible second to acnowledge that Biden and Harris won. He's trying to both keep the racist lunatics, the people who are disgusted by the first but thought they were completely harmless for some bizarre reason, and the business owners that figure genocide will be bad for business. That's becoming increasingly difficult, if not completely impossible, to do.

Quote:
But, at the very least he could have done more in the short term... get more legislation passed when they had both congress and the white house, do more to try to hold on to the senate for at least another term to at least have some control over tax legislation and judicial nominees.
Well, they failed to get rid of Obamacare, which was their *other* plan to harm the poor and middle class and hand money to the ultra-rich. Aside from that...what did they seriously want at the federal level?

I can tell you what dems want - cleaner environment and a way to at least slow the climate crisis, living wages, a pandemic response, criminal justice reform (although this is really as much a state level issue as anything else), renewing VAWA, racial and sex orientation/gender equality, and the list goes on.

The GOP is split between those that don't care about any of that, and people who want the federal government to hurt the people they hate, even if they get hurt too. Moscow Mitch is in the former. Graham is a great example of someone who has slid morally into the latter, to wallow with Cotton, Greene, and other raving bigots.

Originally Posted by bruto View Post
One of the things that gets me is that it seems McConnell was once a supporter of Martin Luther King, and an integrationist at a time when this was not the popular position. I'm sure he would still be offended to be called a racist. And yet.... I've long maintained that most Republicans would support Satan if he promised right-wing judges, and I think McConnell's sick cynicism drives that home.
I like to give credit where credit is due. And I do believe in redemption for those who earn it - but I also believe in the opposite. Moscow Mitch may have stood up for MLK Jr. in his past, I've heard that as well. Current day Mitch, however, is delighted to see black people stopped from voting, out of a Machiavellian lust for power.

Last edited by Mumbles; 14th February 2021 at 05:43 PM.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 05:46 PM   #2735
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 22,894
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Trump 2024
Obesity, age and heart disease argue against it. What they grand juries don't do to him, the actuarial tables likely will. Best thing for the nation really.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 05:58 PM   #2736
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: East Coast, US
Posts: 7,603
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Looks good at a glance, with the Senate GOP be blocking it?
I rather expect them to try, albeit not as successfully as McConnell was able to before by refusing to even allow a vote on the previous iteration.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 06:35 PM   #2737
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,399
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
As a Ukian I'm interested in your use of "Conservative".

Being entirely serious, is it your contention that having conservative views in the US removes any political nuance?

I understand that Trump caused a lot of damage to the GOP and conservatives in general, but reading your, let's face it, polemic, it insists that all "Conservatives" are.
  1. Racist
  2. Homophobic
  3. Transphobic
  4. Fundamentalists
  5. 2nd amendment Proud Boys
  6. Anti-immigration
  7. Anti-abortionist
  8. Climate Change Deniers
  9. Covid 19 hoax proponents
  10. Anti free speech
  11. Cancel culture whores

I think I got 'em all.

Your position seems a little extreme to me and one borne from anger. How accurate do you believe it to be? Would you claim that it's representative of the general leftist position?
I was using it in the same ironic way that the Alt-Right does.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 06:36 PM   #2738
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,399
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
Trump 20-24 years
Fixed that for you
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 06:38 PM   #2739
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,399
Originally Posted by Bogative View Post
It's the Democrat way.
And yet strangely it's always Republicans that keep getting caught doing it.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 06:53 PM   #2740
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,593
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
As a Ukian I'm interested in your use of "Conservative".

Being entirely serious, is it your contention that having conservative views in the US removes any political nuance?

I understand that Trump caused a lot of damage to the GOP and conservatives in general, but reading your, let's face it, polemic, it insists that all "Conservatives" are.
  1. Racist
  2. Homophobic
  3. Transphobic
  4. Fundamentalists
  5. 2nd amendment Proud Boys
  6. Anti-immigration
  7. Anti-abortionist
  8. Climate Change Deniers
  9. Covid 19 hoax proponents
  10. Anti free speech
  11. Cancel culture whores

I think I got 'em all.
Seditionists,
Anti-Science
Anti-American
Hypocrites
Dishonest

I figured I'd add a few. Not sure you could ever list them all.

But in all fairness, I'm not sure this describes conservatives. It describes most Republicans these days however. The GOP is not conservative. It is selfish, self centered and nuts.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 07:03 PM   #2741
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 6,785
I had heard of more than a few people having difficulty sleeping with all the turmoil and drama of the election, it’s aftermath and the events of January 6. I had not had that problem. Until last night.

I had not been glued to the TV all day Saturday, but for the most part at least had it on in the background. When it was announced the House managers were going to call for at least one witness, and were leaving it open to call more, I was thrilled. FINALLY they were acting like a majority party that could call the shots!

I tuned out for a while, and when I started watching again, it took me a few moments to realize the House managers were giving closing arguments. What the hell happened? They had earlier held a vote, and every single Democratic Senator, and even five Republican Senators, had voiced their desire to hear witnesses.

The first impeachment trial was rightfully derided for not being a real trial - a real trial typically has witness testimony. And the Republican majority had the power back then to make a mockery of the whole thing by not hearing any witness testimony. But this time around, the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. Had I been a Senator who voted for witnesses, only to have my vote ignored by the House managers, I would have been livid. The House managers did a fine job presenting their case, but nothing takes the place of real time witness testimony. Not to mention where some of that testimony might have led.

Would witnesses have changed the final result of the impeachment trial? Almost certainly not. But one by one Republicans had been gradually shifting over to vote for conviction, so why not even try?

As a final note, the President’s lawyers did make a good point at how limited the impeachment charges were against the President, basically just the incitement charge. What harm would there have been to add counts of dereliction of duty and violation of the Presidential oath? If anything, I think those were more solid cases than the incitement charge. Again, they should have presented the case for each of those charges, for the history books, if not for intransigent Republican Senators.

Anyway, this whole thread is pretty much moot now, and I’m very close to putting it on ignore.

But hopefully by getting this off my chest I’ll be able to sleep better tonight.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 07:41 PM   #2742
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,340
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
ETA: It's really no different than him waiting until the last credible second to acnowledge that Biden and Harris won.
Did he wait, though? I thought I read about him referring to Biden as president-elect pretty early in the process.

More of the GOP mainstream should have called Trump out *early* for either lying or being delusional. That base, though. I keep wanting to say they're meaner than snakes, but snakes aren't so bad.

I'm glad McConnell said what he did though. Lindsey Graham thinks it's going to be used against Republicans in 2022. GOOD. I don't know why McConnell did it. Maybe he had an epiphany. His party at the very least enabled Trump as he grew increasingly erratic and *dangerous*. I wonder if he spares a thought about whether he played a part in the GOP's current struggles.

Being now in the minority for the first time in 10 years will be a shock to the system. He might even have to cooperate with The Other. I loved Obama but my perception is that he wasn't that into the legislative nitty-gritty. I don't know if that would have helped, but I think Biden is both well-liked and pugnacious enough to conjure up some bipartisanship. Party-line votes with razor-thin majorities make me a little nervous, something to do with 2010.

Last edited by Minoosh; 14th February 2021 at 07:52 PM. Reason: Slightly reworked
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 07:53 PM   #2743
dirtywick
Illuminator
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,345
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Seditionists,
Anti-Science
Anti-American
Hypocrites
Dishonest

I figured I'd add a few. Not sure you could ever list them all.

But in all fairness, I'm not sure this describes conservatives. It describes most Republicans these days however. The GOP is not conservative. It is selfish, self centered and nuts.
I don’t think those describe individual conservatives


But when people talk about “conservatives” they’re referring to GOP leadership. On that count it’s fairly accurate
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 08:14 PM   #2744
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 17,365
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Quote:

ETA: It's really no different than him waiting until the last credible second to acnowledge that Biden and Harris won.
Did he wait, though? I thought I read about him referring to Biden as president-elect pretty early in the process.
The election was in early November. Moscow Mitch did not acknowledge Biden's win until mid-December. Although there were some delays due to things like absentee ballot counting, it was obvious Biden won by mid-November over a month before McConnell admitted it

By comparison, Romney congratulated Biden by November 7 or 8.


Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 08:30 PM   #2745
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,521
Originally Posted by dirtywick View Post
I don’t think those describe individual conservatives


But when people talk about “conservatives” they’re referring to GOP leadership. On that count it’s fairly accurate
I'd say it describes part of the leadership, and the entirety of their base - and now that the hangers-on are realizing that "limited government" isn't really compatible with "police are allowed to beat, rape, and/or murder nonwhite/LGBT people at random", they're starting to run away. They're shocked by what's happened.

Gotta say, I'm not, in the slightest.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 09:03 PM   #2746
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,546
Originally Posted by Regnad Kcin View Post
Gosh, I for one sure hope so. It’ll throw a monkey wrench into every other Republican presidential wannabe’s campaign machinery.

Oh wait, you think he could then go on to win? That’s cute.
That's what I said in 2016.

I'm pretty sure he couldn't win in 2024, but nothing would surprise me anymore.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you are right. But would it hurt you to provide some information?
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 09:04 PM   #2747
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Canada, eh?
Posts: 17,365
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Quote:
McConnell wanted right wing judges, and he got them. But now that the republicans are out of power, they won't be getting any more for at least 4 years, maybe more.

And while he wanted right-wing judges, I suspect he didn't care which right wing judges were picked. Had he been smart, perhaps he might have decided to reject Drunky McRapeface... Trump would have picked someone just as right-wing as a replacement, but likely without the baggage. And perhaps fewer moderates or democrats would be as fired up to vote against the republicans as a result.

And yes, they got their millionaire tax cuts, but those are unlikely to last much longer now that the democrats have taken control.
We'll see on that last one. Truth is, those tax cuts that some (but not all) lower-income folks got are just about set to expire - meaning folks are about to see their taxes shift upwards, while the super-rich get to keep their cuts.
Yes, if nothing changes, the lower classes are expected to get the short end of the stick. I figure the most likely scenario for Biden and the Democrats is that they will do a 'flip'... keep the reduced taxes for lower/middle class (or maybe a small increase), and have a huge increase in taxes on the wealthy.

Quote:
Quote:
But, at the very least he could have done more in the short term... get more legislation passed when they had both congress and the white house, do more to try to hold on to the senate for at least another term to at least have some control over tax legislation and judicial nominees.
Well, they failed to get rid of Obamacare, which was their *other* plan to harm the poor and middle class and hand money to the ultra-rich. Aside from that...what did they seriously want at the federal level?
Well, getting rid of Obamacare would have been the biggest thing. But I'm also thinking of a lot of the things that Stubby McBonespurs enacted via executive order... things like financial and environmental deregulation... the republicans (and their wealthy benefactors) would have been better off to have those done through legislation, rather than the more easily reversed executive order. Or maybe enact gun rights legislation at the federal level.

ETA: And even if he didn't want to pass more legislation, being smarter (maybe cutting Trump loose during the first impeachment) might have kept the senate in Republican hands, allowing them to block changes to taxes and to Obamacare that the democrats want.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot

Last edited by Segnosaur; 14th February 2021 at 09:09 PM.
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 09:53 PM   #2748
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,521
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
Yes, if nothing changes, the lower classes are expected to get the short end of the stick. I figure the most likely scenario for Biden and the Democrats is that they will do a 'flip'... keep the reduced taxes for lower/middle class (or maybe a small increase), and have a huge increase in taxes on the wealthy.
They'll likely try. We'll see what happens.

Quote:
Well, getting rid of Obamacare would have been the biggest thing. But I'm also thinking of a lot of the things that Stubby McBonespurs enacted via executive order... things like financial and environmental deregulation... the republicans (and their wealthy benefactors) would have been better off to have those done through legislation, rather than the more easily reversed executive order. Or maybe enact gun rights legislation at the federal level.
Nah, they don't really care about that - apart from deregulation, which, again, lines his pockets.

Quote:
ETA: And even if he didn't want to pass more legislation, being smarter (maybe cutting Trump loose during the first impeachment) might have kept the senate in Republican hands, allowing them to block changes to taxes and to Obamacare that the democrats want.
Not a chance. I doubt he had the votes even if he wanted to - and if he did, the base would stomp off while Dolt 45 formented more hatred. And really, imagine Pence or McConnell trying to use their charm to bring in new voters - especially when he's denouncing voting rights for black people as "socialist", trying to wreck health care, his supreme courts are screaming about how awful it is to be called a bigot for saying same-sex couples should be legally discriminated against, and so forth. The GOP gambled on their elites keeping the violent bigots in line because the other side elected a black guy to the presidency and let the gays kiss in public, and then Toupee Fiasco crashed in like a klansman, screaming that black and Hispanic people weren't even Americans, and there were fine people marching around chanting "Jews will not replace us", and Mexicans are all rapists and should be in concentration camps, and the bigots said "He says what I'm thinking!" and flocked to him.

And he really only became Majority Leader after that had happened.

Whoops.

I've said for a long time now, the actual smart person with a shred of decency was John Boehner. Saw exactly what was coming, got the Pope to address a joint session of Congress, and skipped out literally singing "Zippidy Doo Da" and went to market weed instead.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th February 2021, 11:51 PM   #2749
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,928
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
That's what I said in 2016.

I'm pretty sure he couldn't win in 2024, but nothing would surprise me anymore.
Trump has a cult following. But unless some big money sees a benefit in betting on him, 2016 was a fluke. He's burnt, damaged goods. A cult following no matter how stupid some legislators are right now being in that cult, is going to burn out just like Trump.

The curtain was pulled back and the wizard turned out to be a fake.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 12:01 AM   #2750
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,521
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Trump has a cult following. But unless some big money sees a benefit in betting on him, 2016 was a fluke. He's burnt, damaged goods. A cult following no matter how stupid some legislators are right now being in that cult, is going to burn out just like Trump.

The curtain was pulled back and the wizard turned out to be a fake.
I make no predictions. Best thing for the country is, frankly, for him to drop dead so his cult can start mangling one another for a while. But don't underestimate the...

How should I put this...

...The ability of people to sit in their tent like Achilles on the one hand, and the self-damaging love of white supremacism on the other.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 03:50 AM   #2751
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 22,920
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
That's pretty much what he wanted to begin with. The problem is that he's in an untenable position in the long-term. The GOP base has been fed on conspiracy nonsense (how long ago was the Clinton murder list, or the War on Christmas?) and hatred of the other (Bogative's avatar is a classic example of racism via the Jezebel stereotype - pure slave rape apologism carried up to the current year- and folks like Limbaugh and D'Souza have trafficked in similar junk for decades, never mind Reagan's anti-gay hatred that allowed the HIV pandemic to flourish while he smiled about it), while the elites work to funnel more money to themselves.

Toupee Fiasco just cut through all that and spewed unvarnished white nationalism, starting with birtherism back in 2011. And now the base isn't really satisfied with anything less. McConnell's trying to persuade the folks that thought the GOP was really about "small government" or "good business", but there's just no way to hide the "we hate ******* and queers" faction. But really, this all set up before Moscow Mitch rose to leadership - again, this was set in the Goldwater-Reagan era, and solidified at most a decade ago.

ETA: Gingrich's scorched earth strategy had it's own role to play, of course, but the overall descent to neo-fascism and conspiracy theory wasn't him.
He, don't forget Nixon. Or Ford's pardon of him.


I've heart people say the rot set in with Reagan and his anti-intellectualism, but we need to look at the two GOP presidents before him.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 03:55 AM   #2752
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,643
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
<snip>

As a final note, the President’s lawyers did make a good point at how limited the impeachment charges were against the President, basically just the incitement charge. What harm would there have been to add counts of dereliction of duty and violation of the Presidential oath? If anything, I think those were more solid cases than the incitement charge. Again, they should have presented the case for each of those charges, for the history books, if not for intransigent Republican Senators.

Anyway, this whole thread is pretty much moot now, and I’m very close to putting it on ignore.

But hopefully by getting this off my chest I’ll be able to sleep better tonight.
I think had they added charges, as Van der Veen pointed out, they would each have to be separate impeachments (or so he claims, although thinking about it that is obviously pants).
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 03:56 AM   #2753
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 22,920
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
I had heard of more than a few people having difficulty sleeping with all the turmoil and drama of the election, it’s aftermath and the events of January 6. I had not had that problem. Until last night.

I had not been glued to the TV all day Saturday, but for the most part at least had it on in the background. When it was announced the House managers were going to call for at least one witness, and were leaving it open to call more, I was thrilled. FINALLY they were acting like a majority party that could call the shots!

I tuned out for a while, and when I started watching again, it took me a few moments to realize the House managers were giving closing arguments. What the hell happened? They had earlier held a vote, and every single Democratic Senator, and even five Republican Senators, had voiced their desire to hear witnesses.

The first impeachment trial was rightfully derided for not being a real trial - a real trial typically has witness testimony. And the Republican majority had the power back then to make a mockery of the whole thing by not hearing any witness testimony. But this time around, the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. Had I been a Senator who voted for witnesses, only to have my vote ignored by the House managers, I would have been livid. The House managers did a fine job presenting their case, but nothing takes the place of real time witness testimony. Not to mention where some of that testimony might have led.

Would witnesses have changed the final result of the impeachment trial? Almost certainly not. But one by one Republicans had been gradually shifting over to vote for conviction, so why not even try?

As a final note, the President’s lawyers did make a good point at how limited the impeachment charges were against the President, basically just the incitement charge. What harm would there have been to add counts of dereliction of duty and violation of the Presidential oath? If anything, I think those were more solid cases than the incitement charge. Again, they should have presented the case for each of those charges, for the history books, if not for intransigent Republican Senators.

Anyway, this whole thread is pretty much moot now, and I’m very close to putting it on ignore.

But hopefully by getting this off my chest I’ll be able to sleep better tonight.

Exactly. I think it was a mistake.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 03:58 AM   #2754
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7,016
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
The Trump Supporters here are no better then the mindless iditos in Germany who felt "The Fuehrur Can Do No Wrong!'.
Make no mistake, a dictaroship is what they want.
And the only regreat they have about the insurrection is that if failed.
But given that they also thought that Biden would never take office Ithink their gifts of prophecy are limited.
Let's hope this fizzles.

Lindsey Graham Displays His Deep Devotion to the Cult of Trump in Fox Interview (Rolling Stone).

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...rview-1128305/
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 05:43 AM   #2755
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 6,785
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I think had they added charges, as Van der Veen pointed out, they would each have to be separate impeachments (or so he claims, although thinking about it that is obviously pants).
I don’t think that’s true.

The first impeachment trial had two charges:

On December 10, 2019, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee announced they would levy two articles of impeachment, designated H. Res. 755: (1) abuse of power, and (2) obstruction of Congress, in its investigation of the President's conduct regarding Ukraine.

Both charges were tried in a single Senate trial, with separate votes on each charge.

Even back then, I think they undercharged. Mueller had handed them about a dozen other obstruction charges they could have easily added, and didn’t. And so, much of the U.S. population, thanks in part to Bill Barr, still thinks Mueller found “no obstruction”. A trial on at least a few of those charges would have at least exposed the evidence for those charges to a larger segment of the population.

I am pretty rabidly anti-Republican right now. But still dissapointed at how weak and inept the Democrats can be.

Last edited by Fast Eddie B; 15th February 2021 at 05:48 AM.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 08:20 AM   #2756
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 28,289
I half agree with a lot here.

Biden was never my first choice but at least he is fairly decent. Asking an objectionable person to resign is not as robust an action as we'd like, but our former leader would have doubled down and lied. At least Biden is not an insane demagogue.

As for the remaining rump of the Republican party, I agree that they're not conservative in any real sense of that word. They like to throw that term around, but they're radical reactionaries, not conservatives. But the party has welcomed them aboard, and we must be aware by now how small a minority can be dangerous if they're sufficiently violent and motivated.

I hope Graham is right that the party cannot prevail without the rump, because there's a good chance that when their leader dies or goes utterly off the rails, they'll fall apart in a spate of power struggles, ideological bickering and purging.

I think Nixon bears much of the blame for establishing the rhetorical stance that his opponents were enemies, not only of himself but of democracy. But he hadn 't figured out just how to implement it. We can credit Newt Gingrich for much of that, his realization of how ideologues can simply refuse to compromise at all, his characterization of the conflict as a war of good against evil in which the stakes were all or nothing. e.t.a.: I also have a particular hatred of Bob Dole, who, after losing to Clinton, said outright that as a senator he would continue to represent the near majority who voted against him, and did his best to implement congressional gridlock.

I think this is the dilemma the Democrats must continue to grapple with: that the reactionaries of the Republican party have declared war not only against the tradition of bipartisan compromise, but against democracy and decency itself, and as so often happens, it is difficult to fight them without sinking to their level. As we see so often right here, you cannot argue rationally with those who abandon rationality.

The republican rump is like a schoolyard bully yelling "Nyah Nyah, I dare you!" We can admire the forbearance of those who say "I won't sink to your level," but the bully who recognizes his power rests on the decency of his opponents will keep on coming back.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)

Last edited by bruto; 15th February 2021 at 08:26 AM.
bruto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 08:28 AM   #2757
SuburbanTurkey
Philosopher
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 8,560
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
I half agree with a lot here.

Biden was never my first choice but at least he is fairly decent. Asking an objectionable person to resign is not as robust an action as we'd like, but our former leader would have doubled down and lied. At least Biden is not an insane demagogue.

As for the remaining rump of the Republican party, I agree that they're not conservative in any real sense of that word. They like to throw that term around, but they're radical reactionaries, not conservatives. But the party has welcomed them aboard, and we must be aware by now how small a minority can be dangerous if they're sufficiently violent and motivated.

I hope Graham is right that the party cannot prevail without the rump, because there's a good chance that when their leader dies or goes utterly off the rails, they'll fall apart in a spate of power struggles, ideological bickering and purging.

I think Nixon bears much of the blame for establishing the rhetorical stance that his opponents were enemies, not only of himself but of democracy. But he hadn 't figured out just how to implement it. We can credit Newt Gingrich for much of that, his realization of how ideologues can simply refuse to compromise at all, his characterization of the conflict as a war of good against evil in which the stakes were all or nothing.

I think this is the dilemma the Democrats must continue to grapple with: that the reactionaries of the Republican party have declared war not only against the tradition of bipartisan compromise, but against democracy and decency itself, and as so often happens, it is difficult to fight them without sinking to their level. As we see so often right here, you cannot argue rationally with those who abandon rationality.

The republican rump is like a schoolyard bully yelling "Nyah Nyah, I dare you!" We can admire the forbearance of those who say "I won't sink to your level," but the bully who recognizes his power rests on the decency of his opponents will keep on coming back.
It would probably help if they stopped saying things like "We need a strong Republican party" and started speaking plainly about how totally corrupt their counterparts have become.

We actually don't need a strong Republican party, and I really wish one of these journalists would press the Dems on statements like these, because I have no idea what they mean by this.

If the party itself can be saved, an extended period of time as a powerless minority party is probably necessary to spur meaningful reform. Or it can just whither and become replaced by some other party.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 10:13 AM   #2758
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 23,587
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I know if I die before the 2024 election, I'm going to rise up and vote anyway just to piss Trump off.
Here's to hoping that you'll live.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 10:48 AM   #2759
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,928
In washing his hands of guilt McConnell said it's up to the justice system, not him to hold Trump accountable.

So here's my question, is Trump legally liable for not responding to the riot?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th February 2021, 10:49 AM   #2760
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded and embattled, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 4,737
Originally Posted by bruto View Post
...

I think this is the dilemma the Democrats must continue to grapple with: that the reactionaries of the Republican party have declared war not only against the tradition of bipartisan compromise, but against democracy and decency itself, and as so often happens, it is difficult to fight them without sinking to their level. As we see so often right here, you cannot argue rationally with those who abandon rationality.

The republican rump is like a schoolyard bully yelling "Nyah Nyah, I dare you!" We can admire the forbearance of those who say "I won't sink to your level," but the bully who recognizes his power rests on the decency of his opponents will keep on coming back.
Those reactionaries aren't declaring war just against Democrats who might think it's worthwhile trying to meet them halfway, they're declaring war against members of their own party who won't toe their line (Politico via MSN):
Quote:
The North Carolina Republican Party is set to vote Monday on whether to censure Sen. Richard Burr for his vote to convict Donald Trump after the former president's impeachment trial, adding to the growing list of Republican members of Congress facing consequences for moves against Trump.
...
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) also faced backlash for his vote Saturday, with his state's GOP voting the same day to censure the senator for his decision. Cassidy continued to defend his vote on Monday, writing in a Baton Rouge newspaper that he "voted to convict former President Trump because he is guilty. That’s what the facts demand."
...

Cassidy and Burr are just a couple of Republicans being rebuked by their state parties for their votes in Trump’s second impeachment trial. Earlier this month, Sen. Ben Sasse faced a censure effort by Nebraska’s Republican Party, and Maine Republicans are slated to discuss Sen. Susan Collins' conviction vote this week. Multiple House Republicans have also faced reprisal for their votes — including No. 3 House Republican Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming.
The "big tent" GOP doesn't even have room in their own party for diversity of opinion; just more evidence that the folks who mouth "unity!" at anyone outside of it isn't talking about unity at all, they're demanding nothing less than unconditional surrender.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:47 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.