Donald Trump 2020

[Bruh Man 3160]

Oh for fuck's sake.

 

Edited July 1, 2020 by Bruh Man

[WhatTheBuck 28719]

45 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

Trump has exposed the two party system. When there’s only two teams, everyone chooses a side and defends their side to the death, even if that means defending traitors. 

Republicans in Congress during Watergate disagree. So do the Lincoln Project and Republican Voters Against Trump. And it really doesn't have anything to do with the two party system. I'm sure there are Gary Johnson and Jill Stein voters who were blindly partisan toward their respective sides. Hell, look how badly Bernie's supporters treated Hillary, and they were on the same side.

Every sports team has a large portion of their fan base who think their players and coaches can do no wrong and who see their rival's players and coaches as the embodiment of pure evil. The "Us vs. Them" instinct is powerfully ingrained and a lot of people never grow out of it. Too many people operate on emotion rather than critical thought. 

[TXSG8R 3360]

28 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean, she was nominated by conservatives.  I think it's pretty much been proven they are not on the up and up.  Millennials and Gen Z skew much further left overall.  I do agree that it's worrisome that we may not be in this for the long haul.  For the record, I am, assuming Step 1 is taken care of in November.

If its really youth driven, it should affect both parties.  Otherwise this becomes more that the D party is attracting the youth vote, and the Rs will shift to "the utes are coming for your X" and scare all the new olds coming down the pipe.  

[SydneyCarton 47932]

1 minute ago, Bruh Man said:

Oh for fuck's sake.

 

If he does this, there will be almost not choice but to expand the justices to 9 or 11. 

[RomaVicta 29809]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

They want a better world, and I think they will put us on the path towards one eventually. They are smart, motivated and totally unsentimental about the past. But if it is left to them the path will be harder and more difficult than it needed to be because we will start with ashes. 
I've said this before: it’s up to millennials with all the help Gen X can give them. They are the last cohort who remembers, if distantly, what is at stake and just how much we have to lose. After that, the deluge. 

You've articulated very nicely what I feel like I've observed about those younger generations in Austin. I hope it's true everywhere. I lament Austin no longer being the two-story town that was cheap to live in and rich with experiences, but I've admired the interesting metropolis that the millennial market influences into existence.

The lack of sentimentality is fresh air in the fug of American self-congratulation. Ironically, the lack of sentimentality has lead to a reinvention of some good things from the past. The millennials seem too emotionally cool for angry iconclasm.

Some boomers retain traces of that same spirit from the Nixon days. I don't like facile generational labeling, but I'm all in on a coalition of citizens of different ages uniting (led by BLM?) to chop away late stage captialism (great term) and refocus on the foundational values of the US. It is the only dim chance against big money, entrenched white people, and general ignorance of what this great experiment was all about.

The shadow of calcified ignorance, smugness, and hate is cast huge on us. All very difficult to undo. A curse on anyone who doesn't become part of the solution. 

Edit to add Brisket quote (after all, this post isn't nearly long enough!):

It's not just that we've built a system designed to fuck over most Americans for the benefit of a few oligarchs, it's that we actively lionize that system as "the American Way!", and any opposition to it is "treasonous commie America-haters!  SOCIALISM!"  The GOP is not interested in negotiation, compromise, or good-faith discussion.  They have drawn a line in the sand.  Victory or death.  That's where we are.

The embrace of market capitalism as religion rather than as merely an option has eroded our identity as citizens with common interest. We're selfish cunts looking out for number one, baby!

Well put, both of you.

Edited July 1, 2020 by RomaVicta

[TwiceHorn 31316]

4 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Oh for fuck's sake.

 

No loss for liberals there, really.  Odds are decent that even whomever Trump might appoint would be better than Alito.  For liberals, I mean.

Alito has always been just a rubber stamp for the conservative wing.  His replacement might be a thinker, a Gorsuch.

Also, although everyone seems to think the modern "vetting" process will prevent "turncoat justices," I rather doubt that that will be the case over the longer haul.

Edited July 1, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[WhatTheBuck 28719]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

If he does this, there will be almost not choice but to expand the justices to 9 or 11. 

Yeah, they should expand to nine. 

[SydneyCarton 47932]

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

No loss for liberals there, really.  Odds are decent that even whomever Trump might appoint would be better than Alito.  For liberals, I mean.

I think that's a dangerous statement. I realize you're an attorney, and that you will be much more famliar with the terrain here and the players. That being said, he could very well put in another lunatic who will be there for 30 years, and will be a zealot in that spot. Even if Alito is a shitbag, he's old and somewhere there's probably still some semblance of decorum, or way to behave and respect for the office. He could be replaced with a zealot who doesn't give a shit about the courts, and has no problem openly politicizing things. No No No. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23364]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Well, its really Trump supremacy.  And he's a white male so all those non-white, non-male people tend to threaten Trump supremacy, so their interests align perfectly.

I hate to say this because it’s going to come off as provocative but the conservative movement for my entire lifetime has been about protecting white supremacy in American society. 

Every policy idea has the consequences of protecting the established white wealth and power structure while oppressing women and minorities.  

Yeah, free market capitalism sounds wonderful if you’re working under the assumption the market is egalitarian and not racist AF but that’s not reality.  

Give minorities education, healthcare, or welfare and it’s socialism.  Give the banks, farmers, and Wall Street stimulus money or a tax cut and it’s the American way. 

How about border security?  No one gives a flying fuck about border security until the people coming in aren’t white. 

Look at our prisons, look at our law enforcement, and ffs we still have 10 military bases named after confederate generals with the conservatives still defending them.

Abortion and gun policy are also rooted in keeping the white patriarchy protected.  

This isn’t some grand conspiracy either, it’s just hundreds of years of internalized and normalized white supremacy 

[Red Five 40694]

I wouldn't worry about it. This is an election year. We don't do these in election years. 

[Bruh Man 3160]

6 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I think that's a dangerous statement. I realize you're an attorney, and that you will be much more famliar with the terrain here and the players. That being said, he could very well put in another lunatic who will be there for 30 years, and will be a zealot in that spot. Even if Alito is a shitbag, he's old and somewhere there's probably still some semblance of decorum, or way to behave and respect for the office. He could be replaced with a zealot who doesn't give a shit about the courts, and has no problem openly politicizing things. No No No. 

Yeah Barnett is a lunatic and only 48. Not sure about Thapar's ideology but he's only 51. 

Edited July 1, 2020 by Bruh Man

[Foosters 17763]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

He might. He really seems to think starting a race war will benefit him.

Yeah, isn't this the same guy who shut down the federal government for over a month because he wasn't given his border wall funding - despite promising that taxpayers wouldn't have to pay for it?

[Bruh Man 3160]

4 minutes ago, Red Five said:

I wouldn't worry about it. This is an election year. We don't do these in election years. 

Mitch: 

[Jive Turkey 12570]

the name i see as the leading candidate to replace Alito is Amul Thapar.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/potential-nominee-profile-amul-thapar/

[Nice Guy Eddie 13418]

14 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

If he does this, there will be almost not choice but to expand the justices to 9 or 11. 

The govt definitely can expand the court. However Trump will need to get Pelosi on board with that plan. That ain't happening. At least not today. Pelosi might agree to that plan in January with President Biden and Leader Schumer.

[Pig Bellmont 8692]

Alito isn’t retiring. 

[TXSG8R 3360]

30 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

My unorthodox ideas:

1) It could be that humans are ungovernable over the long term
2) Looking to history doesn't help us because every historical situation is unique i.e. it has new players, new historical antecedents, new motivations, and new understandings of history, PLUS historians can't even agree on the reasons why something happened, or how

3) We're conditioned to believe that choice X is better than choice Y because of whatever.  What if this is incorrect? What if both choices are equally bad?
4) If having two parties has worked for us for 200+ years, there's no reason it will continue to do so.  Similarly, if having many parties hasn't worked for Italy since World War II, there's no reason it can't start working for Italy ---- or for us.

5) We're screwed or we're not.
6) You never know what worse luck your bad luck saved you from.

Yea, I'm only really familiar with the Bundestag in Germany when it comes to coalition governments, but its appealing from what I know of it.  You get less of the fringes holding the government hostage like we have had with the tea party.  But there is also a large cultural component that goes with that.  I think voters over there are more about issues and less about party identity.  I haven't had a ton of political discussions with family over there, but when I have, I've never heard anyone say they are a proud CPD member or any shit like that.  They also aren't scared to call out candidates they voted for when they do something they don't agree with. I think you see a lot more inter-party disagreement even over relatively minor stuff, they just aren't scared to have dissenting opinions.  They learned their lesson in the 40s of putting party over people, you would think we wouldn't be dumb enough to duplicate it.  

[Lagunamadre 1975]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

He might. He really seems to think starting a race war will benefit him.

He is even dumber than I thought if he thinks there is a swath of virulent racist swing voters out there. They've all been squarely in the core of his base since he claimed Obama was born in Kenya. 

[SydneyCarton 47932]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

The govt definitely can expand the court. However Trump will need to get Pelosi on board with that plan. That ain't happening. At least not today. Pelosi might agree to that plan in January with President Biden and Leader Schumer.

Yeah man, that was my point. After the election, obviously, if there's a blue wave and ownership of all 3 houses. That's what it will take. Obviously not fucking now. 

[RomaVicta 29809]

1 hour ago, Neonmoon said:

Trump has exposed the two party system. When there’s only two teams, everyone chooses a side and defends their side to the death, even if that means defending traitors. 

I know you're not a Both-sider or an apologist for anyone, but this is sort of a both sides argument.

There's plenty wrong with the timid Dems who must suck up to money like everybody else, but they're not the same as the criminal organization that the GOP has become. The Dems do expell members from time to time and have never, as far as I can recall, completely ignored truth to back a traitor in the same jersey.

It's a low bar to clear, but the Dems surely clear it while the present day GOP does not. The Dems didn't have an Iran-Contra or start a war with Iraq over something Iraq didn't do (9/11 and WMD). The Dems were too weak to stop those policies or even delve out punishiment, but they haven't stooped quite so low as to initiate those policies.

[Hornius Emeritus 12424]

24 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

If he does this, there will be almost not choice but to expand the justices to 9 or 11. 

 

There are already nine. My guess is that Alito won't retire before the election, knowing what catastrophic consequences there might be.

 

[Fudge Nuggets 19152]

28 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Yeah, they should expand to nine. 

I was wondering if I was having an old age moment. Glad to see I am not. Yet. There’s still plenty of time left in the day   

[Brisketexan 104735]

20 minutes ago, Jive Turkey said:

the name i see as the leading candidate to replace Alito is Amul Thapar.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/07/potential-nominee-profile-amul-thapar/

You misspelled "Stephen Miller."

[Fudge Nuggets 19152]

13 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

There are already nine. My guess is that Alito won't retire before the election, knowing what catastrophic consequences there might be.

 

I fear some of those consequences would include exercising 2nd amendment rights in a not so nice fashion. 

[SydneyCarton 47932]

15 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

There are already nine. My guess is that Alito won't retire before the election, knowing what catastrophic consequences there might be.

 

Yeah, as another poster pointed out, total brain fart there. 

['stache 21778]

23 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Alito isn’t retiring. 

If he did it would be an acknowledgement that trump is likely to lose. If the polls are correct (which I doubt but assuming they are correct) the republicans will be out of the white house for at least the next 8 years and maybe more. If Alito wants to retire anytime before then, a democrat will replace him and sway the balance. Biden will likely get to replace Ginsberg and Bryer, which is important. Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh will serve more than 8 years. Thomas and Alito will be pushing 80 by then and I don't think they will step down during a democratic executive. Democrats will need to win again after Biden's 8 years for a true alteration of the current conservative balance, which was stolen from Obama. 

[wildcat09 29286]

51 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I think that's a dangerous statement. I realize you're an attorney, and that you will be much more famliar with the terrain here and the players. That being said, he could very well put in another lunatic who will be there for 30 years, and will be a zealot in that spot. Even if Alito is a shitbag, he's old and somewhere there's probably still some semblance of decorum, or way to behave and respect for the office. He could be replaced with a zealot who doesn't give a shit about the courts, and has no problem openly politicizing things. No No No. 

Alito actually is a religious zealot with little regard for decorum and has no problem openly politicizing things. He's the most obviously partisan vote on the court.

[SydneyCarton 47932]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Alito actually is a religious zealot with little regard for decorum and has no problem openly politicizing things. He's the most obviously partisan vote on the court.

Yes. I understand your point. But he's old AF, and from a different era. Do you think he's more likely or less likely to be replaced by someone who's been steeped in the current world of Social Media/Cult of Personality bullshit that has become American politics? The point, is, he may be all the things you say, but it's likely his replacement will be that on Steroids. For example, and I realize this is impossible for many reasons starting with him not being a judge, but what if the nomination was a judicial clone of AG Barr?

Edited July 1, 2020 by SydneyCarton

[Michael Knight 12902]

What if it was Barr

[Leeroy Jenkins 2394]

14 minutes ago, 'stache said:

If he did it would be an acknowledgement that trump is likely to lose. If the polls are correct (which I doubt but assuming they are correct) the republicans will be out of the white house for at least the next 8 years and maybe more. If Alito wants to retire anytime before then, a democrat will replace him and sway the balance. Biden will likely get to replace Ginsberg and Bryer, which is important. Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh will serve more than 8 years. Thomas and Alito will be pushing 80 by then and I don't think they will step down during a democratic executive. Democrats will need to win again after Biden's 8 years for a true alteration of the current conservative balance, which was stolen from Obama. 

I can't see Biden serving for 8 years.  

[Michael Knight 12902]

woke kush

 

Behind the scenes: One person who spoke with the president interpreted his thinking this way: "No more of Jared's woke s***." Another said Trump has indicated that following Kushner's advice has harmed him politically.

 

"He truly believes there is a silent majority out there that's going to come out in droves in November," said a source who's talked to the president in recent days.

 

Ratings trumps everything

 

The president also pays close attention to Fox News' Tucker Carlson. A few weeks ago, in a brutal monologue, Carlson blamed Kushner for giving Trump bad advice.

• "In 2016, Donald Trump ran as a law-and-order candidate because he meant it," Carlson said. "And his views remain fundamentally unchanged today. But the president's famously sharp instincts, the ones that won him the presidency almost four years ago, have been since subverted at every level by Jared Kushner."
• It hasn't escaped Trump's attention that Carlson has recently been the highest-rated host on cable news. Trump, generally skeptical about polls, views television ratings as a kind of substitute poll, according to a person who's discussed the subject with him.

 

https://www.axios.com/trump-kushner-second-thoughts-408d5a33-725d-442a-88e4-d6ab6742c139.html?fbclid=IwAR1ySsJ1dhgAQGFa-5GamSxn9jipG6lCQCEx27P8XH37tnRuHwDV-H9-bUg

Edited July 1, 2020 by Michael Knight

[Mdhorn 5912]

39 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:

 

There are already nine. My guess is that Alito won't retire before the election, knowing what catastrophic consequences there might be.

 

If he retires now, they'll try and ram home a Justice.  

Edited July 1, 2020 by Mdhorn

[Fozzz 152]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Republicans in Congress during Watergate disagree. So do the Lincoln Project and Republican Voters Against Trump. And it really doesn't have anything to do with the two party system. I'm sure there are Gary Johnson and Jill Stein voters who were blindly partisan toward their respective sides. Hell, look how badly Bernie's supporters treated Hillary, and they were on the same side.

Every sports team has a large portion of their fan base who think their players and coaches can do no wrong and who see their rival's players and coaches as the embodiment of pure evil. The "Us vs. Them" instinct is powerfully ingrained and a lot of people never grow out of it. Too many people operate on emotion rather than critical thought. 

There was much less polarization in the watergate era than there is now, and no one cares about the Lincoln Vanity Project. 
 

I do think we are seeing some realignment between the parties where identity politics is driving the working class towards the Republicans while educated, upper-middle class whites are migrating towards the Dems. The upshot is that there will be even less substantive difference between how each party governs although the rhetoric will become even more polarized and heated. 

[BrickHorn 18198]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

No loss for liberals there, really.  Odds are decent that even whomever Trump might appoint would be better than Alito.  For liberals, I mean.

Alito has always been just a rubber stamp for the conservative wing.  His replacement might be a thinker, a Gorsuch.

Oh, for fuck’s sake. You and I both know it’s going to be Judge Jeanine. 

[TwiceHorn 31316]

7 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Alito actually is a religious zealot with little regard for decorum and has no problem openly politicizing things. He's the most obviously partisan vote on the court.

It's odd how these Opus Dei-y Catholics are some of the worst.  Maybe it's not, but it's striking how uniformly bad they are.

[DDD Dad 14268]

1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

I think that's a dangerous statement. I realize you're an attorney, and that you will be much more famliar with the terrain here and the players. That being said, he could very well put in another lunatic who will be there for 30 years, and will be a zealot in that spot. Even if Alito is a shitbag, he's old and somewhere there's probably still some semblance of decorum, or way to behave and respect for the office. He could be replaced with a zealot who doesn't give a shit about the courts, and has no problem openly politicizing things. No No No. 

He's implying a Warren/Breyer result.  Lifetime appointments sometimes get you a Clarence Thomas or Sam Alito, but sometimes a surprise.

[Michael Knight 12902]

4 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

If he retires now, they'll try and ram home a Justice.  

I think its a strategy to "inspire" voters, VOTE FOR ME OR LIBERALS WILL GIVE A JUDGE THAT WILL TAKE AWAY 2 AND ABOLISH POLICE. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 33852]

I know this isn't really the topic at hand but in my political fantasy world I imagine a day where Barack Obama is named to the SCOTUS and people's heads collectively explode across the country

[RPM 26237]

23 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Democrats will need to win again after Biden's 8 years

I have no visions of Biden running for a second term. He's 77 and only running now because we're Trump fucked. What I think happens is Biden picks a strong female Veep then backs her in 4 years.

[TwiceHorn 31316]

7 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

He's implying a Warren/Breyer result.  Lifetime appointments sometimes get you a Clarence Thomas or Sam Alito, but sometimes a surprise.

I freely admit that I could be wrong, but the Federalistas are already up in arms over Gorsuch.  But these people are up there a long time, with perfect job security, that is, no real repercussions for their decisions if they don't fall along party lines.  And the decisions they make are unlike any they've made before, no matter how vast their judicial or legal experience.  Or their bullshit juridical philosophizing at some think tank or idle DOJ position.

Sometimes you get a lunatic like Thomas, but he's just another vote, hardly anyone ever subscribes to his lunacy, so he's kind of neutered.

I think there is considerable room for change and unpredictability, despite the Federalist Society attempt to grow the perfect nazi justice.

Again:

And, although a liberal might be preferable to Alito, if you're going to replace one, it's hard to do worse than him.

Edited July 1, 2020 by TwiceHorn

[Bama Chick 28596]

In all fairness, Anthony Weiner tossed his weiner out so many times they didnt really have a choice.

And if he were a Republican he’d currently be the Secretary of Health and Human Services or The Director of the Office of Diversity.

[Fozzz 152]

2 minutes ago, RPM said:

I have no visions of Biden running for a second term. He's 77 and only running now because we're Trump fucked. What I think happens is Biden picks a strong female Veep then backs her in 4 years.

2024 is Hawley time.

[TXSG8R 3360]

 

 

[Macanudo 12935]

1 minute ago, TXSG8R said:

 

 

I keep seeing the comment that "3 NATO officials" say they were briefed.  Who were they?

[TXSG8R 3360]

Just now, Macanudo said:

I keep seeing the comment that "3 NATO officials" say they were briefed.  Who were they?

I'm sure one is the UK since I believe that was the impetus for all of this spilling out, dunno on the other two.  

Quote

The revelation that US intelligence had briefed the White House on the Taliban bounties had been a closely-held secret for several months, until US officials began briefing UK and other European allies last week.

Three NATO military officials told Business Insider on Monday they had been briefed by US intelligence of the potential threat, with two of them saying they were given the briefing about one week ago. None of the three officials have permission to be named in the press, but their identities are known to Insider.

“We were briefed [by the Americans] on a potential threat to our troops in Afghanistan from operatives potentially linked to the Russian intelligence services,” one NATO military intelligence official told Insider on Monday.

I think the next angle on all of this is why brief them now if we caught wind of it in 2019?  What drove that escalation?  And why was it important enough to share with NATO, but supposedly not POTUS?  This just looks worse and worse the more things come to light.  

[DanTheHorn 4902]

1 hour ago, Bruh Man said:

Oh for fuck's sake.

 

Throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. They think Trump won because there was a conservative justice at stake. Recreate the same situation and try to not bleed support. People that can't stand Trump and Democrats may stay home since two liberal justices are at stake. They may say no gains but also no harm done. This intentional leak by Alito now makes those folks come out.

[4th&Five 41461]

 

[JimmyJames 12271]

3 hours ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, didn't realize NATO and FoxNews were the same thing.  Holy shit, this thing really is blowing up faster and better than I thought it would.  

His fucksticks can blame China for WuhanFlu, they can blame black people for police brutality, they can blame Pelosi for the economy, but who in the world are you idiots gonna look to when your messiah looked the other way when Russia played bounty hunter with our sons' lives?  He's done.  The bad news is his supporters are now boxed into a corner like a frightened pit bull.  Election Day to Inauguration Day...77 Days.  They will be the darkest period in our nation in long while.  We are not yet at our lowest point.

We are not at our lowest point. The lowest point will be the day before trump is finally removed by force out of office. Until that day comes, all of this will get worse, much worse. 

[bolverk 29430]

32 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

If he retires now, they'll try and ram home a Justice.  

 

27 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

I think its a strategy to "inspire" voters, VOTE FOR ME OR LIBERALS WILL GIVE A JUDGE THAT WILL TAKE AWAY 2 AND ABOLISH POLICE. 

Given what we know about Alito, this may well be the strategy for firing up the base by inflaming passions in the middle of an election. After all, it appeared to have somewhat blunted the "blue wave" in 2018 and may well have played a role in preventing Beto from beating Cruz.

[Brisketexan 104735]

9 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Again, we've blown past dog whistles, and reached a point of open "HERE, DOGGIE!  COME HERE, DOGGIE!"

A nazi-supporting slogan, revived....using a logo that matches the nazi emblem, with American colors added.  That's actually happening.