Donald Trump 2018

[Js1 86940]

 

[retread 2951]

 
 
What agreements are the Russians talking about?

It's funny how the Russians are the ones to tell us what went on in their meetings w DOTUS.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Could someone copy and paste the George Will WP article?

[bad_teammate 13479]

8 hours ago, hayden_horn said:

this is really the key. @bad_teammate is worst teammate. seriously, dude, fuck you and your mother. wants, and WHAT THIS COUNTRY NEEDS, and you're all "nah, cool fuck these voters, eat shit, fake hipsters." seriously, do you not understand that your GREAT VICTORY is at hand?

No matter how big the blue wave is in 2018, the Democrats cannot achieve the goal of impeaching and removing Donald Trump.

The only way Donald Trump can be removed before 2020 is if Republicans impeach and remove him. The only way that could happen is if conservatives got moving within the Republican party to make that happen. Why aren't you guys doing that?

Why aren't you trying to save the fiscally conservative party?

A handful of conservatives voting for Democrats for one term in which they cannot accomplish anything important and then those conservatives going back home to the GOP as soon as Ben Sasse or some other white guy with concerned-face comes calling in 2020 or 2024 is not a GREAT VICTORY.

Quote

you may win over the voters you have wanted! these are the actual social liberal voters YOU WANT! here they are, asking for succor, and here you are all "fuck off, financial conservatives, because of your conservative polices" instead of saying, "come on n yall. we have our differences, but fuck this guy. we can talk about other shit later, but we agree on gay shit, and some other social shit, but we may disagree with some other shit, but let's all agree to CUT OUT THE FUCKING CANCER."

Fiscal conservatism is the cancer and Trump is merely the tumor sticking out in an offending manner.

I know you guys have worked yourselves into a huge lather over how Trump is going to destroy the Republic, but the reality is that the Republic is going to exist in 2020 and 2024 and beyond.

When conservatives who are outraged at Trump talk about the coming elections this "we'll talk about other stuff later" stuff is nothing Lucy holding the football and I'm just telling Charlie Brown, "Don't go kick that fucking thing, she's going to pull it back again."

You cannot even begin to understand how unimpressed I am with your "social liberal" talk. Your big paean to cooperation is "we agree on gay shit (we actually don't agree on LGBT issues, I bet), and some other social shit (can't even bring yourself to think of a second thing?)". I'm swooning!

Have fun voting for Democrats as an exercise in temporarily sowing your wild oats. Get together with fellow fiscal conservatives and high five each other about how you're saving the Republic by voting in some people who literally cannot accomplish the goal you say you want (Trump's impeachment). And then have fun working against every progressive policy put forward from now on. I'm going to be the one person here left of center who is not going to end up on his ass in the dirt thinking, "Oh she was really going to hold it for me this time."

If you're interested in talking about actual issues (*cue Brisket rage that anyone would want to talk about stupid shit like issues*) then that's great.

All of these howling posts from "former"-GOP loyalists and center-rightists read like Trump Tweeting, "DO SOMETHING"

Go tell Will Hurd you agree with 98% of his policies, but you demand that he vote to impeach Trump. Why aren't you guys doing that?

Edited July 18, 2018 by bad_teammate

[Francisco 2.0 32543]

Source:

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/trump-putin-g20/index.html

Quote

President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, spoke for a second time on July 7 in a previously undisclosed discussion, the White House confirmed on Tuesday.

A senior White House official told CNN the discussion was "nearly an hour."

The White House, in a statement acknowledging the meeting, contended it was "brief" and said Trump spoke with Putin through Russia's translator. The US translator at the dinner -- each country was only allowed only one -- spoke Japanese, the White House said.

 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Francisco 2.0

[Dr. Teeth 5868]

Does he now lose the 2020 Iowa Caucus to Hader?

[Texas73 422]

Mueller is our best hope for this being resolved. He needs to give us the necessary facts to remove Trump.  Now.

[Js1 86940]

Stop making me agree with you BT!

Centrists/former-GOP-turned-independent while waiting for the GOP to regain sanity-not Trumpers are going to end up shifting the Democrats right so in 2, 6, and 8 years, they can go back to screaming BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE!!!! and "We don't have 2 parties, we just have 1 party that doesn't represent us!" A bunch of fiscal conservatives throwing their loads in with the Democrats aren't going to help accomplish progressive agenda items.

The grassroots are trying to move the party left, to actually be the progressive party, but they're facing headwinds from the corporatist centrists trying to triangulate into the middle.  Those former-GOP-turned-independents will just wait until Sasse/Flake or someone "normal" retakes a hold of the GOP and suddenly, they're back to being Republicans!

The goal shouldn't be to moderate the Democrats nationally (locally is totally different, but even the conservative Democrats didn't budge on dismantling the ACA or protections for LGBT or minorities), it should be to get ACTUALLY ELECTED REPUBLICANS on board with the notion that Trump is compromised, he's a traitor, he's antithesis to American values and institutions and bipartisanly work to get him impeached, removed or defeated. From within their own party.

59% support Medicare-for-All

78% support free public university tuition

66% raising the minimum wage and 59% support $12/hour (48% support $15/hour)

80% want campaign finance reform to get dark money out of politics

78% want tougher Wall Street regulations, rules and enforcements

Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats focus on electing progressive candidates (where they can) who agree with these things.  Instead of centrist dinosaurs who hem and haw and check their bank accounts to make sure Super PAC 1 and Lobbyist Firm 2's checks cleared.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

19 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Source:

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/trump-putin-g20/index.html

 

Torbush

[Texas73 422]

Lifelong Democrat here starting with working in the McGovern campaign while at UT. As for as "78% support free public university tuition", what is the price of free tuition to every public university in the United States? Seems it would be astronomical, impossible to fund.

I can see free public junior college tuition but all public university tuition seems impossible to me.

[Huckleberry 34407]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Stop making me agree with you BT!

Centrists/former-GOP-turned-independent while waiting for the GOP to regain sanity-not Trumpers are going to end up shifting the Democrats right so in 2, 6, and 8 years, they can go back to screaming BoTh SiDeS aRe ThE sAmE!!!! and "We don't have 2 parties, we just have 1 party that doesn't represent us!" A bunch of fiscal conservatives throwing their loads in with the Democrats aren't going to help accomplish progressive agenda items.

The grassroots are trying to move the party left, to actually be the progressive party, but they're facing headwinds from the corporatist centrists trying to triangulate into the middle.  Those former-GOP-turned-independents will just wait until Sasse/Flake or someone "normal" retakes a hold of the GOP and suddenly, they're back to being Republicans!

The goal shouldn't be to moderate the Democrats nationally (locally is totally different, but even the conservative Democrats didn't budge on dismantling the ACA or protections for LGBT or minorities), it should be to get ACTUALLY ELECTED REPUBLICANS on board with the notion that Trump is compromised, he's a traitor, he's antithesis to American values and institutions and bipartisanly work to get him impeached, removed or defeated. From within their own party.

59% support Medicare-for-All

78% support free public university tuition

66% raising the minimum wage and 59% support $12/hour (48% support $15/hour)

80% want campaign finance reform to get dark money out of politics

78% want tougher Wall Street regulations, rules and enforcements

Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats focus on electing progressive candidates (where they can) who agree with these things.  Instead of centrist dinosaurs who hem and haw and check their bank accounts to make sure Super PAC 1 and Lobbyist Firm 2's checks cleared.

If you're agreeing with b_t then you should be questioning yourself, not the people you're arguing with.

Good news for you is that some of us planning to vote Democrat have no plans to join the party and try to move it anywhere. We're all on the same page.

And I agree with 2-1/2 of your 5 ideas, so there's that.

[4th&Five 41904]

 

[Anastasis 23699]

10 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

Yes--so popular, in fact, that such policies do not even attain majority support within the Democratic Party.  So popular that only a minority of the Democratic caucus in either house of Congress supports such policies.

Yes--you're doing a splendid job of passing your agenda.  Tell me, as the permanent minority party pursuing policies favored by a minority of voters and a minority of legislators, how exactly do you expect to get anything passed?

You see, I can count votes, and you don't have the votes.

This sounds virtually identical to the kinds of lobs that TahoeHorn would throw at the Paulistas a decade or so ago. We know how that turned out. Sprinkled and glazed. 

[tantric superman 4668]

2 hours ago, GhostOfTomJoad said:

Hurry up, Mueller. For the sake of this nation, hurry up.

Hurry up 2018 and 2020, for the sake of this nation, hurry up.

[Bookman 4754]

Just remember, this is all the fault of the 63,000,000 Americans who voted for him. The blame goes squarely there.

[Js1 86940]

4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

If you're agreeing with b_t then you should be questioning yourself, not the people you're arguing with.

Good news for you is that some of us planning to vote Democrat have no plans to join the party and try to move it anywhere. We're all on the same page.

And I agree with 2-1/2 of your 5 ideas, so there's that.

Your second sentence is good.  You don't have to join the party.  Please stay out of our primaries though.   We're happy to have you for 2018 and probably 2020.  But let Democrats choose their candidates.

Brisket, for example, God love him, said he is probably done with even voting in GOP primaries. The concern is too many GOP-turned-indie voters going into Dem primaries and choosing the more moderate candidates. 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Js1

[Js1 86940]

37 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Source:

https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/18/politics/trump-putin-g20/index.html

 

No this is fine. -Republicans

Nothing to see here.  There's no implication. Nothing suspicious. Nah. He corrected himself yesterday, we take him at his word (the 2nd time)!

[Huckleberry 34407]

1 minute ago, Js1 said:

Your second sentence is good.  You don't have to join the party.  Please stay out of our primaries though. 

Brisket, for example, God love him, said he is probably done with even voting in GOP primaries. The concern is too many GOP-turned-indie voters going into Dem primaries and choosing the more moderate candidates. 

I support moving to a closed primary system everywhere. These are private political parties and they should be able to limit the selection of their candidates for the general elections to party members only.

I've been pretty clear that I don't see myself ever becoming a Democrat but I have no issue with the party becoming more progressive. Two parties who are actually ideologically opposed is healthier for the nation than these two corporate parties we have now. Well, it would actually add to the divisiveness but that's only because we're a nation of morons who have completely lost the concept of disagreeing respectfully. I mean look at me now, I'm respectful toward you even though 2 of your 5 stated policy goals are terribad.

[Anastasis 23699]

Just now, Bookman said:

Just remember, this is all the fault of the 63,000,000 Americans who voted for him. The blame goes squarely there.

The 129MM Americans who voted in 2016 were given shitty choices by shitty parties, one of which in particular cultivated a culture of right out fucking nonsense among their base after many of years of demonstrating at every chance they got that they had no true principles and couldn't govern their way out of a paper bag.  The other was captured by a political dynasty, held the finger on the scale during the primary, and took for granted the fact that a coalition of voters who pinned their votes on "Hope and Change" but got neither would show up and pull the lever.  But yeah, its the 129MM's fault. 

[pyrohornIII 4844]

4 minutes ago, Texas73 said:

Lifelong Democrat here starting with working in the McGovern campaign while at UT. As for as "78% support free public university tuition", what is the price of free tuition to every public university in the United States? Seems it would be astronomical, impossible to fund.

I can see free public junior college tuition but all public university tuition seems impossible to me.

I think there needs to be a system in place that recognizes and rewards efforts (grades, attendance, public service) to gain entry into higher education.  I don't think it was ever "whoever wants to go to college can" argument.    I think that kind of program would just foster more Trump University scams.

 

[Huckleberry 34407]

1 minute ago, pyrohornIII said:

I think there needs to be a system in place that recognizes and rewards efforts (grades, attendance, public service) to gain entry into higher education.  I don't think it was ever "whoever wants to go to college can" argument.    I think that kind of program would just foster more Trump University scams.

 

The entire "everyone goes to a university" idea is awful. Not everyone needs to go to a university. While the social movement to value education is wonderful, there's no reason for someone who wants to be a mechanic, for example, to think he has to go to college. Like many good ideas the movement to send everyone to college has gone too far.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13619]

The 129MM Americans who voted in 2016 were given shitty choices by shitty parties, one of which in particular cultivated a culture of right out fucking nonsense among their base after many of years of demonstrating at every chance they got that they had no true principles and couldn't govern their way out of a paper bag.  The other was captured by a political dynasty, held the finger on the scale during the primary, and took for granted the fact that a coalition of voters who pinned their votes on "Hope and Change" but got neither would show up and pull the lever.  But yeah, its the 129MM's fault. 

I got actual health insurance due to Obama and it was a huge deal for me. (Cue "my premiums went up!")

[Fastbreak 4012]

Fuck this motherfucking piece of shit. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

11 minutes ago, Texas73 said:

Lifelong Democrat here starting with working in the McGovern campaign while at UT. As for as "78% support free public university tuition", what is the price of free tuition to every public university in the United States? Seems it would be astronomical, impossible to fund.

I can see free public junior college tuition but all public university tuition seems impossible to me.

Same.   Free university tuition is the worst idea to come out of the left in recent years.   I'm all for government-funded educational opportunities for the economically disadvantaged, but what we need to be doing is deemphasizing the need for a university education and encouraging more people to go to trade schools.   And our resources would be better used on early childhood education and child care for working poor parents, which will do a lot more good than free college.  In my opinion. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

36 minutes ago, Texas73 said:

Mueller is our best hope for this being resolved. He needs to give us the necessary facts to remove Trump.  Now.

I hate to be Debbie Downer but Mueller’s findings are not going to remove Trump.

Seriously, what facts could Mueller possibly provide that would force the Republicans’ hand?

Mueller could name Trump as a witting co-conspirator and the Republicans still won’t act because Trump’s base doesn’t give a shit if Trump committed treason to beat Hillary, they applaud it.

All the high crimes and misdemeanors necessary to remove Trump are on full display right in front of everyone.  Americans don’t need Mueller to be the minister of truth to tell us Trump obstructed justice and conspired with Russia to undermine democracy.  He ran a campaign on undermining democracy.  “The election is rigged! Russia if your listening...Wikileaks! I love Wikileaks!”  Not enough people gave a shit at the time, what makes you think they will now?

Edited July 18, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Js1 86940]

Mueller's findings should be the catalyst for 70% of the electorate to actually show up and vote Republicans out in 2018, and then Trump in 2020.

Because the 30% who continue to support Trump will force the Republican Congress' hands (and electoral prospects) and ensure they do nothing to impeach him.  Can't piss them off or you're unemployed.

Edited July 18, 2018 by Js1

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

25 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Your second sentence is good.  You don't have to join the party.  Please stay out of our primaries though.   We're happy to have you for 2018 and probably 2020.  But let Democrats choose their candidates.

Brisket, for example, God love him, said he is probably done with even voting in GOP primaries. The concern is too many GOP-turned-indie voters going into Dem primaries and choosing the more moderate candidates. 

Some New Jersey congressional candidate was on CNN this morning and they asked him how the Democratic party should attempt to balance the rising left wing led by people like AOC and the centrists like Pelosi.  His response was a pretty good one, something along the lines of "there's plenty I want to change in this country, but I don't think this is the election for that.  This is the election to save our country."

I get that the views of moderates do not necessarily jibe long term with those further to the left, but it's unwise to let differences in views for how you want this country to be run in 2050 push away the people who can help in 2018.  

Honestly, I can't even believe that sentence has to be typed less than two years after Hillary/Bernie.  

 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Chuckie Finster

[Js1 86940]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Some New Jersey congressional candidate was on CNN this morning and they asked him how the Democratic party should attempt to balance the rising left wing led by people like AOC and the centrists like Pelosi.  His response was a pretty good one, something along the lines of "there's plenty I want to change in this country, but I don't think this is the election for that.  This is the election to save our country."

I get that the views of moderates do not necessarily jibe long term with those further to the left, but it's unwise to let differences in views for how you want this country to be run in 2050 push away the people who can help in 2018.  

 

Well I agree with that candidate somewhat, I also think electing Democrats still won't get Trump out of office anytime sooner than Jan 2021.  A Democrat-led House will impeach, but a Senate with an R majority or D majority by 1 seat isn't going to convict.  He's here for 2.5 more years, folks.  The purpose of this election is two-fold:  hand investigative powers to the Democrats and prevent the Senate from being able to confirm the chucklefucks Trump keeps nominating to the judiciary and/or Cabinet.  But you're also laying the groundwork for which Congressional Democrats would be working with a Democratic President in 2021. 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Js1

[Texas73 422]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I hate to be Debbie Downer but Mueller’s findings are not going to remove Trump.

Seriously, what facts could Mueller possibly provide that would force the Republican’s hand?

Mueller could name Trump as a witting co-conspirator and the Republicans still won’t act because Trump’s base doesn’t give a shit if Trump committed treason to beat Hillary, they applaud it.

All the high crimes and misdemeanors necessary to remove Trump are on full display right in front of everyone.  Americans don’t need Mueller to be the minister of truth to tell us Trump obstructed justice and conspired with Russia to undermine democracy.  He ran a campaign on undermining democracy.  “The election is rigged! Russia if your listening...Wikileaks! I love Wikileaks!”  Not enough gave a shit at the time, what makes you think they will now?

I really hate that you are right. I've been an educator for almost 5 decades and Hope Springs Eternal keeps me going. I keep thinking people will see the light, use critical thinking skills, hell, just thinking skills and realize how fucked we are with Trump. Roy Moore did lose in bright red Alabama.

With hundreds of millions of people I can't believe we elected a dotard. 

[Chuckie Finster 22978]

Just now, Js1 said:

Well I agree with that candidate somewhat, I also think electing Democrats still won't get Trump out of office anytime sooner than Jan 2021.  A Democrat-led House will impeach, but a Senate with an R majority or D majority by 1 seat isn't going to convict.  He's here for 2.5 more years, folks.  The purpose of this election is two-fold:  hand investigative powers to the Democrats and prevent the Senate from being able to confirm the chucklefucks Trump keeps nominating to the judiciary and/or Cabinet.  But you're also laying the groundwork for which Congressional Democrats would be working with a Democratic President in 2021. 

Making moderates feel unwanted/unneeded is the quickest way to make sure none of that happens.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

The 129MM Americans who voted in 2016 were given shitty choices by shitty parties, one of which in particular cultivated a culture of right out fucking nonsense among their base after many of years of demonstrating at every chance they got that they had no true principles and couldn't govern their way out of a paper bag.  The other was captured by a political dynasty, held the finger on the scale during the primary, and took for granted the fact that a coalition of voters who pinned their votes on "Hope and Change" but got neither would show up and pull the lever.  But yeah, its the 129MM's fault. 

The 129MM had like 25 choices.   Most didn't bother to participate in the selection process.  The rest chose the two final candidates, and then assholes made the worse of the two the president.   Everyone has some blame, but Trump voters have more than everyone else.   The voter blame goes:

Trump primary voters > Trump general election voters > Hillary primary voters.   Everyone else did their best to avoid this. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Hillary primary voters. 

Really?!?

[Constant 6840]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

I’ve never wanted to punch a sitting US President as hard as I do right now. 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Constant

[pyrohornIII 4844]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Same.   Free university tuition is the worst idea to come out of the left in recent years.   I'm all for government-funded educational opportunities for the economically disadvantaged, but what we need to be doing is deemphasizing the need for a university education and encouraging more people to go to trade schools.   And our resources would be better used on early childhood education and child care for working poor parents, which will do a lot more good than free college.  In my opinion. 

I agree with this sentiment.  When someone has to work for something, to sacrifice for something then they tend to respect it more.  And everyone is different, so we can't just send them all through the same program.

Somebody also said in the Bernie thread that joining the military could be a lateral choice to higher education.  I don't have an issue with that, but I would like to see equal emphasis put into programs like the Peace Corps, or even something like the old WPA.  We put so much money into defense, it just seems like in today's climate of America's international reputation being destroyed, programs set upon making the world a better place for everyone would be a much needed boost to our reputation.

It's the whole Might over Right concept for Trump and his followers.  Trump has always played the bully and bluff card.  He just is incapable of seeing how his world could be improved by improving the lot of others, so therefore we can't even have conversations on any level that would address the issues. 

[Lurch 5949]

Lifelong Democrat here starting with working in the McGovern campaign while at UT. As for as "78% support free public university tuition", what is the price of free tuition to every public university in the United States? Seems it would be astronomical, impossible to fund.
I can see free public junior college tuition but all public university tuition seems impossible to me.

We already fund 13 years of school for everyone. 4 more for a smaller portion wont break the bank. Less than $100B/year. 1/6th of the defense budget which is twice as large as it needs to be. Or, just 2/3rds of the tax break we just gave away to corporations.

[Lurch 5949]

The entire "everyone goes to a university" idea is awful. Not everyone needs to go to a university. While the social movement to value education is wonderful, there's no reason for someone who wants to be a mechanic, for example, to think he has to go to college. Like many good ideas the movement to send everyone to college has gone too far.

I don’t believe anyone has suggested “everyone goes to a university”. Unlike K-12, the proposal is to make it free for those that want it.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Really?!?

Absolutely.  They selected a loser who couldn't beat the worst person to become president in history.   A loser who was already widely hated, and whose own campaign leaders wondered why she was even running.   A loser who didn't even bother to campaign in the key states that decided the election.    A "Democrat" who was actually a Goldwater Republican and likely became a Dem because that was the only route for a woman to someday become president, and who was partly responsible for the least Democratic policies of the Clinton presidency.   A corrupt politician who was literally under an FBI criminal investigation for her actions to hide government emails from public view, and who as SOS gave special access to donors to her private foundation and while her husband was getting enriched by paid speeches to foreigners with which she interacted in her official capacity. 

Make no mistake — Trump was far worse.  Every negative she had, Trump was significantly worse.   But she never should have been the Dem candidate, and the Dem primary voters who chose Hillary are partly to blame for making that happen.   (The party apparatus is also to blame, but my post is about the voters and the choices they did have). 

Edited July 18, 2018 by Mojo Hand

[bad_teammate 13479]

19 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Some New Jersey congressional candidate was on CNN this morning and they asked him how the Democratic party should attempt to balance the rising left wing led by people like AOC and the centrists like Pelosi.  His response was a pretty good one, something along the lines of "there's plenty I want to change in this country, but I don't think this is the election for that.  This is the election to save our country."

I get that the views of moderates do not necessarily jibe long term with those further to the left, but it's unwise to let differences in views for how you want this country to be run in 2050 push away the people who can help in 2018.  

Honestly, I can't even believe that sentence has to be typed less than two years after Hillary/Bernie.  

How will electing a Dem Congress in 2018 "save our country"?

"who can help in 2018" accomplish what? Specifically, what?

2 minutes ago, Lurch said:

I don’t believe anyone has suggested “everyone goes to a university”. Unlike K-12, the proposal is to make it free for those that want it.

 

It's almost as if Huckleberry is completely disingenuous.

[Js1 86940]

4 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

 

I don’t believe anyone has suggested “everyone goes to a university”. Unlike K-12, the proposal is to make it free for those that want it.

 

And those who qualify. Just graduating HS does not make one qualify.

[Anastasis 23699]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

(The party apparatus is also to blame, but my post is about the voters and the choices they did have). 

Where do you place the party apparatus on your ordinal ranking of blame overall?  Both GOP and Dem. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Absolutely.  They selected a loser who couldn't beat the worst person to become president in history.   A loser who was already widely hated, and whose own campaign leaders wondered why she was even running.   A loser who didn't even bother to campaign in the key states that decided the election.    A "Democrat" who was actually a Goldwater Republican and likely became a Dem because that was the only route for a woman to someday become president, and who was partly responsible for the least Democratic policies of the Clinton presidency.   A corrupt politician who was literally under an FBI criminal investigation for her actions to hide government emails from public view, and who as SOS gave special access to donors to her private foundation and while her husband was getting enriched by paid speeches to foreigners with which she interacted in her official capacity. 

Make no mistake — Trump was far worse.  Every negative she had, Trump was significantly worse.   But she never should have been the Dem candidate, and the Dem primary voters who chose Hillary are partly to blame for making that happen.   (The party apparatus is also to blame, but my post is about the voters and the choices they did have). 

Jesus. I don’t even know where to begin because you are past the point of no return on hate for Hillary.

Edited July 18, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Gil Bang 26176]

Trump is changing the new Air Force One colors to red white and blue.  Nothing wrong with those colors but Air Force one should remain the same.  I don’t care if you’re trump, Obama or even George Washington, leave the traditional colors as is.

President Adidas

[Js1 86940]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Jesus.

Don't blame him, apparently.

[Horn Dog 10156]

1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Could someone copy and paste the George Will WP article?

July 17 at 2:57 PM ET

America’s child president had a play date with a KGB alumnus, who surely enjoyed providing day care. It was a useful, because illuminating, event: Now we shall see how many Republicans retain a capacity for embarrassment.

Jeane Kirkpatrick, a Democrat closely associated with such Democratic national security stalwarts as former senator Henry Jackson and former senator and former vice president Hubert Humphrey, was President Ronald Reagan’s ambassador to the United Nations. In her speech at the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, she explained her disaffection from her party: “They always blame America first.” In Helsinki, the president who bandies the phrase “America First” put himself first, as always, and America last, behind President Vladimir Putin’s regime.

Because the Democrats had just held their convention in San Francisco, Kirkpatrick branded the “blame America first” cohort as “San Francisco Democrats.” Thirty-four years on, how numerous are the “Helsinki Republicans”?

What, precisely, did President Trump say about the diametrically opposed statements by U.S. intelligence agencies (and the Senate Intelligence Committee) and by Putin concerning Russia and the 2016 U.S. elections? Precision is not part of Trump’s repertoire: He speaks English as though it is a second language that he learned from someone who learned English last week. So, it is usually difficult to sift meanings from Trump’s word salads. But in Helsinki he was, for him, crystal clear about feeling no allegiance to the intelligence institutions that work at his direction and under leaders he chose.

President Trump's news conference with Russian President Vladimir Putin was a disastrous capitulation, says Democracy Post editor Christian Caryl. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

Speaking of Republicans incapable of blushing — those with the peculiar strength that comes from being incapable of embarrassment — consider Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), who for years enjoyed derivative gravitas from his association with Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). Graham tweeted about Helsinki: “Missed opportunity by President Trump to firmly hold Russia accountable for 2016 meddling and deliver a strong warning regarding future elections.” A “missed opportunity” by a man who had not acknowledged the meddling?

Contrast Graham’s mush with this on Monday from McCain, still vinegary: “Today’s press conference in Helsinki was one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president in memory.” Or this from Arizona’s other senator, Jeff Flake  (R): “I never thought I would see the day when our American president would stand on the stage with the Russian President and place blame on the United States for Russian aggression.” Blame America only.

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats and others might believe that they must stay in their positions lest there be no adult supervision of the Oval playpen. This is a serious worry, but so is this: Can those people do their jobs for someone who has neither respect nor loyalty for them?

Like the purloined letter in Edgar Allan Poe’s short story with that title, collusion with Russia is hiding in plain sight. We shall learn from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation whether in 2016 there was collusion with Russia by members of the Trump campaign. The world, however, saw in Helsinki something more grave — ongoing collusion between Trump, now in power, and Russia. The collusion is in what Trump says (refusing to back the United States’ intelligence agencies) and in what evidently went unsaid (such as: You ought to stop disrupting Ukraine, downing civilian airliners, attempting to assassinate people abroad using poisons, and so on, and on).

Americans elected a president who — this is a safe surmise — knew that he had more to fear from making his tax returns public than from keeping them secret. The most innocent inference is that for decades he has depended on an American weakness, susceptibility to the tacky charisma of wealth, which would evaporate when his tax returns revealed that he has always lied about his wealth, too. A more ominous explanation might be that his redundantly demonstrated incompetence as a businessman tumbled him into unsavory financial dependencies on Russians. A still more sinister explanation might be that the Russians have something else, something worse, to keep him compliant.

 

 

The explanation is in doubt; what needs to be explained — his compliance — is not. Granted, Trump has a weak man’s banal fascination with strong men whose disdain for him is evidently unimaginable to him. And, yes, he only perfunctorily pretends to have priorities beyond personal aggrandizement. But just as astronomers inferred, from anomalies in the orbits of the planet Uranus, the existence of Neptune before actually seeing it, Mueller might infer, and then find, still-hidden sources of the behavior of this sad, embarrassing wreck of a man.

Edited July 18, 2018 by Horn Dog

[triplehorn 2664]

9 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Most of the real outright mocking was directed at the "President Hatch by Easter," "Manafort and Stone running underground DC swinger rings", and "SCOTUS master at arms impeachment procedures" nonsense.  But I will admit that I was wrong and have come around to the 25th amendment play.  I think that that one has some legs to it at this point. I still don't think that Trump is capable of coordinating with a paper bag, but he has demonstrated right out psychological impairment that is sufficient to start the process. 

No, your derision and was not about anything so farcical.  It was you who was willing to bet a grand to back up your assertion there was no willful, knowledgable coordination between Trump and Putin's Russia in the attack on the 2016 election, right ?  That WAS you, right ?  And now it's the 25th Amendment?  Nothing to do with illegal Russian coordination, cash, and influence and Trump/GOP.  Got it.  But when TrumpCo is implicated under 18 USC 371 and not the 25th Amendment, it'll be all about dissolving our unsalvageable shithole country.  

[pyrohornIII 4844]

Plus there is a whole lot more than free tuition when it comes to college education.  Books, lodging, food, and transportation come to mind.  I really have no idea how big a percentage tuition plays anymore in the whole pie. 

 

I like this discussion.  It is actual discussion and not working off of sound bites and tweets.  From here could come actual plans and actions, heaven forbid.

[wildcat09 29556]

24 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Some New Jersey congressional candidate was on CNN this morning and they asked him how the Democratic party should attempt to balance the rising left wing led by people like AOC and the centrists like Pelosi.  His response was a pretty good one, something along the lines of "there's plenty I want to change in this country, but I don't think this is the election for that.  This is the election to save our country."

I get that the views of moderates do not necessarily jibe long term with those further to the left, but it's unwise to let differences in views for how you want this country to be run in 2050 push away the people who can help in 2018.  

Honestly, I can't even believe that sentence has to be typed less than two years after Hillary/Bernie.  

 

This. Leftist purity tests gave us Trump and immigrant concentration camps. Voting isn't about electing someone who represents your values, it's about electing someone to govern. Ideally that will be someone who represents my values, but when the choices are between a corporate shill and Hitler, I'll swallow my fucking pride and go with the corporate shill.

[Texas73 422]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

And those who qualify. Just graduating HS does not make one qualify.

You have that right. I teach college students who have Algebra 1, Geometry, Algebra 2, and Pre-Calculus credit on their high school transcript whose math level is middle school. Many couldn't make a 50 on an Algebra 1 final exam. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Where do you place the party apparatus on your ordinal ranking of blame overall?  Both GOP and Dem. 

I don't blame the GOP party apparatus at all, although I do blame the individual GOP leaders who supported Trump at any point.   But they let their voters decide among 17 candidates, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that.  I blame the Dem party apparatus more than the Hillary primary voters, but less than Trump voters. 

[Huckleberry 34407]

13 minutes ago, Lurch said:

 

I don’t believe anyone has suggested “everyone goes to a university”. Unlike K-12, the proposal is to make it free for those that want it.

 

And when it's free for those that want it then millions will want it who don't need it. We will all pay for unnecessary tuition costs that the graduate (or dropout) never utilizes after leaving school.