American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS

[Fuzz]

So if Trump starts a dumbass war(or 3) do our NATO obligations require us to help defend them?

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

So if Trump starts a dumbass war(or 3) do our NATO obligations require us to help defend them?

Probably no. Article 5 only applies if the NATO member is attacked first, so unless Trump somehow goads NK into declaring war or attacking the US first, Article 5 wouldn't apply. Of course, I would fully expect in such an instance that Trump would complain that NATO treaty members were not honoring their commitments if they declined to enter a war that the US had started.

[direwolf]

Pretty scathing article in the WP, written by Republican and former speech writer for George W. Bush, Michael Gerson.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.c5e1e5dc6696

Nearly 150 days into the Trump era, no non-delusional conservative can be happy with the direction of events or pleased with the options going forward.

Trump has been ruled by compulsions, obsessions and vindictiveness, expressed nearly daily on Twitter. He has demonstrated an egotism that borders on solipsism. His political skills as president have been close to nonexistent. His White House is divided, incompetent and chaotic, and key administration jobs remain unfilled. His legislative agenda has gone nowhere. He has told constant, childish, refuted, uncorrected lies, and demanded and habituated deception among his underlings. He has humiliated and undercut his staff while requiring and rewarding flattery. He has promoted self-serving conspiracy theories. He has displayed pathetic, even frightening, ignorance on policy matters foreign and domestic. He has inflicted his ethically challenged associates on the nation. He is dead to the poetry of language and to the nobility of the political enterprise, viewing politics as conquest rather than as service.

Trump has made consistent appeals to prejudice based on religion and ethnicity, and associated the Republican Party with bias. He has stoked tribal hostilities. He has carelessly fractured our national unity. He has attempted to undermine respect for any institution that opposes or limits him — be it the responsible press, the courts or the intelligence community. He has invited criminal investigation through his secrecy and carelessness. He has publicly attempted to intimidate law enforcement. He has systematically alarmed our allies and given comfort to authoritarians. He promised to emancipate the world from American moral leadership — and has kept that pledge.

[troutman]

Georgia’s Special Election Comes to a Nail-Biting Finish

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/u...-election.html

[GGG]

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/re...-ossoff-handel

Here is NYTs live tracking tool that was very depressing during the presidential election.

[octothorp]

My gut feeling is that Ossoff's going to narrowly lose. I think the GOP has mastered the GOTV efforts lately. Hoping I'm wrong though.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by octothorp

My gut feeling is that Ossoff's going to narrowly lose. I think the GOP has mastered the GOTV efforts lately. Hoping I'm wrong though.

We talk about attack ads in Canada, but man, the US takes it to a new level.

Our attack ads are crappy "Nice hair though" or "Just not ready". Their's is "Ossoff says that he wants to kill your babies and families."

Just blatantly false. Not even sarcasm or taking something out of context or humorous irony. Just purely made up quotes and conclusions.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Handel wins, and Ossoff is actually under performing Hillary's numbers in the district. Dems might end up doing better in South Carolina's special election that no one paid attention to. Another night of moral victories, another potential Trump Twitter meltdown denied. Sad.

[DuffMan]

Americans are dumb.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by DuffMan

Americans are dumb.

Great work.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by peter12

Great work.

Thanks Poindexter.

[GGG]

Handal +4 is bad news for democrats. That is only consistant with a 3 point lead nationally which is insufficient to win back the house.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

Handal +4 is bad news for democrats. That is only consistant with a 3 point lead nationally which is insufficient to win back the house.

No, it really isn't. Losing a seat that has not seen a Democrat elected since 1981 is not bad news. The fact it was competitive at all is a good sign for Democrats. This is a seat that has seen a 66% of the vote traditionally go Republican. A split like this bodes well. But please, tell us why this is bad news for Democrats.

[octothorp]

But what does Norman at +4 project to in the national race, in a seat that was supposed to be much more strongly republican.

My main take away from the special elections so far is that money and national attention doesn't really matter. The DNC is criticized when they ignore a race like Kansas, with calls that if they had put some effort into it, maybe they could have won. And they're criticized here for maybe putting too much outside attention into it. I don't think it's an awful result for the national outcome in 2018, but it still leaves the DNC without a proven winning strategy.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Democrats still don't have any sort of message. The opportunity is clearly there, while they haven't won anything they still have significantly over performed in some pretty red areas. They just need to either rally behind the Bernie wing, or find another Obama to unify all elements of the party, but they need to get it together pretty quickly here. Being anything other than Trump can only go so far.

[photon]

If this was a proxy vote for the hugely unpopular Trumpcare, it failed. A Dem win might have given Mitch some second thought as he sneaks his bill through the Senate, oh well.

Do you take away that being a centrist democrat (like Clinton) is dead and try and run more progressive candidates?

Dems did better in South Carolina today, where no one was paying any attention.

[photon]

Looks like they are going to release a version of the health care bill Thursday so people can read it before it becomes law.

Senate Republican leaders said they would release draft language of their healthcare bill on Thursday as lawmakers in both parties vented frustration over the way the bill is being assembled – behind closed doors and without a single public hearing scheduled. A vote is expected next week.

The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, said he expects to have a “discussion draft” of legislation that would dismantle key provisions of the Affordable Care Act ready by Thursday morning.

McConnell said a finalized version of the bill would be released after the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) publishes its analysis, which is expected to occur sometime next week.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...are-bill-draft

[Lanny_McDonald]

I wish Canadians would understand that the message is irrelevant to many parts of the country. It doesn't matter what the Dmeocrats have to say in the red states, they are not going to gain any traction with message changes. The south was lost with the Civil Rights Act. The only thing that will change that is time and the electorate changing. You cannot appeal to people who do not rationalize their political allegiance.

[Senator Clay Davis]

The Dems held the House and a Fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate not even a decade ago. Republicans have held all three branches not even six months. Once health care comes to a head they will be deeply unpopular. Dems need to figure out what their health care message is more than Russia if they actually wanna win some red seats.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by New Era

No, it really isn't. Losing a seat that has not seen a Democrat elected since 1981 is not bad news. The fact it was competitive at all is a good sign for Democrats. This is a seat that has seen a 66% of the vote traditionally go Republican. A split like this bodes well. But please, tell us why this is bad news for Democrats.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...ction-matters/

Effectively if the results from the other special elections represented the national picture they should have won this seat. This is the worst democratic performance in a special election thus far.

You are correct that depending how you model the previous vote you can twist the result in a different manner but this is not a strong red district as your plus 33 number would indicate.

Optically though it is worse than the statistics show. A loss here presented a credible threat to republicans in what should be safe seats. Without that threat from the left the republicans will continue to follow Trump. Now this might be good for democrats in 2018 but certainly bad for America.