American Politics Thread: Orange is the new POTUS

[Senator Clay Davis]

Another morning of unhinged tweets going on, and more attempts to push Sessions out. Full psychotic breakdown can't be too far away.

[nik-]

That's actually the first time I've looked at his twitter in a while. It's truly remarkable how insane this entire situation is. This dude is legitimately president haha.

It's going to be interesting to see just how hard line his core support becomes if he's replaced.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by nik-

That's actually the first time I've looked at his twitter in a while. It's truly remarkable how insane this entire situation is. This dude is legitimately president haha.

It's going to be interesting to see just how hard line his core support becomes if he's replaced.

Best case is it somehow becomes impossible to deny his decent into dementia, so much so that his supporters accept it. If he gets removed while they think he hasn't gone mad, it will not be good. It seems no matter what crazy thing he says or does, his supporters are with him. So it will take something monumental and undeniable.

[nik-]

Democrats gave him dementia.

Tinfoil hat secure. Delusion maintained.

[Itse]

It's BTW pretty common for the US conservatives to agree that the conservatives have become anti-intellectual, "lost their mind" or something to that tune.

Here's an example from The American Conservative from 2012:

http://www.theamericanconservative.c...lost-its-mind/

The Democratic Party’s publicity apparatus isn’t producing intellectuals either, but liberalism has other institutional bases besides the Democrats, including the academy and a variety of somewhat independent magazines, so the left is not quite as monolithic as the right. The right only has institutional bases in the GOP and among the people whose dollars create and support think tanks, and neither a party nor a moneyed interest is going to be all that keen to promote thinking. Not beyond the minimal amount of thinking necessary to make rhetoric sound clever. Call me a cynic, but isn’t this an accurate, even complete, description of the GOP, Fox, National Review, and all the rest?

And a quote from NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/28/o...al-crisis.html

I feel very lucky to have entered the conservative movement when I did, back in the 1980s and 1990s. I was working at National Review, The Washington Times, The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page. The role models in front of us were people like Bill Buckley, Irving Kristol, James Q. Wilson, Russell Kirk and Midge Decter.

These people wrote about politics, but they also wrote about a lot of other things: history, literature, sociology, theology and life in general. There was a sharp distinction then between being conservative, which was admired, and being a Republican, which was considered sort of cheesy.

It’s ironic that an intellectual tendency that champions free markets was ruined by the forces of commercialism, but that is the essential truth. Conservatism went down-market in search of revenue. It got swallowed by its own anti-intellectual media-politico complex — from Beck to Palin to Trump.

The very essence of conservatism is the belief that politics is a limited activity, and that the most important realms are pre-political: conscience, faith, culture, family and community. But recently conservatism has become more the talking arm of the Republican Party.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Notley's cabinet is unqualified too but nobody says the left is dumb.

Been on Facebook lately?

Libtards, snowflakes, nutjobs, NDP trash, communists.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Word is the hope is to force Sessions out to bring Giuliani in. But then who's gonna focus on the cyber?

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Word is the hope is to force Sessions out to bring Giuliani in. But then who's gonna focus on the cyber?

Putin

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by troutman

Been on Facebook lately?

Libtards, snowflakes, nutjobs, NDP trash, communists.

Thats facebook comments. Not salon.com

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Word is the hope is to force Sessions out to bring Giuliani in. But then who's gonna focus on the cyber?

Giuliani is already into it up to his eyeballs when it comes to the whole Russia thing. No way he gets through the gauntlet to get that position.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Thats facebook comments. Not salon.com

In terms of standards and integrity, there's basically no difference.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Thats facebook comments. Not salon.com

Again, Canada is much different than the United States, but I would say you should checkout what The Rebel has to say. In the US you have Breitbart, Fox News, iHeartRadio's hundreds of stations repeating RW hate radio, Alex Jones, and on and on and on attacking liberals non-stop and blaming them for everything imaginable. There is no intellectualism to their argument or message, its just pure vitriol and anger. But Salon is bad because they make a statement about a movement that even remaining conservative intellectuals are in agreement about?

[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Word is the hope is to force Sessions out to bring Giuliani in. But then who's gonna focus on the cyber?

Why would Sessions leave?

He gave up a nice Senate job for Trump, and within 7 months or so he might now be unemployed?

If I were Sessions, I'd say forget about me resigning. Let Trump fire me instead and let the political fall-out happen.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by New Era

Again, Canada is much different than the United States, but I would say you should checkout what The Rebel has to say. In the US you have Breitbart, Fox News, iHeartRadio's hundreds of stations repeating RW hate radio, Alex Jones, and on and on and on attacking liberals non-stop and blaming them for everything imaginable. There is no intellectualism to their argument or message, its just pure vitriol and anger. But Salon is bad because they make a statement about a movement that even remaining conservative intellectuals are in agreement about?

New Era/Itse, that is all true.

But i'm not sure i buy that the right only has institutional bases in the GOP and among the people whose dollars create and support think tanks, and neither a party nor a moneyed interest is going to be all that keen to promote thinking.

It doesn't explain how Trump, an outsider, won the nomination. Trump in his campaigning actually made people think. Yes that sounds weird but he rallied people where Cruz and Rubio (who are more right-learning) could not.

I agree that Liberals are more open-minded than Conservatives. Thus the names Liberals and Conservatives. But on the outside fringes on both sides, left or right populism, it's not that different. I get the argument that in American, the right is closer to that dangerous fringe than the left is. But again, that doesn't explain Trump who isn't really right-wing winning the nomination.

In the end, the States is really majority centrist. The Democrats would win by a landslide if they could tap into that better.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It doesn't explain how Trump, an outsider, won the nomination. Trump in his campaigning actually made people think. Yes that sounds weird but he rallied people where Cruz and Rubio (who are more right-learning) could not.

Quite the opposite. You could easily argue that Trumps victory just demonstrates how the right is now more anti-intellectual and anti-liberal than they are conservative, which would be the traditional right.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Why would Sessions leave?

He gave up a nice Senate job for Trump, and within 7 months or so he might now be unemployed?

If I were Sessions, I'd say forget about me resigning. Let Trump fire me instead and let the political fall-out happen.

Yeah, especially after the extent to which his own reputation has been scorched so far, both in the nomination process and in his hearing appearance.

I also think there's some self-preservation at play here; he steps down, and then a few more details are leaked about meetings he had with Russians during the campaign, and suddenly he's a very convenient fall-guy. But if he stays in his position, the general aura of fake news covers him somewhat. He doesn't go down until the whole administration goes down.

[ernie]

So Trump is trying to force Sessions to quit. I never thought I'd say this...but I hope Sessions sticks it to Trump and stays on. That's how bad it is...I'm cheering for the guy previously determined to be too racist for the federal courts.

To me it just further demonstrates the incompetence of the administration. They are still extremely far behind on nominations and filling of positions and a mere 6 month in they are having to go back to the well on ones they filled!

The GOP is starting to get sick of the administration. Former GOP big wigs starting to speak out more. Yes they spoke out before but the numbers are growing with each passing day. It'll seep it's way through the rank and file every time Trump does something stupid and opens up a crack. Unlike the other trickle down, this trickle down will start to take hold unless there is a 180 made by the administration when it comes to their competence.

Dems...ya the branding on the new effort seems weak. However, if you look at surveys many are basically saying "just tell us what you stand for and you can likely have our vote!". So they are doing that. Meanwhile, the GOP is crippled by incompetence at the top (at best...at worst it's completely influenced by a foreign power) and an complete inability to get anything done in chambers they control. The GOP talks a good game about being for this or that but ultimately for the past 8 years they can't even agree on the lunch order let alone legislation. And it's finally on display for all to see.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It doesn't explain how Trump, an outsider, won the nomination. Trump in his campaigning actually made people think. Yes that sounds weird but he rallied people where Cruz and Rubio (who are more right-learning) could not.

Trump won the nomination, and presidency, largely for the same reason he makes most of his money--name recognition. Trump is a name, Trump is a brand. Regardless of how many failures he personally has had--his name still carries weight globally, his name still stands for celebrity and fortune.

Many of those low information, right-wingers who have been spoon-fed Fox News rhetoric for years see themselves in Trump, because he's "made something of himself" and he's living the "American Dream" ignoring the actual real facts that Trump inherited a massive fortune and has failed miserably on his own several times (he bankrupted a casino. A CASINO.), because his name is still plastered on buildings worldwide and he makes millions from it.

Some nameless millionaire outsider who hadn't been in the public eye for the last 30 years wouldn't have had the same success Trump did with the same message. Celebrity goes far. Hell, early numbers have freaking Kid Rock ahead of the democrat opponent in Michigan.

Combine a loathsome attitude toward education, a vitriolic hatred of liberals, Fox News/Breitbart/Limbaugh ingrained terror of any "others" (gays, blacks, immigrants, etc), and a heavy dose of celebrity--and there you have Trump's winning formula.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

It doesn't explain how Trump, an outsider, won the nomination. Trump in his campaigning actually made people think. Yes that sounds weird but he rallied people where Cruz and Rubio (who are more right-learning) could not.

How did he make them think? Seriously. What in his stump speech was worthy of thought? He threw out nothing but broiler plate populist rhetoric. He was throwing raw meat to a pack of pitbulls and then watching them rip each other to pieces trying to get a taste. Trump was the most "empty" candidate, void of any real policy, I have seen in my lifetime, and I got to experience Goldwater.

I agree that Liberals are more open-minded than Conservatives. Thus the names Liberals and Conservatives. But on the outside fringes on both sides, left or right populism, it's not that different. I get the argument that in American, the right is closer to that dangerous fringe than the left is. But again, that doesn't explain Trump who isn't really right-wing winning the nomination.

Trump won using a campaign of nationalism and fear. If you preach fear, you are going to win over conservatives, because its the way they are wired. Trump played them like a fiddle, using fear as the basis of his campaign and his attacks on his opponents. He then made promises of the rebirth of industries long dead, which anyone with a brain in their head knew were BS. Trump used the populist playbook to his advantage and the people bought it.

In the end, the States is really majority centrist. The Democrats would win by a landslide if they could tap into that better.

But this is the Democrats you are talking about. This is the party being led by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. They aren't leaders. They certainly aren't going to adopt a platform that people like. People want single payer healthcare. People want free education. People want the rich to pay their fair share. The Democratic Party believes in none of those things. They are the Republicans from 20 years ago. There is no centrist party in the United States. They are all right of center and toe the line set forth by their corporate sponsors and lobbyists.

[ernie]

Trump made me think during his speeches.

Made me think about how bad the overall education system is in the US and how prevalent racism, misogyny and homophobia still is. In short, how backwards the country that portends to be a world leader in everything has become.