US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6909

On February 18 2017 02:58 Plansix wrote:
My support of Ellison is based solely that it might satisfy the progressive for a while and might be able to convince them to not attack every centrist democrat after every vote. For that reason alone, he should be given the job.

On February 18 2017 03:09 Plansix wrote:
Joe Manchin? Not a lot. We are going to feel luck that we can get a single seat in West Virginia at all. Attempting to primary him will just make him go full Lieberman and switch parties.

On February 18 2017 03:06 biology]major wrote:


The only way you are going to satisfy bernie bros is if there are changes to the democratic platform itself, and his ideas on free healthcare and college become mainstream. You are dealing with highly ideological people, and this type of thinking is not going to solve your problem. Once you give an inch......

President Trump’s disturbing Russian connections present an acute danger to American national security. According to reports this week, Mr. Trump’s team maintained frequent contact with Russian officials, including senior intelligence officers, during the campaign. This led to concerns about possible collusion with one of America’s principal strategic adversaries as it tried to influence the election in Mr. Trump’s favor. On Monday, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, was forced to resign after details of his communications with the Russian ambassador emerged.

Republican leaders in Congress now bear the most responsibility for holding the president accountable and protecting the nation. They can’t say they didn’t see the Russian interference coming. They knew all along.

...

As the presidential race wore on, some of those leaders began to see parallels between Russia’s disinformation operations in Ukraine and Europe and its activities in the United States. They were alarmed by the Kremlin-backed cable network RT America, which was running stories intended, they judged, to undermine Americans’ trust in democratic institutions and promote Mr. Trump’s candidacy. Deeply unsettled, the leaders discussed these concerns privately on several occasions I witnessed.

...

America’s security is now at stake. For Republican leaders in Congress, there is no more room for cognitive dissonance. Instead, it is urgent that they recommit to patriotic prudence. They should demand that Attorney General Jeff Sessions appoint an independent special counsel to investigate Russia’s assault on American democracy and Mr. Trump’s possible collusion with the Kremlin.

At a minimum, they must establish a bipartisan special select committee with subpoena power in the House or the Senate for the same purpose. This job is too big and significant to be entrusted to the standing intelligence committees, which have critical tasks and limited staff. The nation must have accountability — including public hearings where possible — on these matters.

On February 18 2017 03:03 GreenHorizons wrote:
I feel like we're back to how stupid of a fight this is, let's just give Ellison the job and figure out wtf we're going to do with Democrats like Manchin.

EDIT: I sense I know where this conversation is heading, so I'd like to just get the argument of "well we'd rather him than a Republican" out of the way first.

What are some examples of something in the past 6 years where having Manchin, instead of a Republican, has made a substantive difference (actually changed an outcome)? Because if there aren't any of those, I feel that argument falls apart on it's face.

On February 18 2017 03:15 Plansix wrote:

This is not a compelling argument that there is a progressive candidate that can win that state. That man isn’t going away and neither are the voters who vote for him.

But I support your plan of trying to primary him and any other democrat in the senate you disapprove of. Replace them all with Republicans if we can’t have progressives in there. I am excited to see the results.

On February 18 2017 03:17 Nebuchad wrote:
Didn't Bernie win West Virginia in the primary?

On February 18 2017 03:17 Nebuchad wrote:
Didn't Bernie win West Virginia in the primary?

On February 18 2017 03:17 GreenHorizons wrote:


What's the point in having someone with a D next to their name if they aren't going to make a difference in winning anything for the D they claim? It's stupid moral victories like that, that's left the Democratic party unable to even fight Trump.

On February 18 2017 03:15 Plansix wrote:

This is not a compelling argument that there is a progressive candidate that can win that state. That man isn’t going away and neither are the voters who vote for him.

But I support your plan of trying to primary him and any other democrat in the senate you disapprove of. Replace them all with Republicans if we can’t have progressives in there. I am excited to see the results.

On February 18 2017 03:21 LegalLord wrote:
In mildly related science news: New Zealand is apparently its own continent now.

On February 18 2017 03:20 WolfintheSheep wrote:

No, the moral victory is running someone who will never win so you get to claim the moral high ground despite having no results to show for it.

Better to have someone that will ally with your goals some of the time, than someone who will always oppose you.

On February 18 2017 03:22 Logo wrote:


This is a terrible attitude. You're taking a snarky dismissive attitude (dare I say elitist?) because someone has differing political ideologies and wants to try to make things better? But rather than address the shortcomings of those ideologies you just dismiss them as not being tactical. It comes off as a cheap way to dismiss any thoughts of change because we always have to focus on 'defeating the enemy'.




So we finally have the 7 continents we were always told we had?