|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
So here's a hint as to who Trump may or may not want a war with to test-drive our upgraded military budget he will have.
(CNN)South Korea's controversial THAAD missile defense system is one step closer to reality after Lotte International approved a land swap deal with the government Monday, an official with the country's defense ministry said.
The THAAD, or Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, system is designed to shoot down short, medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, such as those North Korea claims to own.
The deal between international conglomerate Lotte and the South Korean government will allow the THAAD system to be deployed on the military's preferred site.
The contract will officially be signed on Tuesday, the official told CNN. The US and the South Korean governments are planning to deploy the system by the end of 2017.
During his recent trip to South Korea, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis said his country was determined to defend South Korea against the "evolving North Korean threat."
But speaking at a news conference Monday, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Geng Shuang said it would "severely disrupt regional strategic balance."
"The Chinese side has stressed repeatedly that we understand the legitimate concerns of relevant parties in safeguarding their security, however one country's security cannot be pursued at the expense of (anothers)," he said.
North Korea, China opposed
Both North Korea and China have repeatedly stated they are strongly against the deployment of THAAD.
On February 3, North Korea accused the US and South Korea of pushing the Korean peninsula to the "brink of nuclear war" with the deployment.
In a statement, the rogue state alleged the THAAD system was part of an offensive strategy "for a preemptive attack on the North."
But Mattis said Pyongyang's aggressive behavior is why THAAD was necessary.
Meanwhile China has consistently opposed the missile system's deployment, saying it could jeopardize their "legitimate national security interests," according to Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
John Delury, associate professor of international studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, previously told CNN that Beijing was doing "everything in its power to prevent the deployment of the defense system."
Yoonjung Seo contributed to this report.
Source
|
On February 28 2017 07:49 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 07:40 Plansix wrote:
National approval ratings of the parties are of pretty questionable value at this point. Call me in 8 months. And if it's worse then than it is now?
Then the democrats will have their work cut out for them. But they are also out of power, so there isn't much they can do but right and run in 2018. The country is still ready to punch Washington in the face, so whoever is in power needs to do a lot to avoid being punched.
|
The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate.
Source
|
The benefit of being out of power is that nothing is your fault anymore.
Democrats still somehow manage to be widely unpopular.
|
On February 28 2017 07:53 LegalLord wrote:
The benefit of being out of power is that nothing is your fault anymore.
Democrats still somehow manage to be widely unpopular.
Its been a month, Congress hasn't done anything yet...
|
On February 28 2017 07:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate. Source
That's a huge fucking preview of things to come.
|
On February 28 2017 08:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 07:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate. Source That's a huge fucking preview of things to come.
The GOP is going to get its own version of 2008-2010. But without a super majority to seal the deal.
|
On February 28 2017 08:03 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 07:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate. Source That's a huge fucking preview of things to come.
Its going to get fun(bad) when Trump starts attacking the Tea Party on Twitter for holding up his plans.
|
On February 28 2017 07:50 LegalLord wrote:So here's a hint as to who Trump may or may not want a war with to test-drive our upgraded military budget he will have. Show nested quote +(CNN)South Korea's controversial THAAD missile defense system is one step closer to reality after Lotte International approved a land swap deal with the government Monday, an official with the country's defense ministry said.
The THAAD, or Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, system is designed to shoot down short, medium and intermediate-range ballistic missiles, such as those North Korea claims to own.
The deal between international conglomerate Lotte and the South Korean government will allow the THAAD system to be deployed on the military's preferred site.
The contract will officially be signed on Tuesday, the official told CNN. The US and the South Korean governments are planning to deploy the system by the end of 2017.
During his recent trip to South Korea, US Secretary of Defense James Mattis said his country was determined to defend South Korea against the "evolving North Korean threat."
But speaking at a news conference Monday, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Geng Shuang said it would "severely disrupt regional strategic balance."
"The Chinese side has stressed repeatedly that we understand the legitimate concerns of relevant parties in safeguarding their security, however one country's security cannot be pursued at the expense of (anothers)," he said.
North Korea, China opposed
Both North Korea and China have repeatedly stated they are strongly against the deployment of THAAD.
On February 3, North Korea accused the US and South Korea of pushing the Korean peninsula to the "brink of nuclear war" with the deployment.
In a statement, the rogue state alleged the THAAD system was part of an offensive strategy "for a preemptive attack on the North."
But Mattis said Pyongyang's aggressive behavior is why THAAD was necessary.
Meanwhile China has consistently opposed the missile system's deployment, saying it could jeopardize their "legitimate national security interests," according to Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
John Delury, associate professor of international studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, previously told CNN that Beijing was doing "everything in its power to prevent the deployment of the defense system."
Yoonjung Seo contributed to this report. Source
The US has been preparing to deploy THAAD in SK for several years now, can't really play this one off as trump trying to create a war.
|
On February 28 2017 07:53 LegalLord wrote:
The benefit of being out of power is that nothing is your fault anymore.
Democrats still somehow manage to be widely unpopular.
NBC/WSJ Poll
51% media has been too critical of Trump
53% "The news media and other elites are exaggerating the problems with the Trump administration because they are uncomfortable and threatened with the kind of change that Trump represents."
Meanwhile:
44 vs 48 approval rating
Obamacare:
Even split on good idea/bad idea
Only 4% "working well the way it is" rofl
1/3 confident in GOP's ability to replace the law
Travel ban
44/45 practically dead even. Pretty hilarious given all the rhetoric saying it shouldn't be close.
Consensus that Russia meddled somehow and support for the investigation.
|
On February 28 2017 08:07 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 08:03 Danglars wrote:On February 28 2017 07:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate. Source That's a huge fucking preview of things to come. Its going to get fun(bad) when Trump starts attacking the Tea Party on Twitter for holding up his plans.
Actually I can't wait for that.
|
I would point out that only 57% of the country supported impeaching Nixon.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/08/08/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/
And only 58% supported criminal charges after that. People need to temper their exceptions when it comes to national polls. Its never going to be 70/30 unless the topic is "do you support murdering puppies for fuel?"
On February 28 2017 08:23 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 08:07 Gorsameth wrote:On February 28 2017 08:03 Danglars wrote:On February 28 2017 07:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:The chairman of a group of House conservatives known for causing GOP leadership problems is already resisting Obamacare replacement proposals surfaced in leaked Republican draft legislation.
Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), who heads the House Freedom Caucus, told CNN Monday he would vote against a bill that looked like the leaked draft, and that other conservatives had similar concerns about the proposals' tax credits for individual insurance as well as its tax on the most generous employer-based plans.
"What is conservative about a new entitlement program and a new tax increase? And should that be the first thing that the President signs of significance that we sent to the new President?" Meadows said "A new Republican president signs a new entitlement and a new tax increase as his first major piece of legislation? I don't know how you support that -- do you?"
He stopped short of telling CNN exactly how many House Freedom Caucus votes Republicans could be in danger of losing if it moves forward with that version of the legislation. Typically, the caucus will debate an issue and vote on it before taking an official position, seeking 80 percent of the caucus' support. Earlier this month the House Freedom Caucus voted to endorse using the 2015 Obamacare repeal bill, which was vetoed by President Obama, as a model this time around, but left itself some wiggle room as to what else it would support.
The draft legislation, which appears to be a few weeks old, would dismantle major of the aspects of the Affordable Care Act while offering some replacement measures. Republicans hope to use a process called reconciliation that avoids a filibuster in the Senate but can only be used on budget-related items. The proposals in the leaked package include refundable tax credits that would increase by age. Unlike the ACA's subsidies, they would be available to everyone, not just according to one's income.
"So the headline is that the GOP is reducing subsidies to needy individuals when in fact, the growth of the taxpayer-subsidized reimbursements will actually increase. The total dollars that we spend on subsidies will be far greater," Meadows told CNN. "So you can be a millionaire and not have employer-based health care and you're going to get a check from the federal government -- I've got a problem with that."
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), a former chair of the Freedom Caucus, has also raised concerns about the tax credits but wouldn't say whether he would vote against the draft legislation in an interview with CNN.
The Freedom Caucus has warmed up to Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)'s Obamacare replacement bill, which is skimpier than what House leadership has floated. Freedom Caucus member Rep. Mark Sanford (R-SC) introduced a companion version for the House with the group's support.
Paul's bill so far has no Senate co-sponsors, a reflection of the obstacles Republicans face getting its moderates and conservatives on the same page in the repeal debate. Source That's a huge fucking preview of things to come. Its going to get fun(bad) when Trump starts attacking the Tea Party on Twitter for holding up his plans. Actually I can't wait for that.
I am eager for the shit show when Trump has no one to blame but his own party.
|
Well, I'd be all for that if it was efficient enough. To get past 70% you really need the question to be along the lines of "do you want herpies?"
|
On February 28 2017 08:21 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 07:53 LegalLord wrote:
The benefit of being out of power is that nothing is your fault anymore.
Democrats still somehow manage to be widely unpopular. NBC/WSJ Poll51% media has been too critical of Trump 53% "The news media and other elites are exaggerating the problems with the Trump administration because they are uncomfortable and threatened with the kind of change that Trump represents." Meanwhile: 44 vs 48 approval rating Obamacare: Even split on good idea/bad idea Only 4% "working well the way it is" rofl 1/3 confident in GOP's ability to replace the law Travel ban 44/45 practically dead even. Pretty hilarious given all the rhetoric saying it shouldn't be close. Consensus that Russia meddled somehow and support for the investigation.
I'm slowly becoming convinced Democrats are losing on purpose. The ACA is toxic and they want to defend it instead of just pushing Medicare for all, which has almost no opposition and is far more popular than either repealing or keeping the ACA.
|
There is no sign that Trump will do anything to make the millions who hate him start liking him all of a sudden. Plus he still had plenty of time to fuck things up for those who did support him, whether it be through war, recession, broken promises (lol coal) or whatever other disaster he drums up. I mean, does anyone really think the way things went in his first month is sustainable?
As long as Hillary doesn't run, my concern for Democrats in 2020 is zero. Having said that, beating Trump is one thing. Keeping momentum beyond that is different. DNC must evolve for that to be a certainty. The demographics are on their side, which helps.
|
On February 28 2017 08:25 Plansix wrote:
People need to temper their exceptions when it comes to national polls. Its never going to be 70/30 unless the topic is "do you support murdering puppies for fuel?"
I dunno, we've murdered a lot worse than puppies for fuel in the past.
|
Once again, there was a large part of Southern voters that did not want Nixon impeached. A good 40%. Just like Trump, he had a base that would never leave him.
Not to say Trump should be impeached right now or anything. Just that holding onto your super loyal base is pretty easy, even when you are being removed from power by congress.
On February 28 2017 08:32 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 08:25 Plansix wrote:
People need to temper their exceptions when it comes to national polls. Its never going to be 70/30 unless the topic is "do you support murdering puppies for fuel?" I dunno, we've murdered a lot worse than puppies for fuel in the past.
Yes. And I am sure that people said it was bad, but then bought that fuel because they needed it.
There was a story in the NYT today about a community in WV that when for Trump by like 70% that is having a moment because a member of their community is being deported. And fully support illegals being removed from the country, but not this guy. He was part of their community, one of the good ones. And they still support deporting everyone else but that guy when asked.
|
On February 28 2017 08:27 On_Slaught wrote:
There is no sign that Trump will do anything to make the millions who hate him start liking him all of a sudden. Plus he still had plenty of time to fuck things up for those who did support him, whether it be through war, recession, broken promises (lol coal) or whatever other disaster he drums up. I mean, does anyone really think the way things went in his first month is sustainable?
As long as Hillary doesn't run, my concern for Democrats in 2020 is zero. Having said that, beating Trump is one thing. Keeping momentum beyond that is different. DNC must evolve for that to be a certainty. The demographics are on their side, which helps.
I'm reasonably confident Democrats will do their best to run someone on the basis that they are "not Trump" and Hillary is doing everything we would expect if she was running in 2020. With Perez at the top of the DNC (inexplicable as to why there was such a strong effort, including the white house, to stop Ellison if they really are basically going to do the same thing as has been suggested) we're already on the way to a DNC backed Hillary run.
|
My dream of dreams would be that the democrats don't even talk about Trump in 2018 unless asked. Just talk about the Republican congress, their own plans to fix things and ignore him. It would make him so mad and let them focus on what people want, shit to happen.
|
On February 28 2017 08:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2017 08:27 On_Slaught wrote:
There is no sign that Trump will do anything to make the millions who hate him start liking him all of a sudden. Plus he still had plenty of time to fuck things up for those who did support him, whether it be through war, recession, broken promises (lol coal) or whatever other disaster he drums up. I mean, does anyone really think the way things went in his first month is sustainable?
As long as Hillary doesn't run, my concern for Democrats in 2020 is zero. Having said that, beating Trump is one thing. Keeping momentum beyond that is different. DNC must evolve for that to be a certainty. The demographics are on their side, which helps. I'm reasonably confident Democrats will do their best to run someone on the basis that they are "not Trump" and Hillary is doing everything we would expect if she was running in 2020. With Perez at the top of the DNC (inexplicable as to why there was such a strong effort, including the white house, to stop Ellison if they really are basically going to do the same thing as has been suggested) we're already on the way to a DNC backed Hillary run.
I really don't think they're stupid enough to run Hillary again. The only way I could see it ever work is iff Trump is so catastrophic that she could at least run the i-told-you-so card. But in that case you could run literally anybody else and it won't matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
