|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 24 2019 05:56 Mohdoo wrote: I don't think I understand why McConnell wouldn't want SOTU in Senate Why get in the middle of a fist fight when you don’t care about the outcome?
|
His saving grace has been his ability to keep the Senate out of the spotlight. The day he agrees to let Trump break tradition and give the SotU in the Senate is the day his bootlicking becomes impossible to avoid.
Then again, maybe he’s got an exit in mind. His lack of scruples makes him a shifty figure and far more dangerous than Trump.
|
BTW the NYT Magazine wrote a really long piece on McConnell yesterday. The guy has a really perverse world view. He really does see himself as the hero in all this. I'd recommend reading it if you have time.
It's called "Mitch McConnell got everything he wanted. But at what cost?"
|
I could imagine that it would be a real shit show. Trump would just walk into the house and do it regardless of what happens. But I could see the supreme court not being there as well as most of the seats being empty. Pelosi wouldn't be there and she can probably order the sergeant at arms to cause a fuss at the very least. The entire unofficial process of the SOTU would break down and it would just look like a huge shit show.
The worst thing the dems could do is to make it really quiet. Make it a historical note that trump couldn't pull off an event that even in the darkest depths of bush both sides unanimously gathered for.
Imagine people just not giving a shit. AOC showing up with a tablet and live commentating it on twitch. Awkward old men wearing hoodies and empty seats. People just having lunch and doing paperwork while Republicans attempt to pick on on what ques they're supposed to stand and clap for.
|
On January 24 2019 04:50 farvacola wrote: A good move on her part, now we’ll see how Trump reacts. It won’t be pretty I’d bet lol. I also still think there’s no chance McConnell let’s him do it in the Senate. I'm guessing something like "I'm uninvited? Yeah, well, I didn't even want to go anway." with a handful of Trumpisms and randomly CAPITALIZED words.
|
|
Man this is going to be so much worse then what I'm thinking it will be and I can't wait.
|
On January 24 2019 06:05 On_Slaught wrote: BTW the NYT Magazine wrote a really long piece on McConnell yesterday. The guy has a really perverse world view. He really does see himself as the hero in all this. I'd recommend reading it if you have time.
It's called "Mitch McConnell got everything he wanted. But at what cost?"
I also recommend as a companion piece, The Man Who Broke Politics, which profiles Newt and his style of politics. His style was the prototype for what McConnell perfected, using dysfunction to obtain power. It is an interesting background piece and really highlights that the bad faith politics of the current Republicans was always the plan. It just took a decade to blow up all the bipartisan power groups that existed in the House and Senate. But unlike Newt, McConnell has obtained power to achieve a goal, which is to pack the courts. But people sort of have his number now.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/11/newt-gingrich-says-youre-welcome/570832/
Also, you have to be an amazingly fucked up person to visit Verdun and come to the conclusion that, and I quote “I(Newt) realized countries can die,”. Like, mother fucker, you in a historical landmark that shows that countries don’t die even in the most destructive of wars. They endure. I know that mother fucker took history, but clearly he failed to grasp the part about how fruitless WW1 was. Or he just likes saying things that sound profound, but are in fact totally off base. Seriously, what sort of cynical mother fucker comes to that conclusion? Newt, the former speaker who loves to talk about natural law and other bullshit to justify his bullshit politics.
|
My money is on one of thoss campaign style rallies he loves to have. Been a while since he had one afaik and it does great things for his ego. Probably the best outcome for Dems too since it would delegitimize his speech a fair bit. He tends to go one absurd tangents at those rallies.
|
If the networks have even the slightest backbone, they shouldn’t carry his fake State of the Union.
|
On January 24 2019 06:34 Plansix wrote: If the networks have even the slightest backbone, they shouldn’t carry his fake State of the Union.
Wont happen. Fox will obviously carry it and ABC/CBS/NBC will cover it to appear fair and not piss off Republicans. CNN and MSNBC will gain nothing by sitting out at that point and will cover at least part of it for the ratings.
|
|
On January 24 2019 06:34 Plansix wrote: If the networks have even the slightest backbone, they shouldn’t carry his fake State of the Union. Broadcasting mean rating, rating mean money. money is everything.
Ofcourse they will plaster it front and center.
|
On January 24 2019 07:03 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2019 06:34 Plansix wrote: If the networks have even the slightest backbone, they shouldn’t carry his fake State of the Union. Broadcasting mean rating, rating mean money. money is everything. Ofcourse they will plaster it front and center. They don't carry his rallies anymore. Even Fox. They can cover this, but I don’t know if it will really pull in the eyeballs.
|
You can't really monetize the SOTU. OFC the news networks have their pre and post shows but I could easily see a broadcast network skipping it to avoid a shitshow.
|
Agencies are now being asked to plan through February. Some of them will default on their leases and will face the prospect of commercial eviction. Also FBI agents and anyone with security clearance could lose their job because defaulting on loans and rent can lead to security clearing being denied.
|
|
On January 24 2019 07:28 JimmiC wrote: It is good for socialism that Maduro is out, because he was not a socialist, he was a self serving dictator using socialism as a shield to distract his people from his theft. Him being out doesn't let people say "socialism" doesn't work look at Venezuela. It is much harder to say it doesn't work look at Norway.
Yeah... my prediction is that literally nobody will change their opinion on socialism based on what is or isn't happening in Venezuela :/
|
|
What Maduro is is a reminder that democratic principles are always more important than political ideology. There are always those on both the left and the right happy to overlook undemocratic moves by leaders of their political color. Lots of people on the left were feeling quite positive about Chavez despite it being clear it was leading to the current state of affairs.
|
|
|
|