Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[death tribble]

1 hour ago, Dr. MID-Nite said:

Americans will always do the right thing....after they've tried everything else.

America brought Prohibition in and that lasted 13 years. There are still people who believe it was a bad idea to end Prohibition.

 

Trump was reckoned a bad President last time around by those who compiled comparisons between what the Presidents were all trying to do. I have the awful fear he will try to outdo that this time.

[MrWolf]

Thanks for that Hermit.

 

Yeah okay Browncoat I can work with.

 

The most important thing I need to remember right now is Hope.

[Old Man]

5 hours ago, starblaze said:

Thank you for this, I need someone to give me some hope.  Another is that Trump's biggest flaw is that he has very grandiose ideas that will probably never happen.  The wall that he loves sooo much is just not feasible.  The mass deportation looks like a logistical nightmare and where pray tell is he going to get the money for this plan?  Wall street?  His rich buddies?  I don't think so, get ready for a tax hike.

 

Mass deportation on the scale Trump intends is not possible for reasons of cost, logistics, and foreign relations.  That's why, when they tried it in Europe eighty years ago, they kept the concentration camp part, but skipped the deportation part.  If you know what I mean.

[Pattern Ghost]

58 minutes ago, MrWolf said:

Yeah okay Browncoat I can work with.

 

Browncoats vs Brownshirts is going to be a visually confusing battlefield.

[MrWolf]

You can't take the sky from me!!!

[unclevlad]

I haven't figured out how...but yeah...we lost this election, and things are not pretty, but now we just become the Resistance.  

 

5 hours ago, Old Man said:

Mass deportation on the scale Trump intends is not possible for reasons of cost, logistics, and foreign relations.

 

The logistics is likely the only factor that, in the end, will matter.  The costs?  Tariffs, of course!!!  Never mind that they're going to cause massive inflation.  Foreign relations...isn't that like having a cousin who had a friend who was from some other country?  

 

I think Trump may not be able to do many of the things he talked about.  The problem is what he can do, what's largely within his control, will be awful.

[csyphrett]

6 hours ago, MrWolf said:

Thanks for that Hermit.

 

Yeah okay Browncoat I can work with.

 

The most important thing I need to remember right now is Hope.

just don't start misbehaving is all i am saying.

CES

[csyphrett]

I am going to tell you a story about the last Trump election. It's dumb but maybe you will like it as a sort of thing. My buddy, Jeff, harangued me about Trump versus Clinton during that election. He gloated after Trump won. I was like okay. Then after Trump got in, Jeff was like I was wrong. I shouldn't have been so happy. I was like I don't understand. Jeff was like this dumbbeep just picked Jeff Sessions as his AG. I can't believe this crap. Stupid orange fruit. I gloated over that until Jeff quit and started doing other stuff.

 

You see Jeff was at one point a big time coke seller. He got busted, and the Feds seized everything. They even threatened his mom to get his hidden vault in the woods.

 

Guess who wrote the laws that allowed them to do that.

 

Same thing happened after this election, Jessie is like Trump won. I was like I don't vote for child molesters. She paused to think about what I had said, then walked off.

CES   

  

[Trencher]

Vance is a much greater danger than Trump ever will be. Trump is a populist that surfed on the backlash against "wokeism" but Vance is a true beliver. 

Worse he is a true beliver with the ability to turn his cape after the wind as long as he get the things he want. A very dangerous person. 

[tolen1]

Anyone else notice that over the last few days, there hasn't been a single complaint about voter fraud?

 

Like, what? Did it just go away? Funny how that works when it's their side that wins.

[Hermit]

Just now, tolen1 said:

Anyone else notice that over the last few days, there hasn't been a single complaint about voter fraud?

 

Like, what? Did it just go away? Funny how that works when it's their side that wins.

I've got a Trump following cousin who put up a meme on about how we shouldn't risk friendships or family over elections... AND, of course, that we must 'respect democracy'. I've held my tongue with great effort.

[Ternaugh]

I think someone at the WaPo is upset about Tuesday. Here's the solution to today's Keyword puzzle:

 

Spoiler

 

[Starlord]

Racist text messages reported in multiple states after Election Day

[DShomshak]

I too fear Vance as much as Trump, because I see parallels with Venezuela. In contrast to Hermit, let me make the case for absolute despair.

 

Venezuelan military officer Hugo Chavez began his political career by attempting a coup. It failed, but the Venezuelan government made one of the great recurring mistakes (along with "Never start a land war in Asia"): They did not execute him, or even exile him. A few years later, he won election to president on a populist platform. He called it "Socialist," but as best I recall it boiled down to "Use oil money to subsidize lots of stuff for the poor." Which sounds nice, except it means you never develop an efficient local economy, ruin the industries you have -- and eventually the price of oil drops and the money spigot shuts down.

 

Chavez died. His VP Nicolas Maduro took over. Maduro doesn't have Chavez' charisma, but he hasn't needed to. He still had enough oil money to keep enough of the military happy that he could suppress protests and beat back rebellions. Several months ago, Maduro stood for reelection again. Observers say he very obviously lost... but he declared victory, and his pet election managers agreed. There was some hot talk about people taking to the streets in protest, but he's still there. All evidence is that he will stay in power until he drops dead.

 

I think Trump is like Chavez (only even more erratic) and Vance is like Maduro. Trump, like Chavez, tried to overthrow the government. Unfortunately, Trump had enough money to pay for enough lawyers to keep him out of jail. Now he's back in office. He has a chance to erode democratic institutions and install toadies, using his cult of personality to attack those who push back. When he drops out, through death or 25th Amendment overthrow, Vance inherits the political machine and the militias such as the Proud Boys -- people who know they face hard time if constitutional order is ever restored. And since he's not as erratic and impulsive as Trump, he uses them cannily to arrange a compliant Congress, an even more radical Supreme Court, and attack state governments that oppose him. The elections in 2028 and 2032 are blatantly rigged, but it doesn't matter. By 2036, the Constitution has been amended to remove presidential term limits, and he's in as long as he keeps oligarchs like his mentor Peter Thiel happy.

 

In Venezuela, resistance has been useless. It didn't work in Syria, Russia, Belarus or Iran, either. Canny despots who keep their nerve can stay in power indefinitely, or at least until they get too senile and one of their proteges forces them out (as happened to Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe). Why should we imagine we are exceptional?

 

Well, for me it's academic. I need to find a way to make a living now. If I achieve that, I think I shall take the advice of Epicurus and seek tranquility of mind in tending my own garden.

 

Yeah, I'm Little Mary Sunshine today. Bleah. Right now, life sucks.

 

Dean Shomshak

Edited November 8 by DShomshak

[Cygnia]

Hope is a false prophet.

[Hermit]

6 hours ago, DShomshak said:

I too fear Vance as much as Trump, because I see parallels with Venezuela. In contrast to Hermit, let me make the case for absolute despair.

 

 

[unclevlad]

7 hours ago, DShomshak said:

By 2036, the Constitution has been amended to remove presidential term limits, and he's in as long as he keeps oligarchs like his mentor Peter Thiel happy.

 

I don't see the amendment.  Proposing one can be done by 2/3 of the states, but 3/4 must then approve it.  3/4 of 50 is 37.5, so 38.  That means 13 states to block.  20 states favored Harris, if I counted right.  To be sure, several were reasonably close, so it's by no means a done deal.

 

Also, when the 22nd Amendment passed, creating the term limits, it had a grandfather clause...it didn't apply to the sitting president.  To be sure, one can expect such language wouldn't be included, but that, I think, would make it a harder sell in the more-balanced states...New Hampshire was 51-48, Minnesota was 51-47.  

 

Flip side, tho...why not simply pick a stalwart for Vance's VP?  Mike Johnson's not MAGA, but he's a Christian nationalist.  He'll continue the pushes in those directions.  He's 52 now, so he'd be 64 by the '36 election...not a big problem.  If not Johnson...another rising-star Senator, or Governor?  One of the great failings of the Democrats was *not* working on a line of succession;  figure the Republicans will learn from that.

 

And yeah....I don't think it's likely, but you do have to fear, they'll try to overturn term limits.

[Old Man]

5 hours ago, unclevlad said:

 

I don't see the amendment.  Proposing one can be done by 2/3 of the states, but 3/4 must then approve it.  3/4 of 50 is 37.5, so 38.  That means 13 states to block.  20 states favored Harris, if I counted right.  To be sure, several were reasonably close, so it's by no means a done deal.

 

Also, when the 22nd Amendment passed, creating the term limits, it had a grandfather clause...it didn't apply to the sitting president.  To be sure, one can expect such language wouldn't be included, but that, I think, would make it a harder sell in the more-balanced states...New Hampshire was 51-48, Minnesota was 51-47.  

 

Flip side, tho...why not simply pick a stalwart for Vance's VP?  Mike Johnson's not MAGA, but he's a Christian nationalist.  He'll continue the pushes in those directions.  He's 52 now, so he'd be 64 by the '36 election...not a big problem.  If not Johnson...another rising-star Senator, or Governor?  One of the great failings of the Democrats was *not* working on a line of succession;  figure the Republicans will learn from that.

 

And yeah....I don't think it's likely, but you do have to fear, they'll try to overturn term limits.

 

I do get some grim amusement watching people have cerebral discussions about constitutionality, when the current SCOTUS has already demonstrated that they could not care less what the Constitution says.  They'll make up some obviously bs reason why Trump can run again once or twice, depending on how long he lives and/or is useful.  Decisions like Dobbs and Trump v. U.S. are effectively legal Calvinball, blatantly ignoring legal precedent, logic, and even the meaning of words in order to arrive at the desired predetermined outcome.  That's not going to change anytime soon.

[assault]

13 hours ago, DShomshak said:

Venezuelan military officer Hugo Chavez began his political career by attempting a coup. It failed, but the Venezuelan government made one of the great recurring mistakes (along with "Never start a land war in Asia"): They did not execute him, or even exile him. A few years later, he won election to president on a populist platform. He called it "Socialist," but as best I recall it boiled down to "Use oil money to subsidize lots of stuff for the poor." Which sounds nice, except it means you never develop an efficient local economy, ruin the industries you have -- and eventually the price of oil drops and the money spigot shuts down.

 

That's a profound oversimplification of what Chavez was trying to do. It's not so bad when it comes to what Chavez achieved.

Aside from health, education and housing, the money from Venezuela's oil was meant to go towards building a more diverse economy. Unfortunately a country we won't name decided to apply economic sanctions to sabotage that.

It's a problem when a country's economy is based on a single commodity. They tend to become banana republics, and there are always outside forces that want them to stay that way.

Chavez tried to break Venezuela out of that by making alliances with other Latin American countries, but he failed. Maduro is the figurehead of the more conservative wing of his movement that doesn't care so much. Basically, Maduro is happy to rule a banana republic, and doesn't care about housing, education and healthcare for poor people, although he likes it when they vote for him. But they don't as much anymore, so...

The main opposition to Maduro at the moment are people that are also happy for Venezuela to be a banana republic, but one that the US is OK with, and in which there is no chance of someone like Chavez ever getting near power again.

Source: people that lived in Venezuela, and who wrote books about it. Plus my rejection of radical tourists, oh my!

Edited November 9 by assault

[DShomshak]

9 hours ago, assault said:

 

That's a profound oversimplification of what Chavez was trying to do. It's not so bad when it comes to what Chavez achieved.
...
Source: people that lived in Venezuela, and who wrote books about it. Plus my rejection of radical tourists, oh my!

Then you certainly know more about it than I do; I'm going by memories of news stories and a review of Venezuela's entry in the World Almanac.

 

Chavez' program of musical education gave the world the conductor Dudamel, so that's another thing.

 

OTOH he got his legislature to give him rule by decree, achieved a constitutional amendment to abolish term limits, and, "Emboldened by the victory... pressured domestic critics and consolidated control over the armed forces." Chavez may have meant well, but he put the conditions in place for Maduro's thuggery. I weight despotic results over reformist intentions.

 

Dean Shomshak

[unclevlad]

3 hours ago, DShomshak said:

I weight despotic results over reformist intentions.

 

How do you rate despotic intentions, with as-yet-unknown results?

[Lectryk]

22 hours ago, Old Man said:

They'll make up some obviously bs reason why Trump can run again once or twice, depending on how long he lives and/or is useful.  Decisions like Dobbs and Trump v. U.S. are effectively legal Calvinball, blatantly ignoring legal precedent, logic, and even the meaning of words in order to arrive at the desired predetermined outcome.  That's not going to change anytime soon.

 

The amendment language is pretty explicit:  No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

 

It'll be interesting to see what they'd hang their hypothetical rejection of it on.  Ones of the examples you cite (Dobbs) is rejection of past decision, not rejection of explicit statements of constitutional authority.  That requires another amendment to remove the extant directive (for example Prohibition).  And as unclevlad pointed out above, not enough states will ratify for such a change.  Yes, Dobb's reversed an interpretation, but the right to an abortion wasn't explicit anywhere, so no Calvinball there.  Calvinball might have come up if an attempt to reverse Loving is ever made to them - it's based on the same principles and directly affects Thomas.  Trump v US, like Roe v Wade, created new interpretation.  So, the only Calvinball there is the same as Roe: if one was, the other was, if one wasn't, then the other wasn't.  I think it was a bad decision, but that's what the court is for, to render decisions.  If lawmakers (or the people elect the lawmakers) are unhappy with the decision, enact laws to render the decision moot.  And several were proposed in the wake of that decision, just going to happen under this regime.  We could even try for an amendment when they're out, but I don't think that'll pass. 

Edited November 10 by Lectryk

[Lectryk]

Also, what are non hard core republican female voters for Trump going to do when Federal law banning abortions is attempted/passes?  Or, any set of laws that reduce access to healthcare, freedoms in divorce, etc - any of the things that have been proposed of that nature. 

 

Several senators are already lined up to propose or support a Federal abortion ban (Graham has been vocal about it for ex) , and if the Republicans do gain the house, we'll probably see attempts, esp under the like of Johnson.

[starblaze]

I really hope I am wrong.  I hope that Trump getting a second term is a good thing.  I hope everything is just fear mongering and that I need to relax and ignore this feeling in the out of my stomach.

 

But it's going to be a really hard sell.

[death tribble]

If nothing else it is nice to see starblaze and Mr Wolf posting