Trump Regime thread.

[blotsfan 2,112]

1 hour ago, seanbrock said:

I don't like that Obama used the Supreme Court nomination as political capital to make sure people were thuroughly threatened into voting for Hillary.

This makes literally no sense. He nominated Merrick Garland and the republicans refused to hold a hearing. If his goal was to dangle the nomination over the American people, he wouldn't have nominated anyone.

[BwareDWare94 723]

There is not even one women's right that Justice Kavanaugh will threaten. Not one.

[seanbrock 1,684]

What about the ones that matter to everyone like privacy and habeas corpus, speech etc? He's a good Christian boy that doesn't believe in baby murder though lol come on 

[seanbrock 1,684]

46 minutes ago, blotsfan said:

This makes literally no sense. He nominated Merrick Garland and the republicans refused to hold a hearing. If his goal was to dangle the nomination over the American people, he wouldn't have nominated anyone.

That's all there is to it. No possibility of nuance, especially not in politics.

[blotsfan 2,112]

50 minutes ago, seanbrock said:

That's all there is to it. No possibility of nuance, especially not in politics.

I mean, Garland was a relatively conservative judge, to throw the republicans a bone (and partially call their bluff). What would you have liked Obama to do?

[Thanatos 2,847]

The GOP getting away with stalling a SC pick for a year is one of the greatest jokes in politics. 

[seanbrock 1,684]

I think it's funny how the Republicans get shit done no matter the president is and no matter what Congress looks like. I wonder why that is. 

[blotsfan 2,112]

58 minutes ago, seanbrock said:

I think it's funny how the Republicans get shit done no matter the president is and no matter what Congress looks like. I wonder why that is. 

They didn't "get shit done" when Obama was president beyond the political equivalent of throwing a temper tantrum and taking your ball home. During the only two years where we've had a Democratic president + house + senate in the last 20+ years, they did get the ACA done, which got insurance for 20 million more people. It would've been much better if Republican in all but name Joe Lieberman didn't sink the public option. Incidentally, the repeal of the ACA was a major thing the republicans ran on in 2016, which despite having the presidency, house, and senate, they were not able to get done, so I don't think "no matter what" isn't accurate there either.

Edit: So I will repeat: what should obama have done with the Supreme Court seat? Don't be vague. You said he held  it hostage for Hillary. What should he have done? 

Edited September 6, 2018 by blotsfan

[seanbrock 1,684]

Idk be a leader. Force the Senate to take a harder line. Shut shit down, figure out a creative way to use executive orders other than bombing civilians.

The Republicans never wanted to end the ACA. I don't believe they did for a second. It was a conservative idea, they were able to fix the public option and now they've been able to gut the ACA and they can still run on replacing it forever .

[blotsfan 2,112]

40 minutes ago, seanbrock said:

Idk be a leader. Force the Senate to take a harder line.

Can't lead people who have 0 goals besides preventing you from getting anything done. Nothing Obama could've done besides maybe nominating Gorsuch could've gotten them to hold a hearing. But "idk" is pretty compelling and totally doesn't make it sound like you have nothing to back up your dumb statement. 

 And they 100% view not repealing a state a failure, no one gives them credit for the gutting of it. And again, the public option was removed by one vote by a guy that was technically not even  democrat then, and is a trump supporter now. You'd rather the democrats just say "then we don't need a bill"? Tell that to the 20 million people who only have health insurance because of it. 

[blotsfan 2,112]

Back to kavanaugh: sick of the republicans keeping documents confidential for no reason besides it making kavanaugh look bad, Corey Booker and Mazie Hirino decided to release them to the public anyways. Spoiler: not only is he racist and anti-woman, he also has committed purjury during this confirmation hearing. 

[blotsfan 2,112]

Yeah, triple posting but holy fuck. 

https://twitter.com/RyanLizza/status/1037739279248748544?s=20

Edited September 6, 2018 by blotsfan

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Garland was nominated by Obama simply as a hail mary. If anyone further left was nominated, there was a 0% chance of confirmation. Obama desperately wanted another pick on the court just in case Hillary lost. Considering the ages of some of the other justices, it was a very real reality that whomever was president after 2016 would get multiple selections. The GOP is evil, paid off, etc etc.. But they aren't completely inept. Wasn't exactly a hard playcall to defend against... but it was risky. If Hillary had won, they weren't getting another Garland nomination... lol

Obama definitely failed as a leader though, as Sean mentioned. For most of his 8 years, he spent the time whining and crying foul. Instead of actually doing things, he thought it was better to complain and pass blame off to someone else.

His ego was just about the size of Trump's minus the obvious brashness. He saw any and everything but his way as failure, and wouldn't allow himself to come off that. And we all suffered because of it. To be fair to him (Obama), I think being POTUS requires some level of ego.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Why couldn't Obama, the leader of his party force them to do stuff like this? I don't know the ins and outs personally. I'm not a congressman but considering how the country has steadily become conservative, isn't it pretty clear they're more effective legislators than Dems?

https://www.alternet.org/rss/breaking_news/483355/denying_a_quorum_vs._the_filibuster

 

Edited September 6, 2018 by seanbrock

[blotsfan 2,112]

2 hours ago, seanbrock said:

Why couldn't Obama, the leader of his party force them to do stuff like this? I don't know the ins and outs personally. I'm not a congressman but considering how the country has steadily become conservative, isn't it pretty clear they're more effective legislators than Dems? 

https://www.alternet.org/rss/breaking_news/483355/denying_a_quorum_vs._the_filibuster

Denying a quorum/filibustering just stops the senate from functioning so that would be literally the exact opposite of what Obama would want to do. Just take the L buddy.

Republican's are getting success because of a variety of factors including voter suppression, gerrymandering, and a more engaged voter base that believe stupid shit like trump being the will of jesus. Whereas democrats need to be specially convinced to vote for someone and will do stupid shit like vote for trump because they didn't get their first choice in the primary.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Depends on how it was framed. Republicans used that threat to rile up their base with the whole deficit ceiling they pretended to care about. I mean, when you just do literally nothing because you don't have the votes and you think you're better off raising money doesn't that say a lot about why Democrats keep losing. When have the Democrats gotten what they wanted since you've been alive besides the ACA? Democrats supposedly represent working people and working people are losing more and more wealth. If they're not losing maybe they're in on it.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Democrats have had control of congress + the presidency for two years out of the last 20+

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

Blots, I don't know if you are just full of shit or if you just try to twist lies to fit your personal narrative but that's a very SKEWED way to present your argument considering... 

Democrats have dominated the last century... lol

Per Wiki from 1916 to 2015, Democrats have had full Congressional control + Presidency for 35 years... Republicans have had it for 16... (18 after factoring in the first half of Trumps 1st term)

Democrats have controlled the Senate for 66 years.. they've controlled the House for 65... 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_power_in_the_United_States_over_time

Also fun fact as I keep digging... Up until Trump won the Presidency.. Democrats and Republicans had the same number of years of FULL (presidency and congressional) control going back to the beginning of Clinton's first term.

Dating back to Carter's first term ('77), the Democrats have had more instances of full control than the Republicans. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divided_government_in_the_United_States

33% of the total time Republicans have had full control in the last 100 years have come in the last 15 years. Before Bush, it hadn't happened since the 50's during Eisenhower's first two years before he lost Congress.

If you actually look at those tables... It isn't exactly a commonality that one party has full control. Thus if you think it requires full control to get anything done, you are fooling yourself.

 

Edited September 7, 2018 by DalaiLama4Ever

[blotsfan 2,112]

Politics has changed so much in the last 100 years that its stupid to look at it that way. Not to mention that obstruction on the level of Mitch for the end of Obama's presidency was literally unprecedented.

Of course, I will admit that the democrats have admittedly screwed up by respecting norms of government as well as taking republicans as good-faith actors rather than the childish fascists that they are. Corey Booker basically telling them to fuck off yesterday gives me hope that if and when the Dems take control they serve to obliterate the republican party in every way possible.

[BwareDWare94 723]

Blots, any time someone has a contrasting view to yours, your reaction is "that's/you're stupid."

How is any progress supposed to occur that way?

[Omerta+ 1,206]

He doesn't expect or want progress. Never has.

[Thanatos 2,847]

McConnell and the GOP most certainly obstructed Obama to the point where its basically impossible to get anything. When one side refuses to even give your side a say or at least an up-down vote, then how are you supposed to get anything done? The GOP party line that Obama did nothing is hilarious. When Bush left office, we were in the middle of a recession. Obama turned that around and ever since we have been climbing upwards. Trump's continued claims of a greater economy and a lower unemployment rate are fucking hilarious when you look at a graph of the last ten years and realize he is 100% riding Obama's wave.

It is past time for the Dems to use GOP tactics and completely ignore the other party when they retake control of things. The GOP has shown their colors as the party of Trump now, and anyone still on that orange buffoon's side needs to be voted out. 

Though, I do thank Mike Pence for that wonderful op-ed in the NYT explaining that at least some of the GOP still have a few principles left and are actively working to thwart the imbecile in charge. It doesn't absolve him of the rest of his crazy ass beliefs, but at least he is trying to curb the damage Trump is doing.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Bush was horrible but he got a lot of shit done, unfortunately. Obama's recovery was another transfer of wealth to the 1%. He made the banks and the various bubbles bigger and Trump will undoubtedly burst them. Actually Obama's recovery was basically a continuation of Bush's policy.

[Thanatos 2,847]

4 hours ago, seanbrock said:

Bush was horrible but he got a lot of shit done, unfortunately. Obama's recovery was another transfer of wealth to the 1%. He made the banks and the various bubbles bigger and Trump will undoubtedly burst them. Actually Obama's recovery was basically a continuation of Bush's policy.

That is complete baloney. Bush had us going into a recession that saw larger declines than the Great Depression in numerous areas. Obama turned that around. Certainly by Trump's measurements of larger stock market gains = the better the economy, Obama was a booming success, more than doubling the stock markets during his time in office. (This is mainly tongue in cheek, that's a horrible way to measure economic success, unless you are Donald Trump.)

 

https://www.ft.com/content/b5b764cc-d657-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

Edited September 8, 2018 by Thanatos

[seanbrock 1,684]

Well he lead the way trying to push tpp with Shillary. He made Bush's tax cuts to the wealthy permanent. Not only did he bail the banks out and screw home owners but he used tax money to pay for their golden parachutes and he's touring around the country doing speeches and collecting his payments.