The Swamp

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:23 pm

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:55 pm I think anyone saying the GOP will be permanently tanked by Trump is being way too optimistic. They’ll just rebrand like they did after the disaster that was Bush’s presidency led to the landslide losses in 2006 and 2008. In a two-party state like the US way too many people view political party as part of their personal identity for either the GOP or Dems to sink into permanent oblivion. Plus Biden has repeatedly said that he likes working with Republicans, including McConnell, and looks forward to doing so as President. Biden literally eulogized Strom Thurmond; he’ll be fine with helping the GOP rehabilitate.

Yes, bipartisanship is so important to Biden that he personally stopped the ACA rather than push it through without Republican support.

You’re right. If there’s one thing we know about Biden, it’s that he’d never try to rehabilitate despicable Republicans.


Also, he did a fundraiser for a GOP Congressional candidate, Fred Upton, in 2018. That was a pretty important midterm for the Dems.

brian wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:56 pm Yeah, I was just projecting out what happens if the GOP doesn't course-correct it's outward white nationalism.

Word..... to the Mother

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:30 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:23 pm

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:55 pm I think anyone saying the GOP will be permanently tanked by Trump is being way too optimistic. They’ll just rebrand like they did after the disaster that was Bush’s presidency led to the landslide losses in 2006 and 2008. In a two-party state like the US way too many people view political party as part of their personal identity for either the GOP or Dems to sink into permanent oblivion. Plus Biden has repeatedly said that he likes working with Republicans, including McConnell, and looks forward to doing so as President. Biden literally eulogized Strom Thurmond; he’ll be fine with helping the GOP rehabilitate.

Yes, bipartisanship is so important to Biden that he personally stopped the ACA rather than push it through without Republican support.

You’re right. If there’s one thing we know about Biden, it’s that he’d never try to rehabilitate despicable Republicans.


Also, he did a fundraiser for a GOP Congressional candidate, Fred Upton, in 2018. That was a pretty important midterm for the Dems.

First, don’t fall into the trap of thinking you can read his mind based on what he says. Yes, Biden *says* stuff about bipartisanship. That’s how you appeal to the large number of moderate voters who are “tired of partisan bickering.” (Plus, don’t you folks think Biden’s a huge liar anyway?)

Second, I don’t think it was a fundraiser, though Biden did praise Upton in a speech and call him one of the good guys.

Being from Michigan I can say Upton is practically a moderate Democrat compared to most of the GOP these days.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:52 pm

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 8:30 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 6:23 pm

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:55 pm I think anyone saying the GOP will be permanently tanked by Trump is being way too optimistic. They’ll just rebrand like they did after the disaster that was Bush’s presidency led to the landslide losses in 2006 and 2008. In a two-party state like the US way too many people view political party as part of their personal identity for either the GOP or Dems to sink into permanent oblivion. Plus Biden has repeatedly said that he likes working with Republicans, including McConnell, and looks forward to doing so as President. Biden literally eulogized Strom Thurmond; he’ll be fine with helping the GOP rehabilitate.

Yes, bipartisanship is so important to Biden that he personally stopped the ACA rather than push it through without Republican support.

You’re right. If there’s one thing we know about Biden, it’s that he’d never try to rehabilitate despicable Republicans.


Also, he did a fundraiser for a GOP Congressional candidate, Fred Upton, in 2018. That was a pretty important midterm for the Dems.

First, don’t fall into the trap of thinking you can read his mind based on what he says. Yes, Biden *says* stuff about bipartisanship. That’s how you appeal to the large number of moderate voters who are “tired of partisan bickering.” (Plus, don’t you folks think Biden’s a huge liar anyway?)

Second, I don’t think it was a fundraiser, though Biden did praise Upton in a speech and call him one of the good guys.

The specific “debate” was about whether the GOP will suffer adverse long-term consequences from Trump. I believe it will not, in part because Biden has always taken the position that awful Republicans, including certain segregationists and war criminals, are “decent men” with whom he can find common ground. That makes it highly unlikely that he’ll condone or encourage the view that the Congressmen who have abetted Trump are morally culpable for Trump’s actions and should incur appropriate treatment. The electorate will then memory hole Trump and let Josh Hawley and Tom Cotton be viable Presidential candidates in 2024.

Man you guys raise some good points. The decision this November is gonna be really tough!

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 9:34 pm Man you guys raise some good points. The decision this November is gonna be really tough!

At this point I know you just don’t like me and am mocking my posts but maybe read the thread first, dude. It’s a discussion started by Brian and others about the future of the GOP assuming a convincing Biden win. It has nothing to do with who to vote for in November.

Joe, I do respect your thought processes even when I disagree. I probably can’t speak for everybody, but please don’t mistake disagreement for personal animosity.

I think PDX deleted his post, which is fine but it's also important to remember none of us here are idiots. We know exactly what we're voting for in Joe Biden. I don't think anyone has deluded themselves into thinking this is next coming of FDR or whatever. But what I do know is there's no way this country can afford another four years of Trump. I very much doubt there will be enough of the Constitution left to salvage after that. Arguably less from what he can do with presidential decrees and more about the packing of the federal bench, especially RBG's seat. The right-wing will never cede power after that.

If everyone knows that and everyone acknowledges Biden has their vote, why does every debate turn into “well what about Trump???” The debate has never been “is Biden better than Trump”, but that sure as fuck seems to be the fallback whenever someone here takes on Biden’s record or present state or the party.

Maybe with this you can have a frank discussion without distraction.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 25, 2020 10:42 pm If everyone knows that and everyone acknowledges Biden has their vote, why does every debate turn into “well what about Trump???” The debate has never been “is Biden better than Trump”, but that sure as fuck seems to be the fallback whenever someone here takes on Biden’s record or present state or the party.

I also think there is a fairly general assumption that "Biden beats Trump and things go back to(ward) normal, then Biden steps down after one term and things are fine."

Well, what if the GOP has decided that since the country swallowed, and in many circles, liked, four years of Trump. (You can mock him for his general unpopularity, but the base level approval doesn't vary.) So they decide to run a much more competent candidate in 2024 who happens to share a bunch of the same ideas because there sure seems to be a lot of support for those ideas.

By what level of margin on the local, state, and national levels are the Democrats going to have to win in 2020 to do structural things like removing gerrymandering, etc. to ensure "Competent Trump" doesn't win in 2024? Can those margins of victory realistically happen in 2020? Or is it "Trump goes away and we never have to worry about this again?"

Competent Trump would be way more dangerous. It's guys like McConnel that actually hold the power. Trump isn't even conservative, he's just a populist conman.

I guess the question is, is there a Competent Biden out there, which makes the VP choice key.

Uh oh NJ guys...

Is he sick? Does he have the COVID? If not, this is probably gonna be an epic weekend of rage tweeting so batten down the hatches.

DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 9:24 amBy what level of margin on the local, state, and national levels are the Democrats going to have to win in 2020 to do structural things like removing gerrymandering, etc. to ensure "Competent Trump" doesn't win in 2024? Can those margins of victory realistically happen in 2020? Or is it "Trump goes away and we never have to worry about this again?"

I don't think there's much the Dems could do in the 2020 election that would prevent a Competent Trump from winning in 2024. If things are bad economically, someone like Tom Cotton could easily win.

If the Dems take back the Senate, then the filibuster has to go and they have to spend the first two years of Biden's term on as much popular structural change as they can (voting rights, statehood for DC, there's a few other things that poll at around 70 percent or so and shouldn't be even mildly controversial. I expect the normal backlash to the party in the White House and a reaction to the likely recession/depression we'll still be going through economically, so there's no guarantee of holding the House or the Senate after 2022.

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:04 pm If the Dems take back the Senate, then the filibuster has to go and they have to spend the first two years of Biden's term on as much popular structural change as they can (voting rights, statehood for DC, there's a few other things that poll at around 70 percent or so and shouldn't be even mildly controversial. I expect the normal backlash to the party in the White House and a reaction to the likely recession/depression we'll still be going through economically, so there's no guarantee of holding the House or the Senate after 2022.

Agreed. They need to ram through every Bill that the house has approved.

And I also feel like he needs to appoint at least 2 judges to the supreme court and expand that turn that shit to 11.

Instead of packing the court, I'd also like to see an independent counsel assigned to investigate Kavanaugh for financial crimes arising out of his Supreme Court nomination. There's been no investigation of some definitely weird financial stuff related to Nationals tickets, as well as the whole situation with Kennedy stepping down. If they can dig up enough dirt, then maybe they can get him to step down or impeach him.

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 11:31 am Is he sick? Does he have the COVID? If not, this is probably gonna be an epic weekend of rage tweeting so batten down the hatches.

Bizarre, I can't imagine he gives a fuck that NJ made a quarantine rule. He has cancelled his last 2 or 3 planned trips to NJ, and I haven't really seen any explanations. I know Ivanka and Jared came to NJ for Passover when travel into NJ was verboten, and they hosted a Seder dinner party, because why would the rules apply to them?

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:15 pm

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 11:31 am Is he sick? Does he have the COVID? If not, this is probably gonna be an epic weekend of rage tweeting so batten down the hatches.

Bizarre, I can't imagine he gives a fuck that NJ made a quarantine rule.

For sure something else came up.

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:32 pm

The Sybian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:15 pm

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 11:31 am Is he sick? Does he have the COVID? If not, this is probably gonna be an epic weekend of rage tweeting so batten down the hatches.

Bizarre, I can't imagine he gives a fuck that NJ made a quarantine rule.

For sure something else came up.

In order of likelihood:

1) Someone convinced him that golfing as the pandemic worsens was a bad look and he actually took the advice.
2) He actually has the COVID and they're going to dump the news of the positive diagnosis at like 4:59 p.m. today.
3) Wants to spend more time with Barron/Melania.

1.5) There's a decent chance of rain and storms in north Jersey tomorrow so actually playing golf might have been dicey anyway

rass wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:38 pm 1.5) There's a decent chance of rain and storms in north Jersey tomorrow so actually playing golf might have been dicey anyway

See, I wouldn't know that. But yeah, it's most likely golf-related or golf-adjacent.

rass wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:38 pm 1.5) There's a decent chance of rain and storms in north Jersey tomorrow so actually playing golf might have been dicey anyway

saw your car at my course today with your personalized "RAAS" license plate. how was the round?

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:13 pm Instead of packing the court, I'd also like to see an independent counsel assigned to investigate Kavanaugh for financial crimes arising out of his Supreme Court nomination. There's been no investigation of some definitely weird financial stuff related to Nationals tickets, as well as the whole situation with Kennedy stepping down. If they can dig up enough dirt, then maybe they can get him to step down or impeach him.

I think this one is huge. There’s almost zero chance this was a legitimate appointment so fight back and set precedent related to all future nominations. None of these “aww shoot, you got us this time” allowances; if something wasn’t above board it doesn’t get grandfathered in.

mister d wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 1:59 pm

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:13 pm Instead of packing the court, I'd also like to see an independent counsel assigned to investigate Kavanaugh for financial crimes arising out of his Supreme Court nomination. There's been no investigation of some definitely weird financial stuff related to Nationals tickets, as well as the whole situation with Kennedy stepping down. If they can dig up enough dirt, then maybe they can get him to step down or impeach him.

I think this one is huge. There’s almost zero chance this was a legitimate appointment so fight back and set precedent related to all future nominations. None of these “aww shoot, you got us this time” allowances; if something wasn’t above board it doesn’t get grandfathered in.

I think they need to pack the court. At the very least, they need to pass a law that increases the size of the court as long as Gorsuch remains on the bench.

But yes, investigate Kavanaugh too, for financial shenanigans and perjury in his two confirmation hearings.

rass wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 12:38 pm 1.5) There's a decent chance of rain and storms in north Jersey tomorrow so actually playing golf might have been dicey anyway

Yeah, there is no way he'd skip a golf outing because of optics. He went golfing numerous times during impeachment and throughout COVID, so why stop now?

Def pack the courts, but that can be cyclical so fighting Kavanaugh seems more important. Establishing that scamming a judge onto the court can and will later be reversed would serve as prevention going forward.

Packing the court in 2021 might not be as effective as it is in say 2025 (assuming a hopeful second term or another Dem win) because of all of the nutters Trump has appointed to the federal appeals courts. Packing the court would be an effective way for the Supreme Court to take up the cases that the loonies on the lower court strike down (or vice versa).

If Kavanaugh can be removed for most of the reasons indicated it will prevent those kinds of shenanigans in the future and restore the court to a 5-4 liberal(-ish) majority. Essentially, it would just be reclaiming the seat that the Republicans stole by not confirming Garland.

I'd like to see the Supreme Court expanded to 11 after it's pretty clear the Republican Party is starting to turn on itself. Taking the court to 11 in 2021 gives them a lot of ammunition for 2022 and 2024.

brian wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 2:30 pm Packing the court in 2021 might not be as effective as it is in say 2025 (assuming a hopeful second term or another Dem win) because of all of the nutters Trump has appointed to the federal appeals courts. Packing the court would be an effective way for the Supreme Court to take up the cases that the loonies on the lower court strike down (or vice versa).

If Kavanaugh can be removed for most of the reasons indicated it will prevent those kinds of shenanigans in the future and restore the court to a 5-4 liberal(-ish) majority. Essentially, it would just be reclaiming the seat that the Republicans stole by not confirming Garland.

No, you have to pack the court right away and get your judges on the bench right away. You need to pack the appellate courts too, which Congress can do by creating new judgeships. That is a helluva a lot easier than impeaching a judge, since impeachment requires a supermajority in the Senate.

But either way I think this is all beyond what Biden (and the vast majority of voters) would be comfortable with.

THe senate would have to go Blue, right? Otherwise do you have confidence that they'd approve ANY justice, given that the new seats would be being created specifically to overturn the current majority?

A_B wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 2:48 pm THe senate would have to go Blue, right? Otherwise do you have confidence that they'd approve ANY justice, given that the new seats would be being created specifically to overturn the current majority?

Yes. The Senate would have to go blue, and probably by several extra seats because there's no way in hell Joe Manchin is on board with any of this.

rass wrote: ↑Fri Jun 26, 2020 11:20 am Uh oh NJ guys...

No, he's staying in DC to do work.

Seriously, at this point Dick Wolf needs to send a cease and desist to this moron.

Big Maccuweather forecast

Oh neat. Another thing that would've ended any other presidency.

You could make a pretty decent case that’s one of the two or three worst things Trump has done in office. It certainly should be for any “support the troops” simpletons (in the sense if that’s your only metric for judging a President)