Random Politics

P.D.X. · Post by **P.D.X.** » Fri May 26, 2023 1:23 pm

'snippets' = title / author's photo

Pruitt IV · Post by **Pruitt IV** » Sat May 27, 2023 6:33 am

P.D.X. wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:23 pm 'snippets' = title / author's photo

“I see the word ‘communism’, and I think it’s something about communism,” she told JTA, adding, “I didn’t read the words.”

Pruitt IV · Post by **Pruitt IV** » Sat May 27, 2023 7:11 pm

Texas attorney general urges supporters to protest at capitol ahead of impeachment vote

Guess this is the new playbook move.

Post by **brian** » Sat May 27, 2023 8:12 pm

Biden & McCarthy announce they have a debt ceiling deal but might be shot down by extremists on both sides (which is probably evidence that it’s not the worst deal ever).

(And yes the GOP should not be holding the country hostage but agreeing to flatten, not cut federal spending is not the end of the world. It’s an open question to be who would be hurt worse politically by a shutdown/default — Biden or the GOP.)

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Tue May 30, 2023 5:35 pm

Lol.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Tue May 30, 2023 5:51 pm

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed May 31, 2023 7:03 pm

Post by **Shirley** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:19 pm

sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 5:51 pm

How this story is reported (or at least, Tweeted about) is frustrating. I'm nearly positive he said that he stopped mail-in ballots from being sent out to potential voters. That doesn't mean that those people still didn't vote some other way. Or that they were ever going to vote at all. It's bad (if they were truly valid requests) and I'm sure it suppressed some of the dev vote, but it didn't cost 2.5M votes.

EnochRoot · Post by **EnochRoot** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:22 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:19 pm
sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 5:51 pm
How this story is reported (or at least, Tweeted about) is frustrating. I'm nearly positive he said that he stopped mail-in ballots from being sent out to potential voters. That doesn't mean that those people still didn't vote some other way. Or that they were ever going to vote at all. It's bad (if they were truly valid requests) and I'm sure it suppressed some of the dev vote, but it didn't cost 2.5M votes.

No offense, but that’s a bad faith position to hold, because you presuppose the right had valid reasons to suppress the vote.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:15 pm

There's no reason to do them any favors with framing. If I stand in front of you blocking you from getting into the supermarket, it doesn't matter if you eventually get around me and go inside if the debate is whether I sought to block you from shopping. If he stopped 2.5MM write-ins and 1.75MM of them went on to vote in person anyway, he still stopped 2.5MM write-ins.

Post by **Shirley** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:34 pm

EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:22 pm
Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:19 pm
sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 5:51 pm
How this story is reported (or at least, Tweeted about) is frustrating. I'm nearly positive he said that he stopped mail-in ballots from being sent out to potential voters. That doesn't mean that those people still didn't vote some other way. Or that they were ever going to vote at all. It's bad (if they were truly valid requests) and I'm sure it suppressed some of the dev vote, but it didn't cost 2.5M votes.
No offense, but that’s a bad faith position to hold, because you presuppose the right had valid reasons to suppress the vote.

I didn’t presuppose or even say I believed that.

Post by **Shirley** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:37 pm

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 1:15 pm There's no reason to do them any favors with framing. If I stand in front of you blocking you from getting into the supermarket, it doesn't matter if you eventually get around me and go inside if the debate is whether I sought to block you from shopping. If he stopped 2.5MM write-ins and 1.75MM of them went on to vote in person anyway, he still stopped 2.5MM write-ins.

I don’t want to do them any favors, but the way I’ve seen it worded in several places essentially says he stole 2.5M votes from Biden and Beto and therefore they should have won. That’s quite a leap to me, much as I’d like to believe they could or should have won.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:42 pm

Well, he said it was 2.5MM and even if he's off or overstating by 2.49MM that should be a scandal, right?

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:46 pm

Of course, one thing we shouldn't do is believe anything Paxton says. We have no reason to believe he stopped mail ballots from being sent out, or that he violated Texas law in doing so.

Biden lost Texas by half a million votes. There's no way that was because of anything Paxton did. The results in Texas were in line with what would be expected given how Biden and Trump performed in other states.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:46 pm

You don’t suppose…

EnochRoot · Post by **EnochRoot** » Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:55 pm

Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 4:34 pm
EnochRoot wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:22 pm
Shirley wrote: ↑Thu Jun 01, 2023 12:19 pm
sancarlos wrote: ↑Tue May 30, 2023 5:51 pm
How this story is reported (or at least, Tweeted about) is frustrating. I'm nearly positive he said that he stopped mail-in ballots from being sent out to potential voters. That doesn't mean that those people still didn't vote some other way. Or that they were ever going to vote at all. It's bad (if they were truly valid requests) and I'm sure it suppressed some of the dev vote, but it didn't cost 2.5M votes.
No offense, but that’s a bad faith position to hold, because you presuppose the right had valid reasons to suppress the vote.
I didn’t presuppose or even say I believed that.

Just don't bring a good faith argument to a bad situation. You won't win, and those you seek to hold accountable will laugh at the notion.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sat Jun 03, 2023 2:55 pm

More of this please.

govmentchedda · Post by **govmentchedda** » Sat Jun 03, 2023 2:57 pm

Gen Z, baby.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 11:24 am

Great ad.

Also, Lucas Kunce has popped up in some gaming podcasts I listen to recently because he's big into Magic: The Gathering.

Post by **brian** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 11:28 am

Yes, it’s a good ad but Hawley will win by at least 15 points. His brand of performative grievance politics plays especially well with the kind of mouth-breathers who live in MO.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 1:39 pm

brian wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2023 11:28 am Yes, it’s a good ad but Hawley will win by at least 15 points. His brand of performative grievance politics plays especially well with the kind of mouth-breathers who live in MO.

Truth.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 8:31 pm

Josh Hawley got 51.4% of the vote in 2018

yeah, he beat an incumbent to win that election, but he also held statewide office at the time

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 8:48 pm

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2023 8:31 pm Josh Hawley got 51.4% of the vote in 2018

yeah, he beat an incumbent to win that election, but he also held statewide office at the time

Didn’t mean to insult you there, Bronto. But, I had a bunch of my wife’s MO relatives in mind, who are completely lost to the cult.

Post by **brian** » Tue Jun 06, 2023 10:52 pm

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2023 8:31 pm Josh Hawley got 51.4% of the vote in 2018

yeah, he beat an incumbent to win that election, but he also held statewide office at the time

And he’ll win 57.5-42.5-ish next year is what I’m saying.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 7:27 am

and I'm saying as someone who lives here that I'll be extremely surprised if that's the margin

L-Jam3 · Post by **L-Jam3** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 7:41 am

Someone should really rent a billboard and just show 24/7 the video of Hawley running away like a little bitch.

Post by **brian** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 8:45 am

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 7:27 am and I'm saying as someone who lives here that I'll be extremely surprised if that's the margin

Ok, so serious question since you obviously know the “local” (MO) mood better than we do, but what stops him from winning fairly easily in a Trump +15 state? Dobbs blowback? Other stuff? Because he certainly is a MAGA darling especially in MO from everything I’ve read and I don’t see any reasons voters will peel off from him.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:17 am

brian wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 8:45 am
Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 7:27 am and I'm saying as someone who lives here that I'll be extremely surprised if that's the margin
Ok, so serious question since you obviously know the “local” (MO) mood better than we do, but what stops him from winning fairly easily in a Trump +15 state? Dobbs blowback? Other stuff? Because he certainly is a MAGA darling especially in MO from everything I’ve read and I don’t see any reasons voters will peel off from him.

he's not as favorable as you think

he's going to win, and going to win comfortably; but the margin being 15 would be incredibly surprising. 55-45 is the much safer bet

DSafetyGuy · Post by **DSafetyGuy** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 10:57 am

Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:17 am55-45 is the much safer bet

What would it take for him to lose? I don't need a specific example, even "statistical near-impossibility" is fine.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 11:04 am

DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 10:57 am
Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:17 am55-45 is the much safer bet
What would it take for him to lose? I don't need a specific example, even "statistical near-impossibility" is fine.

Coming out as gay?

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 12:25 pm

sancarlos wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 11:04 am
DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 10:57 am
Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:17 am55-45 is the much safer bet
What would it take for him to lose? I don't need a specific example, even "statistical near-impossibility" is fine.
Coming out as gay?

"Trump was bad."

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 1:15 pm

Being accepting of or defending a marginalized group probably kills his candidacy quicker than either of those.

DaveInSeattle · Post by **DaveInSeattle** » Wed Jun 07, 2023 1:24 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 12:25 pm
sancarlos wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 11:04 am
DSafetyGuy wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 10:57 am
Brontoburglar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 07, 2023 9:17 am55-45 is the much safer bet
What would it take for him to lose? I don't need a specific example, even "statistical near-impossibility" is fine.
Coming out as gay?
"Trump was bad."

"I bought this case of Bud Light at Target"

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:09 pm

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:10 pm

#voteharder

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:33 pm

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:10 pm#voteharder

I get the reason for the sarcasm/cynicism. But, what else would you have us do??

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:39 pm

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:10 pm#voteharder

The GOP has a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court because people on the far left of the spectrum chose not to vote hard enough to stop it.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:00 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:39 pm
mister d wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:10 pm#voteharder
The GOP has a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court because people on the far left of the spectrum chose not to vote hard enough to stop it.

FWIW, the Liberal Justices were joined by Roberts and Kavenaugh in the majority for this opinion.

L-Jam3 · Post by **L-Jam3** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:12 pm

I feel like Roberts is more in the HW/Romney side of the right as opposed to the more MAGA-adjacent Gorsuch/Thomas/Alito or Opus Dei-affiliated Barrett. And it seems like he has pull on Kavanaugh. So it does appear as if he can occasionally rein in the more egregious decisions if it strikes his fancy that day.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:34 pm

L-Jam3 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:12 pm I feel like Roberts is more in the HW/Romney side of the right as opposed to the more MAGA-adjacent Gorsuch/Thomas/Alito or Opus Dei-affiliated Barrett. And it seems like he has pull on Kavanaugh. So it does appear as if he can occasionally rein in the more egregious decisions if it strikes his fancy that day.

From what I've read, Roberts is deeply concerned with his legacy as Chief Justice and therefore unwilling to completely throw out the traditions of the Court and judicial precedence to push his ideology beyond the former constraints on a Court. He will still push his Conservative Agenda, but holds a slight tether to the norms that have governed Justices in the past. Not concerned enough to address shockingly blatant ethical violations, of course.