The Swamp

brian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 1:59 pm

brian wrote: Thu Jan 05, 2023 10:22 am

Giff wrote: Thu Jan 05, 2023 10:19 am

brian wrote: Thu Jan 05, 2023 10:04 am Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) announces she won't run for re-election to the Senate in 2024. Michigan has had only 1 R Senator (for only one term) since 1978.

Likeliest candidate to run in her place is current MI governor Gretchen Whitmer. After that the bench gets fairly thin,

Someone on Twitter pointed out that Pete Buttigieg moved to Michigan a couple years ago.

Oh shit. Totally forgot about that. True, him and his husband have a place near Traverse City. That would be interesting. Whitmer's aspirations might be to run for President in 2028, so Buttigieg running for that Senate seat makes a lot of sense. Wouldn't surprising me if Stabenow's retirement was all orchestrated for that purpose (though she'll be in 74 in 2024).

After Gary Peters retirement announcement seems pretty likely Buttigieg will win that MI Senate seat, especially in a mid-term election.

I think it’s pretty likely Gretchen Whitmer will be the front runner for the Dem nomination in 2028.

Whitmer would be a great candidate. If the US voters didn’t hate the idea of voting for a woman.

Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Whitmer’s a lot MILFier than either of them too and sadly that doesn’t hurt.

my god man

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:06 pm Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Naive is a good word for it.

Gender, race and her prosecutorial past. Pick your poison.

EnochRoot wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:48 pm

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:06 pm Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Naive is a good word for it.

Gender, race and her prosecutorial past. Pick your poison.

Gender and Race. Those are the answers.

duff wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 3:11 pm

EnochRoot wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:48 pm

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:06 pm Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Naive is a good word for it.

Gender, race and her prosecutorial past. Pick your poison.

Gender and Race. Those are the answers.

Do you think anyone who wouldn’t vote for her because of gender or race would vote for a Democrat? I just didn’t hear much attacking her on gender and don’t think it would have mattered. Race was more of a factor. I think her prosecutor past hurt her 2020 primary campaign so close to BLM, Floyd etc…, but I think most of the ACAB wing of the party voted for her over Trump.

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 3:36 pm

duff wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 3:11 pm

EnochRoot wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:48 pm

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:06 pm Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Naive is a good word for it.

Gender, race and her prosecutorial past. Pick your poison.

Gender and Race. Those are the answers.

Do you think anyone who wouldn’t vote for her because of gender or race would vote for a Democrat? I just didn’t hear much attacking her on gender and don’t think it would have mattered. Race was more of a factor. I think her prosecutor past hurt her 2020 primary campaign so close to BLM, Floyd etc…, but I think most of the ACAB wing of the party voted for her over Trump.

I've said it before on here, but I don't think there was anything Harris, or any other Dem, could have done differently that would have made a difference in the election result.

Every fucking day Trump did at least 2 things that would have completely torpedoed a campaign back in the day. But the country, for god knows what reason, decided that MORE TRUMP is what they wanted, and by god, that's what they are going to get.

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 3:36 pm

duff wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 3:11 pm

EnochRoot wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:48 pm

The Sybian wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 2:06 pm Maybe I’m naive, but I think America would vote for a woman. Hilary was so inherently unlikable and I don’t think gender was what cost Harris the ejection.

Naive is a good word for it.

Gender, race and her prosecutorial past. Pick your poison.

Gender and Race. Those are the answers.

Do you think anyone who wouldn’t vote for her because of gender or race would vote for a Democrat? I just didn’t hear much attacking her on gender and don’t think it would have mattered. Race was more of a factor. I think her prosecutor past hurt her 2020 primary campaign so close to BLM, Floyd etc…, but I think most of the ACAB wing of the party voted for her over Trump.

I think gender played a bigger role than race. But I think both were taken into account by those not certain or wanting a reason not to vote for her.

What the hell is going on with Nancy Mace?

Nancy Mace accuses ex-fiance and associates of rape and abuse in House speech

The South Carolina congresswoman Nancy Mace accused four men – including her former fiance – of rape, physical abuse and sexual misconduct during a nearly hourlong speech on Monday on the US House floor.

In the 50-minute presentation, Mace named and displayed photos of the alleged abusers. Mace described how, in November 2023, she “accidentally uncovered some of the most heinous crimes against women imaginable” – including “non-consensual photos, non-consensual videos of women and underage girls”.

Mace’s remarks took place after House votes and when most legislators had left. Mace’s mother, three of her fellow Republican representatives, and a dozen supporters were in attendance for the speech.

Yes, I believe women...but she made these allegations during a speech on the House Floor, where conveniently libel and slander laws don't apply, which her office pointed out in a statement.

Mace’s office has also issued a statement defending her unprecedented remarks on the House floor by referring to the constitutional protection.

“Any and all statements made by members on the House floor are quintessential ‘legislative acts’, and protected by the speech and debate clause afforded under the constitution of the United States,” the statement from Mace’s office said. “Her statements tonight are not conjecture, they are not allegations, they are facts based on information she uncovered and documents she accidentally discovered.”

And one of the guys she called out, South Carolina attorney general, Alan Wilson, in considered to be one of her potential rivals if she decides to run to become SC governor.

$10 says Mace sent noods and is getting ahead of that info/those photos coming out.

Is it a “legislative act” if the room is mostly empty and you’re talking about personal shit unrelated to legislation? Curious if there is any precedence here. When Mace first came into the scene, she seemed like a straight shooting anti-Trump Republican ready to hold him accountable. Then she turned into a lunatic MAGAt. Either Trump had majority on her, or she lost her damned mind.

if true, it's a shame that she represents an ideology that doesn't care

The Sybian wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 1:58 pm Is it a “legislative act” if the room is mostly empty and you’re talking about personal shit unrelated to legislation? Curious if there is any precedence here. When Mace first came into the scene, she seemed like a straight shooting anti-Trump Republican ready to hold him accountable. Then she turned into a lunatic MAGAt. Either Trump had majority on her, or she lost her damned mind.

She's also the one who last week was yelling out anti-trans slurs during a committee session.

Nancy Mace uses anti-trans slur during House committee hearing

Rep. Nancy Mace, a South Carolina Republican, repeatedly used a transphobic slur during a House Oversight Committee hearing Wednesday, prompting pushback from one of her Democratic colleagues.

Mace first used the slur while questioning witnesses about USAID funding for gender-affirming health care in Guatemala. Ranking Member Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., later noted that the term used by Mace was derogatory, and Mace interrupted him by repeating it — three times — adding, “I don’t really care.”

So I'm voting "lost her damn mind"...

P.D.X. wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 2:01 pm if true, it's a shame that she represents an ideology that doesn't care

Yeah, being accused of sexual assault against her is unlikely to hurt her opponent in a Republican primary.

sancarlos wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 2:23 pm

P.D.X. wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 2:01 pm if true, it's a shame that she represents an ideology that doesn't care

Yeah, being accused of sexual assault against her is unlikely to hurt her opponent in a Republican primary.

Im slightly ashamed at how hard I laughed at this.

Please Don’t Use Nancy Mace’s So-Called Victim Hotline, Advocates Say

But one aspect of the explosive speech has gone unexamined: A so-called hotline that Mace said she set up to encourage victims to come forward—which nobody actually answers, and which leading domestic and sexual violence advocates in Mace’s home state of South Carolina say they don’t want victims to call.

I forget where I saw it, but after her efforts at congressional bathroom labeling, someone was paraphrased as saying, "everything she (Mace) does is to get attention".

DSafetyGuy wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2025 12:13 pm Please Don’t Use Nancy Mace’s So-Called Victim Hotline, Advocates Say

But one aspect of the explosive speech has gone unexamined: A so-called hotline that Mace said she set up to encourage victims to come forward—which nobody actually answers, and which leading domestic and sexual violence advocates in Mace’s home state of South Carolina say they don’t want victims to call.

I forget where I saw it, but after her efforts at congressional bathroom labeling, someone was paraphrased as saying, "everything she (Mace) does is to get attention".

Right?

Didn't she even send out a (misspelled) teaser about the "big announcement" she was going to make, which ended up being these allegations?

these people ain't right

Brain worms, all of them.

brian wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2025 12:26 pm Brain worms, all of them.

More evidence...

Bill to rename Greenland to 'Red, White and Blueland' introduced by Georgia Rep. Buddy Carter

A Republican Congressman from Georgia has introduced a bill to the House of Representatives that would give a new name to Greenland as President Donald Trump continues his efforts to purchase the island.

Named the “Red, White, and Blueland Act of 2025,” the bill, introduced by Rep. Earl "Buddy" Carter, seeks to rename the island from Greenland to a more colorful Red, White and Blueland.

The act would direct the new Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to oversee the change and implement it on official documentation and maps to refer to Greenland by the updated name.

“America is back and will soon be bigger than ever with the addition of Red, White, and Blueland,” Carter said in a press release. “President Trump has correctly identified the purchase of what is now Greenland as a national security priority, and we will proudly welcome its people to join the freest nation to ever exist when our Negotiator-in-Chief inks this monumental deal.”

How can this dumbass look at himself in the mirror every morning and think "You're doing great! Keep up the great work!".

We truly are a deeply stupid country.

DaveInSeattle wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2025 1:59 pmWe truly are a deeply stupid country.

You misspelled "freest nation ever to exist"

so he’s suing for E and I?

They're trying to drive women back into the home and make white men superior to all.

If you ever needed another reason to eat the rich, the owners of my wife's small business were all cackling and whatnot about how Trump is going to make those people making less than 50k pay their fair share of taxes. And also fuck medicaid. One of these is a DR that refused to see Medicare patients, so at least he's on brand -- nvm that he got wildly fucking rich after opening clinics in two less-priviliged areas where you can guess who paid most of the bill.

Anyway, there are 16 people in the office and FOUR make more than 50 k though I am not including any of the owners in that. Those four people have been there the longest and for the most part account for the revenue/expenses/bottom line, so they should be getting paid. bUt to say shit like that just shows you don't value people. It's just more cruelty for the sake of it.

And about half the hourly employee (the ones not making 50k) complained about their $1 raise they got . Which is, I know, not a lot but it's over 4% for most, 5% for a couple and they have gotten a raise every year except one, even during pandemic and all that. Yeah it amounts to a cost of living increase, but I've always looked at any raise as positive, and an extra $100 a month is something that doesn't go on a credit card, or something gets purchased that was needed. But hey, maybe they're just thinking they need to get on the right side of the "paying their fair share" ledger.

This is the pure essence of the Reagan Revolution.

More Money For Us.

Fuck You.

The only way "you depend on me for this job" will ever turn to "I depend on you for your labor" is via a general strike and I can't think of anything I believe would happen less here. Atleast not until after all of the damage is fully done.

mister d wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 11:39 am The only way "you depend on me for this job" will ever turn to "I depend on you for your labor" is via a general strike and I can't think of anything I believe would happen less here. Atleast not until after all of the damage is fully done.

I honestly think my wife's company would go under in a year if she left.

During my 1:1 with my manager yesterday, I asked if he was worried that this Musk/DOGE funding nonsense was going to eventually have a negative effect on our company. We sell very expensive lab equipment to facilities (universities, hospitals, research labs) which tend to get a lot of funding from various Government agencies.

He said "Well....I wasn't worried until you said something".

DaveInSeattle wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 11:48 am During my 1:1 with my manager yesterday, I asked if he was worried that this Musk/DOGE funding nonsense was going to eventually have a negative effect on our company. We sell very expensive lab equipment to facilities (universities, hospitals, research labs) which tend to get a lot of funding from various Government agencies.

He said "Well....I wasn't worried until you said something".

Jesus, how could he NOT think of that? All funding for everything was cut off at one point. Universities are prepared for having to stop all subsidized research. The economy could grind to a halt from these arrogant idiots.

My co-worker just mentioned the Politico/USAID payments. Spouting off about the 8 million dollars given to Politico to write good stories about Democrats. I told him that I am sure there is more to the story. All it took was 20 minutes of research and digging into the site that was cited by MAGAts to find the real answer. USAID paid for $44,000 worth of subscriptions to Politico Pro to get more insider information on bill proposals and other things happening in Washington.

No where near 8 million. The biggest spender to Politico was the Department of Interior.

While researching this, I came across an article by Forbes about the lies told my Musk. God damn, do not read comments on any stories that claim their lord and saviors are blatantly lying about anything. Such a fucking shit show.

mister d wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 11:39 am The only way "you depend on me for this job" will ever turn to "I depend on you for your labor" is via a general strike and I can't think of anything I believe would happen less here. Atleast not until after all of the damage is fully done.

They're trying (but at under a quarter of a million people).

duff wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 12:20 pm My co-worker just mentioned the Politico/USAID payments. Spouting off about the 8 million dollars given to Politico to write good stories about Democrats. I told him that I am sure there is more to the story. All it took was 20 minutes of research and digging into the site that was cited by MAGAts to find the real answer. USAID paid for $44,000 worth of subscriptions to Politico Pro to get more insider information on bill proposals and other things happening in Washington.

No where near 8 million. The biggest spender to Politico was the Department of Interior.

While researching this, I came across an article by Forbes about the lies told my Musk. God damn, do not read comments on any stories that claim their lord and saviors are blatantly lying about anything. Such a fucking shit show.

The simple response I give is this:

Prove it.

If they hem and haw, tell them they have device in their pocket where they can search Google and come up with a valid source if true. Until they do tell them they’re going to treat them misinformed and not believe a word they say.

L-Jam3 wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 1:08 pm

duff wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2025 12:20 pm My co-worker just mentioned the Politico/USAID payments. Spouting off about the 8 million dollars given to Politico to write good stories about Democrats. I told him that I am sure there is more to the story. All it took was 20 minutes of research and digging into the site that was cited by MAGAts to find the real answer. USAID paid for $44,000 worth of subscriptions to Politico Pro to get more insider information on bill proposals and other things happening in Washington.

No where near 8 million. The biggest spender to Politico was the Department of Interior.

While researching this, I came across an article by Forbes about the lies told my Musk. God damn, do not read comments on any stories that claim their lord and saviors are blatantly lying about anything. Such a fucking shit show.

The simple response I give is this:

Prove it.

If they hem and haw, tell them they have device in their pocket where they can search Google and come up with a valid source if true. Until they do tell them they’re going to treat them misinformed and not believe a word they say.

Once I showed him the data, he understood what was going on. He is really just an agent of chaos. He loves seeing everyone get in a tizzy about everything. No matter what side of the aisle. I just try to keep him under wraps in the office and not cause any waves.

If people claim outrage at amounts spent on xxx a potential response is "then why did President Musk exclude any documentation regarding these claims from public records requests until at least 2034?"

Speaking of irritating arguments, one I've had is hearing a variation of, "Trump isn't against other NATO countries. He just wants them to pay their share."

Which doesn't exactly account for his love of Putin, Orban and other authoritarians.

You remember Chris Kluwe…