Octopus Overlords

You’re not crazy. The married president of the United States had an affair with a porn star when his son was an infant, paid six figures for her silence, and in the final analysis, no one really cares. You’re not crazy.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:15 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:06 pm

el Guapo wrote:The good news is that the GOP has become so crazy and divorced from mainstream opinion that even on divisive issues, they've left democrats plenty of room to stake out reasonable positions. Say that you want to ban assault weapons, high capacity ammo magazines, and bump stocks, which has overwhemling popular support. Don't say that you want to put a Planned Parenthood in every Starbucks, because that's a crazy thing that no one would ever actually say.

What is currently most popular and best selling firearm class in the US? Hint, it's what you suggested banning. Just about every person who owns legally one will vote the other way. Automatically and regardless of any other issue. That's what I'm talking about.

80% support the ban. If the other 20% are really upset and vote the other way, I would still sign on to that 1,000%. You can't win everyone, so you want to focus on winning the majority.

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 7:34 pm

El Guapo wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:15 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:06 pm

el Guapo wrote:The good news is that the GOP has become so crazy and divorced from mainstream opinion that even on divisive issues, they've left democrats plenty of room to stake out reasonable positions. Say that you want to ban assault weapons, high capacity ammo magazines, and bump stocks, which has overwhemling popular support. Don't say that you want to put a Planned Parenthood in every Starbucks, because that's a crazy thing that no one would ever actually say.

What is currently most popular and best selling firearm class in the US? Hint, it's what you suggested banning. Just about every person who owns legally one will vote the other way. Automatically and regardless of any other issue. That's what I'm talking about.

80% support the ban. If the other 20% are really upset and vote the other way, I would still sign on to that 1,000%. You can't win everyone, so you want to focus on winning the majority.

We both know that doesn't translate to an 80/20 vote.

tjg_marantz wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:44 pm Motherfucking thread

https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/954132275083513857

Yeah yeah, no racism in this administration at all.

Kurth wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 12:57 am

tjg_marantz wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 11:44 pm Motherfucking thread

https://twitter.com/KFILE/status/954132275083513857

Yeah yeah, no racism in this administration at all.

My god. I just read through all those Higbie comments over on CNN. Just unbelievable that he could be appointed to a position in any administration.

The lawyer, Michael Cohen, established Essential Consultants LLC, on Oct. 17, 2016, just before the 2016 presidential election, corporate documents show. Mr. Cohen, who is based in New York, then used a bank account linked to the entity to send the payment to the client-trust account of a lawyer representing the woman, Stephanie Clifford, one of the people said.

US Defence Secretary James Mattis has said competition between great powers, not terrorism, is now the main focus of America's national security.

The US faced "growing threats from revisionist powers as different as China and Russia", he said, unveiling the national defence strategy.

In an apparent reference to Russia, he warned against "threaten[ing] America's experiment in democracy".

"If you challenge us, it will be your longest and worst day," he warned.

America has been gripped by ongoing investigations into alleged collusion between the Trump 2016 election campaign and Russia.

Speaking at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. Mr Mattis also appealed to Congress to fund the military adequately and refrain from "indiscriminate and automatic cuts" to the US federal budget.

Paingod wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:26 pm How does one decide on $130,000 as a figure to keep a porn star silent. Was there negotiation between lawyers? Did they have to sit down and weight the values of a Forbes spanking vs. a regular spanking? Was there a 'size' bonus? Was there a pre-NDA interview deduction? By what metric do we arrive at $130,000?

Trump doesn't pay for anything he doesn't absolutely have to, and often doesn't pay for those. Prying this money out of his hands must have required a team of experts wielding the "Jaws of Life" and a bucket of greasy KFC to get him to let go of it.

El Guapo wrote:Trump hates sharks and wants them all to die.

I mean...this is far, far from the most important story about Trump. But at the same time...FUCK, that guy is president.

$iljanus wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:15 pm

El Guapo wrote:Trump hates sharks and wants them all to die.

I mean...this is far, far from the most important story about Trump. But at the same time...FUCK, that guy is president.

Can't wait till his confidental national security memo mandating the study of how to counter the sharknado threat is leaked...

$iljanus wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:15 pm

El Guapo wrote:Trump hates sharks and wants them all to die.

I mean...this is far, far from the most important story about Trump. But at the same time...FUCK, that guy is president.

Can't wait till his confidental national security memo mandating the study of how to counter the sharknado threat is leaked...

Paingod wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:26 pm How does one decide on $130,000 as a figure to keep a porn star silent. Was there negotiation between lawyers? Did they have to sit down and weight the values of a Forbes spanking vs. a regular spanking? Was there a 'size' bonus? Was there a pre-NDA interview deduction? By what metric do we arrive at $130,000?

Trump doesn't pay for anything he doesn't absolutely have to, and often doesn't pay for those. Prying this money out of his hands must have required a team of experts wielding the "Jaws of Life" and a bucket of greasy KFC to get him to let go of it.

Paingod wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:26 pm How does one decide on $130,000 as a figure to keep a porn star silent.

hepcat wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 5:20 pm

Paingod wrote: Fri Jan 19, 2018 3:26 pm How does one decide on $130,000 as a figure to keep a porn star silent.

In Trump's case, she demanded 10 dollars for every shower she had to take after each encounter.

Donald Trump lifted the Dow Jones industrial average in his first year in office more than any other president since Franklin Roosevelt.

The Dow has surged more than 31 percent since Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017. That marks the index's best performance during a president's first year since Roosevelt. The Dow skyrocketed 96.5 percent during Roosevelt's first year in office.

El Guapo wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:52 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 5:18 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:43 pm

LordMortis wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 4:13 pm

Moliere wrote: Thu Jan 18, 2018 3:56 pm Non-deplorables write letters to the editor for the NY Times explaining their support of Trump. Democrats better figure out how to get these kind of middle Americans back if they want to win in 2020.

Pay walled for me.

But what I assume is a similar concern I posted yesterday, not necessarily from Trump supporters but from "Middle America" democrats.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ana-216273

I'd start with fearing the midterms elections before fearing the 2020. I think dems get the picture but then who knows? They still seem to be the party of Pelosi and that could spell pain when it should the party of Trump should lead them to easy victories.

Of course this opinion comes from someone waiting and hoping for the GOP to implode so he can put his vote elsewhere. I have effectively been taken hostage, something I vowed I would never let happen.

Dems need to give up on guns, abortion, and any other non-imperative issues, highly-divisive issues. Save them for down the road. There are a ton of single issue voters that might move two two or three issues if they felt some security on issue #1.

As soon as it's obvious that they're avoiding these issues, the GOP will just push them back to the front. If they're at risk of losing the socially conservative Democrats who have voted Republican, it's easy for the Republicans to just remind them why they started switching in the first place. Plus, then the Democrats piss off their base of social liberals.

I'm not talking about legislation. I'm talking about campaigning and Sunday morning talk show rhetoric. Don't say you want to ban semi-automatic weapons or put a Planned Parenthood in every Starbucks. Write a bill to do so, if you want. Most voters don't know what their representatives do in Washington. Feel free to state your [party's] position when asked. But don't go all stupid. When Pelosi says her crazy, there are single issue voters who would cast their votes for the next 10 years right then and there if they could. And most of them aren't voting for her.

Maybe I'm just desensitized and used to crazy coming from the right but damn, the Dems have sure stepped it up the last few years.

I have a long history of hating Trump, going back to the 80s. However, that didn't prevent me from noticing the GOP-level insanity from the Dems in 2016. You know that feeling you got when Trump won? I got that feeling when it officially became a 2-horse race.


It seems like the new expectation is a complete national reimagining every 4 or 8 years. I'm more for the status quo (or was when it was a different status quo) with incremental changes.

The good news is that the GOP has become so crazy and divorced from mainstream opinion that even on divisive issues, they've left democrats plenty of room to stake out reasonable positions. Say that you want to ban assault weapons, high capacity ammo magazines, and bump stocks, which has overwhemling popular support. Don't say that you want to put a Planned Parenthood in every Starbucks, because that's a crazy thing that no one would ever actually say.

Documents obtained by the conservative group Judicial Watch reveal that President Trump's travel costs for various trips to his Bedminster, N.J., golf club, resorts in Florida and New York, and campaign rallies have cost $3,199,188 since June 30, bringing the total cost of Trump's travel so far as president up to $13,533,937.

In contrast, former President Obama's travel costs during his last fiscal year in office totaled just $882,756, according to Judicial Watch.

Trump has spent 121 days of his presidency at his personal properties, according to an NBC News tracker, equaling roughly a third of his presidency so far.

Rip wrote: Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:26 am http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Trump.html

Donald Trump lifted the Dow Jones industrial average in his first year in office more than any other president since Franklin Roosevelt.

The Dow has surged more than 31 percent since Trump's inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017. That marks the index's best performance during a president's first year since Roosevelt. The Dow skyrocketed 96.5 percent during Roosevelt's first year in office.

Rip wrote: Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:26 am Donald Trump lifted the Dow Jones industrial average

Jaymann wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:35 am You know if Trump were to hold up a baby shield ala Stillson, his supporters would applaud him for quick thinking.

Rip wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:10 am
The only place where Trump has ruined the economy is in the fantasy wet dreams of liberals.

Daehawk wrote: Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:57 am Over the years Ive learned that friendship and talking politics dont mix. Its why people talk about the weather.

Richard Cordray asked Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen for $217 million in October—his last such request as director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Last week Mr. Cordray’s acting successor, Mick Mulvaney, made his first quarterly funding request: “$0.” What a difference a few months make.

Established in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis according to now-Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s vision, the CFPB ran wild under Mr. Cordray’s leadership—issuing reams of punishing regulations and conducting endless fishing expeditions, sometimes into industries Congress had specifically excluded from its jurisdiction.

This was possible because the bureau was designed to be insulated from accountability. It is led by a single director, whom the president cannot fire except for cause, and funded by the Fed, so that it need not justify its actions and funding needs to Congress.

Whether this arrangement is constitutional is an open question, currently pending in the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. But for now, as that court’s Judge Brett Kavanaugh has observed, it renders the CFPB director “the single most powerful official in the entire United States Government” (with the possible exception of the president).

That power now belongs to Mr. Mulvaney—and if Mr. Cordray had no constraints in his overreach, his successor is equally free to rein it in. Mr. Mulvaney has already frozen new regulations as well as regulatory “guidance,” which agencies often treat as carrying the force of law. But with Mr. Cordray’s minions burrowed into the bureau’s 1,600-person workforce, tweaks to rules and enforcement policies will only go so far.

The linchpin for fast and effective deregulation is substantially defunding the agency and clearing out its ranks in the process. Mr. Mulvaney’s request of zip from Ms. Yellen is a good first step.