The Former Trump Presidency Thread

[Moliere]

The Toronto Sun is pretty conservative I've noticed, but that's a newspaper. Remember those? Me neither.

I can't remember the last time I saw someone under the age of 60 reading a newspaper.

[El Guapo]

Beats me.

The Toronto Sun is pretty conservative I've noticed, but that's a newspaper. Remember those? Me neither.

Alberta is pretty conservative. We had a Christian poster here one time that was from Alberta. More conservative than the Christians in Ontario, I found.

Max probably knows which way various channels lean.

I'm mainly wondering whether Fox News (and, to a lesser degree, firebreathing conservative talk radio) is a unique Ameican institution, and if so, why that would be.

[YellowKing]

Things are bad, but the country is still made up of a (large) majority of sane people who don't buy into Trump and the modern GOP's bullshit. Just because the nutjobs are running the insane asylum for the moment doesn't mean that's how it's always going to be. And the more bonkers the GOP gets, the more they alienate independents and moderate Republicans who may have voted for Trump.

Right now you have the media pushing back against this administration, the intelligence community, hell - even some Republicans. Morale is low. Staffers are dropping like flies. This isn't an environment that can sustain itself.

If the elections come and go this year and the Democrats make very little gain, Trump's popularity is soaring, and Mueller's investigation is going nowhere, THEN I'll panic. But right now, there's no light at the end of the tunnel for the current GOP. They've painted themselves into a corner. Live by the Trump, die by the Trump, and I don't see an endgame in which Trump suddenly becomes popular with the other 2/3 of the country.

Just like Trump's mentality, the GOP is betting on short-term gain over long-term success. And I believe it's going to cost them dearly. I hope they enjoy the 2 years of power they had, because I think they're going to ultimately usher in a wave of progressive leaders the likes of which the country has never seen before.

[ImLawBoy]

The Toronto Sun is pretty conservative I've noticed, but that's a newspaper. Remember those? Me neither.

I can't remember the last time I saw someone under the age of 60 reading a newspaper.

Ouch. I'm not sixty.

[Moliere]

The Toronto Sun is pretty conservative I've noticed, but that's a newspaper. Remember those? Me neither.

I can't remember the last time I saw someone under the age of 60 reading a newspaper.

Ouch. I'm not sixty.

Do you respond to emails by printing them and faxing your answer back?

[ImLawBoy]

The Toronto Sun is pretty conservative I've noticed, but that's a newspaper. Remember those? Me neither.

I can't remember the last time I saw someone under the age of 60 reading a newspaper.

Ouch. I'm not sixty.

Do you respond to emails by printing them and faxing your answer back?

How else am I going to sign my response???

[Rip]

Personally I like to cut the newspaper up into individual letters and then glue them to a piece of paper to form my response.

But different strokes.

[Fitzy]

I think that what GreenGoo is saying is that the danger that Trump represents to this country is so great that literally *any* time wasted on acknowledging that the Democrats are putting their lips pretty damn close to the ass is a dangerous waste of time. You claim you can do both, but the very fact that you are doing both is necessarily distracting you from the scale and scope of the danger.

At least that's what I think he's saying.

Probably. And my response was bull. If GreenGoo can't look at both sides with an open mind, that's his problem. Not mine. I haven't voted for a Republican in over 5 years, the last was for local election and as I recall he would be kicked out of the party these days. However, I will not rubber stamp Democrats just because some Republicans are nuts. I'm going to make damn sure I'm voting for someone I can support in office.

And if I chose to give the Democrats a very careful look over, before punching the ballot box in their favor, that too doesn't mean I support Trump. It simply means I'm not willing to be mauled by the donkey after getting trampled on by the elephant. (that was a political animal joke)

I think you're undercutting yourself right there and making GG's point. That you think there is anything to "look over" when comparing a Republican to a Democrat at this point means you've fallen for the GOP narrative to some extent. Large portions of the Republican party are currently destroying our institutions, covering up crimes in the Whitehouse, and objectively lying to the American people and press on a regular basis among countless other misdeeds.

Whatever faults the Democrats might currently have are in a completely different league than what's going on in the Republican party right now, and anyone who convinces themselves to vote for anyone but a Democrat in the upcoming election is giving their support to Drumpf in all but name.

We need to oust the Republicans from power for a generation, before everything they've come to embrace becomes entrenched, and once we've done that I'll happily hold the Democrats feet to the fire.

As I said earlier, black and white thinking. You're either for us or for them.

People have so bought into the us against them mentality, you won't even examine your "us" to make certain they're not a wolf in sheep's clothing. This is crazy!

I have every right to examine every person I am going to vote. More than that, I have a responsibility to. If I'm unwilling to do the research into the people I'm voting for, I have no business being anywhere near a voting a booth. Same goes for everyone in this thread.

If the Republicans are ousted without a careful vetting of the incoming Democrats, we could find ourselves in an even worse position. A government not beholden to the people is simply Authoritarianism, and that is what scares me about the way people are talking in this thread. You're offering the Democrats that power and doing so with a smile.

Remove Trump. Put in place people of good character and sound judgement. I will be looking for them whatever the letter after their name.

[LordMortis]

Probably. And my response was bull. If GreenGoo can't look at both sides with an open mind, that's his problem. Not mine. I haven't voted for a Republican in over 5 years, the last was for local election and as I recall he would be kicked out of the party these days. However, I will not rubber stamp Democrats just because some Republicans are nuts. I'm going to make damn sure I'm voting for someone I can support in office.

It's been a while since I've voted republican, even though I was never determined to never vote Republican ever again until last election. I'd have agreed with you right up until last batch. Heck I'da voted Kasich over Clinton without too much anger at my hand being forced. I never saw me voting for the less or two evils until both Trump took the presidency combined with the 2014 Republican Congress stonewalling normal governance functions until after the 2016 elections. Now it would take an extreme democrat to make me not rubber stamp them. There are just too many marbles in the circle to lose with whatever this republican party is. If it was just Trump, I'd still not rubber stamp Democrats. If it was just the Congress of these last four years, I'd still not rubber stamp a democrat. But the combination of events that has allowed me to see the populace of these last two years? I can't cope with it.

[Zaxxon]

Probably. And my response was bull. If GreenGoo can't look at both sides with an open mind, that's his problem. Not mine. I haven't voted for a Republican in over 5 years, the last was for local election and as I recall he would be kicked out of the party these days. However, I will not rubber stamp Democrats just because some Republicans are nuts. I'm going to make damn sure I'm voting for someone I can support in office.

It's been a while since I've voted republican, even though I was never determined to never vote Republican ever again until last election. I'd have agreed with you right up until last batch. Heck I'da voted Kasich over Clinton without too much anger at my hand being forced. I never saw me voting for the less or two evils until both Trump took the presidency combined with the 2014 Republican Congress stonewalling normal governance functions until after the 2016 elections. Now it would take an extreme democrat to make me not rubber stamp them. There are just too many marbles in the circle to lose with whatever this republican party is. If it was just Trump, I'd still not rubber stamp Democrats. If it was just the Congress of these last four years, I'd still not rubber stamp a democrat. But the combination of events that has allowed me to see the populace of these last two years? I can't cope with it.

Pretty much this. It's [extremely] unfortunate, but the reality of the situation is that in the US, in 2018, in any election of consequence, it actually is us vs them. You either vote for the Democrat, or you vote for the continued destruction of American norms.

It's that simple. I hate that it's that simple, but I believe it is. For now, at least. The Democratic party has its own issues, and Democratic candidates do, as well. But one must not lose sight of the forest for the trees.

[Fitzy]

I propose a simple experiment. Everyone with a Democratic senator email them. Ask them if they gain the Senate how quickly will they move to restore the filibuster to all situations it has historically covered.

I mean, this is one of the big institutions that Republicans killed right? So our heroes, the Democrats, will immediately step in and restore that power. Correct?

[gbasden]

Pretty much this. It's [extremely] unfortunate, but the reality of the situation is that in the US, in 2018, in any election of consequence, it actually is us vs them. You either vote for the Democrat, or you vote for the continued destruction of American norms.

Agreed. I'm really not thrilled with a number of Democrats right now, but when faced with an existential crisis you take the allies you can get until the crisis is resolved.

[Remus West]

Voting any Republican into office right now is simply handing another vote to Trump's agenda. If you can stomach that and live with yourself then I guess have at it. I won't even try to say I will think much less of anyone that supports him in any way on any topic right now. He could come to me with a plan to up funding of public education and close all private/charter/other schools so that we might actually band together and fix public education for all and I would tell him to go fuck himself because I would be 100% certain that any gain would be more than offset by the truly evil flip side of the coin he offers. Until the current iteration of the Republican party is gone I will rubber stamp the Democrats because only by giving the Dems an overwhelming majority everywhere possible can we have any chance to retain Democracy at all. If they get into power and let us down then the game has already ended for us and it wouldn't matter anyway. I will say though that track record shows Dems in power are good for the average American...Clinton and Obama both did well by us. When the Left takes power I'm open to moving slowly back towards center but until they well and truly do we all need to push left with every punch of the ballot.

[Remus West]

I propose a simple experiment. Everyone with a Democratic senator email them. Ask them if they gain the Senate how quickly will they move to restore the filibuster to all situations it has historically covered.

I mean, this is one of the big institutions that Republicans killed right? So our heroes, the Democrats, will immediately step in and restore that power. Correct?

Why on Earth would we want to hand the ability to hogtie government back to the right immediately? So they can prevent the rest of their evils from being undone? When the alt-right stops being the power on the right and the moderate right returns then and only then will I again look to the Republican party to do anything for the actual people.

[El Guapo]

I propose a simple experiment. Everyone with a Democratic senator email them. Ask them if they gain the Senate how quickly will they move to restore the filibuster to all situations it has historically covered.

I mean, this is one of the big institutions that Republicans killed right? So our heroes, the Democrats, will immediately step in and restore that power. Correct?

uh, no that's not correct. The filibuster is not so much the institutions that most people are worried about right now, as much as the FBI and the independent press.

Also, Republicans haven't really killed the filibuster. Democrats ended the filibuster for judicial nominees below the SCOTUS level (and I think for cabinet appointments). Republicans ended it for SCOTUS nominees. Filibuster for regular legislation is still in full effect (though it will probably be killed by one party or other sooner or later).

Also the filibuster probably should end sooner or later, as it's getting more and more abused and becoming a hindrance to actual governance.

Point is just that no, the filibuster is not really what people are focused on / worried about.

[Fitzy]

Pretty much what I thought.

I was hopeful that the lesson learned from Trump was that partisanship was bad for the country.

I see I was wrong.

I'll bow out now as I don't see this going in positive debate direction. Thank you for your opinions.

[Sepiche]

As I said earlier, black and white thinking. You're either for us or for them.

People have so bought into the us against them mentality, you won't even examine your "us" to make certain they're not a wolf in sheep's clothing. This is crazy!

I have every right to examine every person I am going to vote. More than that, I have a responsibility to. If I'm unwilling to do the research into the people I'm voting for, I have no business being anywhere near a voting a booth. Same goes for everyone in this thread.

If the Republicans are ousted without a careful vetting of the incoming Democrats, we could find ourselves in an even worse position. A government not beholden to the people is simply Authoritarianism, and that is what scares me about the way people are talking in this thread. You're offering the Democrats that power and doing so with a smile.

Remove Trump. Put in place people of good character and sound judgement. I will be looking for them whatever the letter after their name.

Let me first respond by saying that in a perfect world you are absolutely correct. Voting SHOULD be a decision between two equally qualified candidates. I have said many times in the past that I want the Republican party to right itself because we as a country are better when we have a reasonable choice of leaders.

But that's not the reality right now. Even Republicans who are in private, I'm sure, conscientious, reasonable people are getting corrupted by the rot in the Republican party... the anti-democratic rot that was already present in the Republican fever swamps, but brought out into the main stream by Drumpf.

Previously I would have agreed with you, at least intellectually, and if I saw more Republicans standing up to the would be authoritarians in their ranks I would trust that they would be able to fix things themselves without anything so dramatic as voting party line against them, but the last straw for me was this latest offensive by Republicans against the FBI and DoJ. Seeing Devin Nunes butchering logic to protect Drumpf, and seeing Republican Senators straight up lying on national TV in an effort to discredit the FBI is a stain on the Republican party, not to mention the laundry list of democratic norms the Republicans are either helping to overturn or turning a blind eye to the gutting of.

IMO the Republicans have drifted so far from a party that is actually interested in governing, that there is an imperative to send as strong a message as possible that they need to change course. And to be completely honest, between gerrymandering, propaganda, and the apathy of swaths of the electorate, I'm not even sure it's possible to send the type of message that needs to be sent.

One caveat to all this is obviously some things are too far in any candidate. For instance, I personally would never vote for a candidate who was credibly accused of being a child molester, and would be ashamed if Democrats knowingly fielded a candidate like that. If that were my choice I would stay home rather than voting for a Democrat. That's on the parties to pick reasonable candidates though, and in recent years, one party has shown itself to be much more capable of choosing candidates worthy of putting trust in, and who know what to do with that trust once they get to Washington.

[Zaxxon]

I was hopeful that the lesson learned from Trump was that partisanship was bad for the country.

No, that is most definitely not the most important lesson to be learned from Trump. Even if in the general sense it's true that partisanship is bad for the country.

[Daehawk]

Not got any words for what this freedom caucus member says in the video.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/13/opinions ... index.html

[Chaz]

Not got any words for what this freedom caucus member says in the video.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/13/opinions ... index.html

These are disgusting people, making up disgusting lies to other poor people. He wants to take food stamps from people who haven't worked in three generations? That statement is so wrong on so many levels, I honestly hope he's consciously lying about it. The alternative is he honestly has no idea how SNAP works, and he's one of the people voted in to run the federal government.

[YellowKing]

Infuriating.

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system. But there are a lot more that truly need the help. My wife works for a school system that is considered one of the best in the county. Broad mix of mostly middle-class families. Super supportive parents - every school function is packed with parents who participate and volunteer and fundraise. And even in that seemingly ideal environment, there are kids who come to school every day starving because school is the only place they can get meals. Imagine what it's like in the "bad" schools.

[Skinypupy]

Infuriating.

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system. But there are a lot more that truly need the help. My wife works for a school system that is considered one of the best in the county. Broad mix of mostly middle-class families. Super supportive parents - every school function is packed with parents who participate and volunteer and fundraise. And even in that seemingly ideal environment, there are kids who come to school every day starving because school is the only place they can get meals. Imagine what it's like in the "bad" schools.

It's really all their own fault, you know. If "those people" would just work harder and stop spending their food stamps on Cadillacs and lobster, their kids would eat just fine.

(this is what the GOP actually believes)

[Chaz]

Find an example of someone taking advantage of a government aid program: this system is horribly corrupt, everyone's taking advantage of it, better shut it the hell down.

Find an example of a cop abusing his power to target/abuse/kill minority groups: this is obviously just a single bad apple, and not representative of cops, there's no wdespread problems and we don't need to look any closer or do anything about this.

[Daehawk]

Both me and my wife were born with our disabilities that only get worse with age and time. We both had food stamps when we got married. Nothing in our life changed except we got a paper saying we were now married. They took away both our food stamps. So we went from bad to worse instantly. If you read the rules for foodstamps approval on the Govs own websites we should qualify for them 3 different ways yet they have turned us down every time we try. So at times we have ate saltine crackers and water for up to a week at the end of the month more than once. Our fridge and cabinet are bare at those times. Ive ate a spoon of sugar to stop shaking.

So if we cant get foodstamps I can only imagine how bad it is for those who do get them. And people like this asshat have the nerve to say such things. He who most likely never ever has had that problem once. Who has great healthcare, great insurance, and great diets all because people like me and my wife who go hungry and live in pain pay our sales tax when we buy our cans of soup to make last or our cheap oily yellow colored 'butter' because its on sale for .89.

It really makes me feel like throwing up. I have tears in my eyes writing this. Its just horrible what this country is doing to itself and her people.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

In other news, Stormy Daniels is back in the news. Trump’s personal lawyer stated today that he paid the $130K out of his own personal account and was never reimbursed. Seems pretty unlikely to me; they’ll say anything to avoid linking that payment to any campaign funds.

[Zarathud]

I look forward to his disbarment for perjury or ethics violation under Ethics Rule 1.8(e).

ABA Model Rule 1.8(e):
(e) A lawyer shall not provide financial assistance to a client in connection with pending or contemplated litigation, except that:

(1) a lawyer may advance court costs and expenses of litigation, the repayment of which may be contingent on the outcome of the matter; and

(2) a lawyer representing an indigent client may pay court costs and expenses of litigation on behalf of the client.

New York Model Rule 1.8(e):
(e) While representing a client in connection with contemplated or pending litigation, a lawyer shall not advance or guarantee financial assistance to the client, except that:
(1) a lawyer may advance court costs and expenses of litigation, the repayment of which may be contingent on the outcome of the matter;
(2) a lawyer representing an indigent or pro bono client may pay court costs and expenses of litigation on behalf of the client; and
(3) a lawyer, in an action in which an attorney’s fee is payable in whole or in part as a percentage of the
recovery in the action, may pay on the lawyer’s own account court costs and expenses of litigation. In such case, the fee paid to the lawyer from the proceeds of the action may include an amount equal to such costs and expenses incurred.

The chances that Trump's lawyer filed a gift tax return reporting that taxable gift to Trump paying Stormy Daniels? Zero.

It's not the lie that bothers me anymore. It's the insult to our intelligence that I find most offensive.

[El Guapo]

In other news, Stormy Daniels is back in the news. Trump’s personal lawyer stated today that he paid the $130K out of his own personal account and was never reimbursed. Seems pretty unlikely to me; they’ll say anything to avoid linking that payment to any campaign funds.

I mean, I find it credible that Trump's lawyer disbursed the funds and that Trump never actually reimbursed him.

[Blackhawk]

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system.

Approximately 1.5% of SNAP beneficiaries engage in some form of fraud. I get SNAP benefits. The thought of a sizable portion of my food budget being taken away for food that is probably less healthy than what I already buy, chosen by someone who doesn't have to take into account my autistic child's needs (and feeding an autistic child is not as easy as it sounds), is terrifying.

Now, I bet someone will eventually suggest that special diets can be accounted for by the people choosing the food. That doesn't work for autistic kids (or adults.) It is easy to account for low sodium diets or peanut allergies. It isn't so easy when the dietary issue is with food textures.

[Daehawk]

[malchior]

Only the *BEST* Government!

https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/963617978980892673

[Remus West]

Infuriating.

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system. But there are a lot more that truly need the help. My wife works for a school system that is considered one of the best in the county. Broad mix of mostly middle-class families. Super supportive parents - every school function is packed with parents who participate and volunteer and fundraise. And even in that seemingly ideal environment, there are kids who come to school every day starving because school is the only place they can get meals. Imagine what it's like in the "bad" schools.

I don't need to imagine. I live it. The school I teach in is a title 1 school. The vast majority of our kids are poverty level. One of the things we did to increase attendance at our after school tutoring program was to feed the kids. The number of students now attending and working hard during the sessions just so they can get a meal after is astounding.

[GreenGoo]

I'll bow out now as I don't see this going in positive debate direction. Thank you for your opinions.

I guess I would ask you what you would do if the Dem in your area was a douchebag and the Rep in your area supported Drumpf every time he lied or undermined your country's institutions?

I'm not the guy with only 2 parties. That's an American specialty. It's not "us vs them" it's "either/or".

Abstain? Write in? How does that help anything? You have two choices. Vote for Republicans who have proven unable to govern in a responsible way (or at all, really), or Democrats, who...might have some skeletons in the closet, I guess? What kind of skeleton would give you a clear conscience to vote Republican?

[Skinypupy]

Infuriating.

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system. But there are a lot more that truly need the help. My wife works for a school system that is considered one of the best in the county. Broad mix of mostly middle-class families. Super supportive parents - every school function is packed with parents who participate and volunteer and fundraise. And even in that seemingly ideal environment, there are kids who come to school every day starving because school is the only place they can get meals. Imagine what it's like in the "bad" schools.

I don't need to imagine. I live it. The school I teach in is a title 1 school. The vast majority of our kids are poverty level. One of the things we did to increase attendance at our after school tutoring program was to feed the kids. The number of students now attending and working hard during the sessions just so they can get a meal after is astounding.

Jesus, that's depressing.

The thought that it could all disappear for no reason other than STIGGINIT is even more so.

[LawBeefaroni]

Infuriating.

It is true that there are people out there that abuse the system. But there are a lot more that truly need the help. My wife works for a school system that is considered one of the best in the county. Broad mix of mostly middle-class families. Super supportive parents - every school function is packed with parents who participate and volunteer and fundraise. And even in that seemingly ideal environment, there are kids who come to school every day starving because school is the only place they can get meals. Imagine what it's like in the "bad" schools.

I don't need to imagine. I live it. The school I teach in is a title 1 school. The vast majority of our kids are poverty level. One of the things we did to increase attendance at our after school tutoring program was to feed the kids. The number of students now attending and working hard during the sessions just so they can get a meal after is astounding.

Jesus, that's depressing.

The thought that it could all disappear for no reason other than STIGGINIT is even more so.

It's another money grab under the guise of stigginit. Who do you think will get the contract for all those prepared food drops? And who slurps up any "savings" the program would provide?

[LordMortis]

Removing the meals served at school question which is wholly separate IMO, I do think SNAP and BRIDGE should be revamped but I don't know how. When all of the corner gas stations have "We accept Bridge Cards" and people are constantly either doing their grocery shopping there or buying candy bars, something is wrong. When I worked at 7-11 and I had people bitching at my constantly about me not legally being able to to sell them a slurpee with food stamps and watching them pay $2 for the convenience of buying a $.50 loaf of bread when there is Meijer less than a mile away, something is wrong.

At the same time, in the inner city, they don't necessarily have a Meijer a mile away or a car to take them further than the corner gas station.

I don't know what solution meets both needs. Perhaps "boxed delivery" isn't necessarily so bad of a compromise if it's not just thrown at the wall to see if it will stick, though it seems like boxed delivery has an additional built in expense. I dunno. No answer here, but I don't mind the question being asked without getting overly protective of what is in place.

[Zarathud]

$0.50 loaf of bread? More like $2.50-$3.00 unless it's past the "sell by" date.

(Edit - or maybe if this was in the stone age of teen Mortis)

POS systems even 25 years ago allowed the store to cap food stamp eligibility based on the items purchased. So they are likely paying for that candy bar with their own money and the food stamps paying for the "qualifying" food.

Of course, an intellectually consistent Republican libertarian wouldn't be judgmental about how the poor used their food stamps, let alone turn it into a wedge issue.

[LordMortis]

$0.50 loaf of bread? More like $2.50-$3.00 unless it's past the "sell by" date.

(Edit - or maybe if this was in the stone age of teen Mortis)

It was. I worked at 7-11 from age 19 to 22, I think, so that would be 90ish to 93ish.

I can still get a loaf of bread for a cheap wheat or white enriched loaf of bread for a buck nowadays if I play games with grocers sales. I don't have time or energy for that so I typically buy a cheap wheat bread for around $1.50 or sometimes treat myself to nicer wheat/whole grain bread for around $2. I'm not refined enough to buy $2.50 to $3.00 loaves of bread.

Of course, an intellectually consistent Republican libertarian wouldn't be judgmental about how the poor used their food stamps, let alone turn it into a wedge issue.

I don't get you. I would think "an intellectually consistent Republican libertarian" would generally cut off food stamps entirely if they had their druthers, judging how they use their stamps is an extension of using them at all.

[hepcat]

At the same time, in the inner city, they don't necessarily have a Meijer a mile away or a car to take them further than the corner gas station.

I think this is the more immediate concern. The term Food Desert was coined for this issue.

[LordMortis]

At the same time, in the inner city, they don't necessarily have a Meijer a mile away or a car to take them further than the corner gas station.

I think this is the more immediate concern. The term Food Desert was coined for this issue.

Absolutely it is. If it weren't the most immidiate, my first priority would be to universally reduce access to Bridge/WIC/SNAP/foodstamps in gas stations and convenience stores. But we can't do that in a vacuum and it's a problem I have no idea how mitigate against but it one that absolutely my mitigated against before reducing access, which goes back to the discussion of pre-packaging and delivering food as being an acceptable discussion to have IMO. The solution on the table may not be good, but it sounds like it may have a valid way to address some of the problems we have. I dunno. If I were the smart guy, I'd be making decisions and the right ones at that.

[El Guapo]

Pretty much what I thought.

I was hopeful that the lesson learned from Trump was that partisanship was bad for the country.

I see I was wrong.

I'll bow out now as I don't see this going in positive debate direction. Thank you for your opinions.

Honestly I think there's much more agreement in this discussion than people realize. Like, I don't think that anyone here would say that *no* scrutiny should be applied to Democratic candidates. In fact, I would agree that it's more important than ever to scrutinize democratic candidates during primary season, because the candidates that emerge from democratic primaries are going to be the only plausible alternatives to the Party of Dr. Doom. I think all people are saying is that since the issues with the Democratic party and most of its candidates are generally within the bounds of normal, whereas the GOP is dominated by lunatics who want to create a one party state and might kill us all, people should ultimately vote for 99.9% of democratic candidates this November, even if said candidates are assholes or deeply flawed or whatnot.

So to sum up, deeply scrutinize democratic candidates now, and also vote for whomever the democratic nominees are in November, even if the jerk won the primary in your area.

Speaking of which, someone really ought to be primarying Menendez. A strong democratic year is the ideal time to weed out a seemingly corrupt senator in a Democratic state.