Octopus Overlords

LordMortis wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:40 pm

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 12:14 pm But now the hullabaloo is that Manchin might also vote no on the Deb Haaland nomination to the Interior Department. So he votes yes on Kavanaugh, Jeff Session, etc., but doesn't want to vote for these two nominees. What ever could be the pattern here???

Why does he caucus and run as a democrat? Is he still more democrat than GOP?

Probably because he wants to be insulated from the crazy. If this was a normal, functioning society with a standard opposition party he could change affiliation and maybe make slightly minor shifts. Now...I imagine it'd probably be hard for him to pull it off. Van Drew pulled it off here in NJ but he is pretty off the grid. Manchin? He'd be primary-ed away at first opportunity.

LordMortis wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:40 pm
Is he still more democrat than GOP?

He votes with the Democrats around ~75% of the time, so yes.

He also comes from a state where it's kind of shocking that they've got a Democratic Senator, (Trump won WV by 39 points last year) so I'm absolutely grateful for him. Especially given our, uh, 50-50 majority.

For sure: he would have a much tougher time winning a primary running as a member of the GOP than he does as a Dem. He is pretty bad, but he' is also about the best case scenario you can hope for for a Dem senator from West Virginia. The fact that there is even a Dem senator from West Virginia is a minor miracle.

Defiant wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:09 pm

LordMortis wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:40 pm
Is he still more democrat than GOP?

He votes with the Democrats around ~75% of the time, so yes.

He also comes from a state where it's kind of shocking that they've got a Democratic Senator, (Trump won WV by 39 points last year) so I'm absolutely grateful for him. Especially given our, uh, 50-50 majority.

Then that's that.

LordMortis wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:19 pm

Defiant wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:09 pm

LordMortis wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 1:40 pm
Is he still more democrat than GOP?

He votes with the Democrats around ~75% of the time, so yes.

He also comes from a state where it's kind of shocking that they've got a Democratic Senator, (Trump won WV by 39 points last year) so I'm absolutely grateful for him. Especially given our, uh, 50-50 majority.

Then that's that.

Yeah, as frustrating as he is from time to time, we really should all thank our lucky stars every day that he's a senator from WV. He has a higher VORS (Value Over Replacement Senator) for Democrats than anyone else in the Senate today given the state that he's from. If he needs to pull shit like this from time to time to remain competitive for reelection (and he does), it's a small price to pay for, you know, enabling the existence of a Democratic majority.

It's also why efforts to primary him are batshit insane.

El Guapo wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 2:43 pm It's also why efforts to primary him are batshit insane.

That would have been my question if he was DINO. He's not. So that ends the inquiry for me.

Even if it was in name only, the name part is super important.

As an aside, the stats about % voting with a party always seemed of questionable relevance to me, since I don't know how many votes are just procedural or have broad support. I guess my question would be, what would those same stats look like if we were talking about a semi-moderate Republican, say Susan Collins? Are they much different than the 75% voting record with Dems that Manchin has?

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 3:24 pm As an aside, the stats about % voting with a party always seemed of questionable relevance to me, since I don't know how many votes are just procedural or have broad support. I guess my question would be, what would those same stats look like if we were talking about a semi-moderate Republican, say Susan Collins? Are they much different than the 75% voting record with Dems that Manchin has?

IIRC Collins's voting record is pretty similar in terms of % voting with Trump. But I agree that those "% voting with party" stats are borderline useless, since they treat all votes the same, whether they are matters of significance or trivial, and (I think more importantly) whether they matter in terms of the outcome. So like, a vote not to name a Post Office "Own the Libs Post Office" becomes treated the same as her vote helping to kill ACA Repeal (on the positive side) or her vote to confirm Kavanaugh (on the negative side).

So I do think that we need better metrics on this sort of thing, though it's hard to do that without introducing some level of subjectivity.

Hilarious.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1364373497577959424

Edit: Updating it with the commentary of Aaron Rupar - my guiding light in this time of madness.

What would it take to get a medical evaluation for these people? I am genuinely concerned there's diminished mental capacity at work here.

That has to be intentional trolling at this point, right?

Well, at least Tanden is probably going to get a killer "mean tweets" segment on Kimmel out of this.

malchior wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:07 pm Hilarious.

https://twitter.com/CraigCaplan/status/ ... 1007721472

That really makes me hope they push her through in spite of the republicans objections and I know nothing about her. Just want them to have to swallow their own bullshit. After it entered their bodies from the wrong direction.

The apparent lack of self-awareness is stunning.

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:46 pmThe apparent lack of self-awareness is stunning.

It's the sort of behavior that should get people evaluated and medicated so they're not a danger to themselves or others.

If one of your relatives ran around yelling at everyone about how much they sucked, and then the next day pretended that never happened and how dare you be angry at him ... you'd call for the paddy wagon.

I agree, that *has* to be trolling.

Seriously, a lot of the Trumpier House and Senate members know their base loves lib tears more than anything. Outrage will also suffice, but not quite as tasty.

I know Lindsey Fucking Graham does this occasionally (makes statements he knows are absurd, that will outrage lefties). Probably so they can get a few points with their big donors, or big orange turd masters, in private.

Or because they are mean-spirited, unserious jackasses doing it for fun.

They also know that they can say *anything* and that the right-wing media machine will kick into gear to justify it. And that their base isn't paying attention to any media that calls them out.

With Cornyn...I'm never sure if its trolling or just dumbass. He is like Johnson of Wisconsin. They leave you guessing - is this guy a moron or not? It's not like Cruz, Graham, or Lee who are often trolling and frankly are just despicable monsters who at some point knew better, intentionally needling at our democracy for personal power, and consequently makes them unfit for public service.

Tao wrote: Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:30 pm Biden signed an EO to put a moratorium on deportations for 100 days so that the new administration had time to assess the current situation and policies.

Federal Judge Blocks Biden's 100-Day Deportation Moratorium

The Judge was appointed almost exactly one year ago to the Southern District of Texas by Trump. I know we saw a good number of Judges shoot down Trump cases, McConnell's plan may now be working and the pendulum may be swinging the other way.

AP News

A federal judge late Tuesday indefinitely banned President Joe Biden’s administration from enforcing a 100-day moratorium on most deportations.

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton issued a preliminary injunction sought by Texas, which argued the moratorium violated federal law and risked imposing additional costs on the state.
...
Tipton, a Trump appointee, initially ruled on Jan. 26 that the moratorium violated federal law on administrative procedure and that the U.S. failed to show why a deportation pause was justified. A temporary restraining order the judge issued was set to expire Tuesday.

malchior wrote:With Cornyn...I'm never sure if its trolling or just dumbass. He is like Johnson of Wisconsin. They leave you guessing - is this guy a moron or not? It's not like Cruz, Graham, or Lee who are often trolling and frankly are just despicable monsters who at some point knew better, intentionally needling at our democracy for personal power, and consequently makes them unfit for public service.

Cue stereotypical 70’s game show music:
Let’s play...”Half-witted moron, or evil garbage human Being?”!

Manchin says he is a go on Haaland. I'm scratching my head on this one. I sort of expected that Tanden would be easier for Manchin to accept than Haaland who is anti-coal/fracking. Haaland is the populist favorite while Tanden is the "Clinton" associated elitist. Does Manchin expect the populist voter track whether left/right is the best path forward?

Back to business as usual, I guess.
Funny how things were so quiet overseas for a few years......
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/ ... 51543.html

stimpy wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 10:37 pm Back to business as usual, I guess.
Funny how things were so quiet overseas for a few years......
https://currently.att.yahoo.com/att/cm/ ... 51543.html

You really need to pay more attention to the world.

Just Afghanistan

• 2018
  • 1 January 2018: At least 61 ISIL militants were killed, including one civilian, in the Nangarhar province by a possible US strike. A further 30 ISIL militants were injured, including 14 civilians.[28]
  • 1 January 2018: Twenty-six people, including foreigners and prominent ISIL commanders, were killed by a possible US strike in the village of Saradara and Alkhani in the Darzab district. Some victims included famous militant commander Qari Zia aka Shuja, and two other prominent militants, Yaqub and Shaikh, a judge. There were also possible civilian casualties.[29][30]
  • 1 January 2018: A possible US strike killed seven Taliban fighters in the Bati Kot district. A second strike killed two members of ISIL's Afghan branch in Achin District.[31]
  • 5 January 2018: A possible US strike killed 10 ISIL militants in a training camp in Nangarhar's Haska Mena district while they were in training. Two compounds belonging to ISIL were also destroyed, leaving five militants dead. Another strike killed six militants during ground operations.[32]
  • 5 January 2018: A possible US strike killed 14 ISIL militants, including two commanders, in the Nad-e Ali district in the Laghman province.[33]
  • 6 January 2018: An unnamed key Taliban leader responsible for "financial deals and providing logistics" for militants was killed in the Helmand province by a possible US strike.[34]
  • 10 January 2018: Twenty-one militants, including seven foreigners from Pakistan, were killed by a possible US strike in the Khak e Safid district, located in the Farah province.[35]
  • 1 April 2018: Mullah Lal Mohammad, a local Taliban leader in the Kandarhar province, was killed by a AAF strike in the Nish district, injuring 11 other members of his group[36] Also the same day, a US strike killed an unknown number of Taliban fighters in the Nad Ali district[37]
  • 2 April 2018: Afghan military strike kills at least 70, including 21 terrorists, one of whom was a Taliban commander, and injured 30 others during a religious ceremony at a Mosque in Dasht-e-Archi.[38]
  • 3 April 2018: US drone strike killed four ISIL militants in Nangarhar.[39]
  • 5 April 2018: A high-ranking ISIL commander named Qari Hikmatullah (also Hekmat) and his bodyguard were killed in a US drone strike in the northern province of Jowzjan[40][41]
  • 6 April 2018: An AAF strike killed eight militants in Farghamerawi locality of Wardoj district.[42]
  2019
  • 18 September 2019: A US drone strike intended to hit an Islamic State hideout killed 30 pine-nut farmers in the Nangarhar province.[43]
  • 1 December 2019: A US drone strike on a car carrying a woman who had just given birth near Khost left five people dead.[44]
  2020
  • 8 January 2020: More than 60 civilians were killed or wounded in a US drone attack targeting Mullah Nangyalay, a top Taliban splinter-group commander in Herat Province.[45][46]

stessier wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:55 amYou really need to pay more attention to the world.

What's funnier is that it looks like the US just kind of gave up hunting terrorists. By the looks of it, they've had a good two years to get nestled in anywhere they wanted without being chased out. Bad things happen when you let parasites burrow deep and unchecked.

I'm not following you Stimpy.

Are you being critical of the administration for striking back at them?
Are you saying that the terrorists are made to feel safe by us striking back at them? And that we would do better not to... because that would really put the fear into them?


Or are you just saying that you bet this attack is because Trump isn't in office, because they would never have dared do that while a stronger President was in office... ?

stimpy wrote: You call all that giving up?
Most all of those attacks were on the offensive to try and take down terrorists.
None were in retaliation for a strike on US sites.
This latest one was.
Maybe the terrorists feel safe again?

The (now deleted?) post I was replying too

I will assume you deleted it because you realized you talked yourself into a circle.

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:13 am

stimpy wrote: You call all that giving up?
Most all of those attacks were on the offensive to try and take down terrorists.
None were in retaliation for a strike on US sites.
This latest one was.
Maybe the terrorists feel safe again?

The (now deleted?) post I was replying too

I will assume you deleted it because you realized you talked yourself into a circle.

I deleted it because the post I was quoting referred to the last 2 years only.

OK, well what's your main point?

That the terrorist didn't feel safe until Biden was elected?

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:35 am OK, well what's your main point?

That the terrorist didn't feel safe until Biden was elected?

Yes.

I'm sure Trump ignoring Iranian groups in Syria had nothing to do with Russian-Iranian cooperation there.

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:45 am

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:35 am OK, well what's your main point?

That the terrorist didn't feel safe until Biden was elected?

Yes.

And you are not being critical of the administration’s response to a terrorist attack. Correct ?

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:04 am

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:45 am

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:35 am OK, well what's your main point?

That the terrorist didn't feel safe until Biden was elected?

Yes.

And you are not being critical of the administration’s response to a terrorist attack. Correct ?

No.

The moral of the story appears to be that terrorists live in fear when they're not being attacked by a man who loves bullies and dictators, but grow bold when faced with an administration that has no qualms with killing them?

Or that the terrorists get crowded out by local talent during a Republican administration.

Trump was unpredictable in how he would respond.
Biden is not. He has shown he has no problem engaging in long drawn out conflicts that accomplish little to nothing except cost lives and money.

The trend in active military deaths, as reported by the Congressional Research Service, shows essentially no change after the war wound down under Obama through the entire Trump administration (see 2014-2020).

So did Florida Man bring home all the troops from Afghanistan like he promised?

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:20 amTrump was unpredictable in how he would respond.
Biden is not.

I've also appreciated political stability over political chaos.

Trump was predictable as long as you examined everything through a lens of "What do I (personally) get out of this?"

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:12 am

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:04 am

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:45 am

Unagi wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 10:35 am OK, well what's your main point?

That the terrorist didn't feel safe until Biden was elected?

Yes.

And you are not being critical of the administration’s response to a terrorist attack. Correct ?

No.

So you are being critical of it?

stimpy wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 11:20 am Trump was unpredictable in how he would respond.
Biden is not. He has shown he has no problem engaging in long drawn out conflicts that accomplish little to nothing except cost lives and money.

Ok, so let's put a "wheel o' terrorist responses" into place, with slides that say "ignore attack", "respond with missile attack", "engage with regional allies", "respond with ground troops", etc. Then we'll just spin it whenever there's terrorist activity.

Problem solved! Maybe we don't even need a Secretary of State.