Political Randomness

[gilraen]

Jeffrey Lord is out at CNN.

Maybe I'll start watching CNN again.

[YellowKing]

Good fucking riddance. That guy's desperate defense of Trump was the absolute worst part of watching the debates (besides Trump himself).

[malchior]

Just making room for Spicey!

Still good riddance.

[El Guapo]

Way, way overdue.

Now who had "making an overt Nazi reference" in the "reason why Jeffrey Lord will be fired" pool?

[Ralph-Wiggum]

Time it takes until he's working for Trump's "real" propaganda, er, news network?

[Max Peck]

Bern it to the ground!

Things could go well for the Democrats in next year’s midterm elections — if they don’t Bern out.

President Trump is woefully unpopular, feuding with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other Republicans. The GOP can’t manage to repeal Obamacare or do much of anything. Voters say they’d like Democrats to run Congress.

But here come the Bernie Bros and sisters to the Republicans’ rescue: They’re sowing division in the Democratic Party and attempting to enact a purge of the ideologically impure — just the sort of thing that made the Republican Party the ungovernable mess it is today.

Bernie Sanders’s advisers are promoting a “litmus test” under which Democrats who don’t swear to implement single-payer health care would be booted from the party in primaries. Sanders pollster Ben Tulchin penned an op-ed with a colleague under the headline “Universal health care is the new litmus test for Democrats.” Nina Turner, head of the Sanders group Our Revolution, told Politico this week that “there’s something wrong with” Democrats who won’t “unequivocally” embrace “Medicare-for-all.”

That notion — not just taking a stand but excommunicating all who disagree — is what Republicans have done to themselves with guns and taxes, and it would seriously diminish Democrats’ hopes of retaking the House next year.

At the same time, Our Revolution has stepped up its attack on the Democratic Party. Turner this week sent an email to supporters complaining that she and others attempted to deliver a petition to Democratic National Committee headquarters but “were shut out.” In a follow-up interview with BuzzFeed, Turner expressed particular outrage that the DNC offered her . . . donuts. “They tried to seduce us with donuts,” she said, calling the gesture “pompous” and “arrogant” and “insulting.”

It’s not just about breakfast confections. The Bernie crowd has begun accusing freshman Sen. Kamala D. Harris (Calif.), a rising Democratic star, of being beholden to corporate money. Also in California, Kimberly Ellis, who ran for state Democratic chairman with the support of Sanders and lost in a close race to a former Hillary Clinton delegate, is refusing to concede and threatening to sue. Ellis told Adam Nagourney of the New York Times that the “Democratic Party is in many ways right now where the Republican Party was when the tea party took over.”

[Smoove_B]

Meanwhile in Alabama:

An Alabama judge ruled Thursday that a law barring teachers from having sexual relationships with students old enough to consent is unconstitutional.

Morgan County Circuit Judge Glenn Thompson dismissed charges Thursday against 44-year-old Carrie Witt, a former teacher at Decatur High School, and 27-year-old David Solomon, a former contract teacher at Falkville High School. Witt is accused of having sex with two students who are over the age of 16, the state's legal age of consent. Solomon is accused of having sex with one student over the age of 16.

There are days when I think I'm living in a different American than some people.

[Pyperkub]

My Rift comes in Friday so I went ahead and downloaded the Oculus software and am downloading some stuff to be prepared. I made sure that the White House one was the first download. That way I can assure Donald that I know my way around the place when he taps me for a key post.....

Making America great at the cyber!

[Max Peck]

American travels all the way to Germany to do a Nazi salute, still gets punched.

[Defiant]

SIGNS IN SWISS HOTEL SINGLE OUT JEWISH GUESTS

A hotel in the Swiss tourist town of Arosa was documented by a Haredi Israeli family positing signs singling out Jews throughout the facility, Israel's Channel 2 reported Monday.

"To our Jewish Guests: Please take a shower before you go swimming and although after swimming. If you break the rules, I'm forced to cloes the swimming pool for you. Thank you for understanding: Ruth Thomann. [sic]"one of the signs said.

If I ever, somehow, end up staying in that hotel, remind me to pee in the pool.

[Max Peck]

Someone pees in every pool already. I recommend going to Plan 2.

[Isgrimnur]

Baby Ruth?

[Alefroth]

What could be worse than not showering?

[Max Peck]

Baby Ruth?

Yes, but not with a Baby Ruth. I don't believe in half measures.

[pr0ner]

Bern it to the ground!

Litmus tests for abortion and universal health care! What's next, basic income?

Geez. This kind of shit isn't going to help the Democratic party out in 2018.

[Fitzy]

Bern it to the ground!

Litmus tests for abortion and universal health care! What's next, basic income?

Geez. This kind of shit isn't going to help the Democratic party out in 2018.

If the Democrats and Republicans both went to their fringes and their centers splintered off, I think it would be good for the country. Assuming people would vote for a boring middle party.

[Kraken]

Bern it to the ground!

Litmus tests for abortion and universal health care! What's next, basic income?

Geez. This kind of shit isn't going to help the Democratic party out in 2018.

If the Democrats and Republicans both went to their fringes and their centers splintered off, I think it would be good for the country. Assuming people would vote for a boring middle party.

"Boring middle party" was what the Dems ran in '16, and they did win the most votes. By 2020 voters might be so desperate for a return to normalcy that it will be a winning strategy.

Or not; we may just be too far down the rabbit hole. It's hard to say without knowing how much longer Trump will be in office. If the Reps trash him in the first half of next year (as I've long predicted), they might have time to reclaim normalcy before '20.

[El Guapo]

Bern it to the ground!

Litmus tests for abortion and universal health care! What's next, basic income?

Geez. This kind of shit isn't going to help the Democratic party out in 2018.

If the Democrats and Republicans both went to their fringes and their centers splintered off, I think it would be good for the country. Assuming people would vote for a boring middle party.

"Boring middle party" was what the Dems ran in '16, and they did win the most votes. By 2020 voters might be so desperate for a return to normalcy that it will be a winning strategy.

Or not; we may just be too far down the rabbit hole. It's hard to say without knowing how much longer Trump will be in office. If the Reps trash him in the first half of next year (as I've long predicted), they might have time to reclaim normalcy before '20.

I expect that the Sanders wing will be much stronger and more organized in '18 and '20, which will make it more difficult to run in the center even if that's what the party wants to do.

[Defiant]

"Boring middle party" was what the Dems ran in '16, and they did win the most votes. By 2020 voters might be so desperate for a return to normalcy that it will be a winning strategy.

Or not; we may just be too far down the rabbit hole. It's hard to say without knowing how much longer Trump will be in office. If the Reps trash him in the first half of next year (as I've long predicted), they might have time to reclaim normalcy before '20.

I expect that the Sanders wing will be much stronger and more organized in '18 and '20, which will make it more difficult to run in the center even if that's what the party wants to do.

First off, boring middle party wasn't exactly the campaign Clinton ran - her platform was the most left wing of the past 20+ years, because she didn't pivot back to the center. Her campaign was boring and responsible mainstream left party.

I'm not sure how 2020 will play out. I don't think Sanders will run, but Warren might be a stand-in for him and she'll have a fairly good chance. I think, however, that given that the primary will be pretty wide open, it'll probably go to one of the more charismatic candidates (assuming the candidate meets some standard - has some experience, has views within the mainstream of the party).

[El Guapo]

"Boring middle party" was what the Dems ran in '16, and they did win the most votes. By 2020 voters might be so desperate for a return to normalcy that it will be a winning strategy.

Or not; we may just be too far down the rabbit hole. It's hard to say without knowing how much longer Trump will be in office. If the Reps trash him in the first half of next year (as I've long predicted), they might have time to reclaim normalcy before '20.

I expect that the Sanders wing will be much stronger and more organized in '18 and '20, which will make it more difficult to run in the center even if that's what the party wants to do.

First off, boring middle party wasn't exactly the campaign Clinton ran - her platform was the most left wing of the past 20+ years, because she didn't pivot back to the center. Her campaign was boring and responsible mainstream left party.

I'm not sure how 2020 will play out. I don't think Sanders will run, but Warren might be a stand-in for him and she'll have a fairly good chance. I think, however, that given that the primary will be pretty wide open, it'll probably go to one of the more charismatic candidates (assuming the candidate meets some standard - has some experience, has views within the mainstream of the party).

Oh, I know, and "center" and "left" are relative terms. She was perceived (including by lazy media analysts) as the centrist candidate because she was between Sanders and the Republicans.

I'm just saying that the Sanders wing will be more organized, including (I expect) running a number of primary candidates in congressional races. I'm sure that they will consolidate around a candidate in 2020 (which *could* be Warren, though I suspect that she will be too mainstream for them), that candidate will probably lose (since they will need said candidate to be 100% pure ideologically), and then they will handle that poorly.

[Defiant]

Oh, I know, and "center" and "left" are relative terms. She was perceived (including by lazy media analysts) as the centrist candidate because she was between Sanders and the Republicans.

That part was more for Kraken.

I'm just saying that the Sanders wing will be more organized, including (I expect) running a number of primary candidates in congressional races. I'm sure that they will consolidate around a candidate in 2020 (which *could* be Warren, though I suspect that she will be too mainstream for them), that candidate will probably lose (since they will need said candidate to be 100% pure ideologically), and then they will handle that poorly.

Well, sure, for the "Bernie Bros" no substitute would be acceptable (well, maybe Stein ). But for the bulk of of Bernie supporters, they aren't nearly as devoted to Sanders far left stance on (some) issues. There was some polling done that showed that Sanders and Clinton supporters had very similar stances on the issues (and on some issues, Sanders supporters were a little to the right of Clinton supporters).

[LordMortis]

It's too early for Polls.

If it were today, I'd say "a centrist" candidate with a modicum of charisma and ground game in "the flyover states" would clean up way more than a Sanders progressive but really the political landscape is so much a frying pan or fire situation right now, who knows?

I never thought anything would get Congress to turn on Trump and then he one two punched them in the nuts by admonishing them for not passing his or their mystery plans for health care provision and then taking 48 hours to say "nazis are bad".

If you asked me two weeks ago, in spite of all the shit that is going down, do I see a possibility of Trump being impeached, I would have said "I don't see a circumstance where that ever happens." Today it seems to have somehow crossed the magic line from seemingly impossible to merely improbable. In short, the landscape is now a mystery to me though I will be seriously fucked up if in three weeks from now, something turns the tide back to Trump will always have a perceived 35% support level and Congress will never turn on him.

And how the nation reacts to Trump will directly affect who runs, how they run, and if they can win at pretty much all levels of government over he next three years.

[Holman]

Alabama's senate primary is today. Results are coming in now.

The race is between Luther Strange (incumbent recently appointed to replace Jeff Sessions) and Roy Moore (Christian Supremacist and former chief justice). Strange has been endorsed by Trump and McConnell, but as an appointee he doesn't enjoy the incumbent's usual advantage. Moore has led in the polls.

Right now (with about 20% reporting) Moore is leading 41%-31%. (Mo Brooks is also running, but he's around 21%.) However, the most populous counties have just begun to report, and they are expected to lean towards Strange.

The Dems are having a primary too, but, seriously, right.

I trust the people of Alabama to do the worst possible thing and to send Roy Moore to the U.S. Senate.

[dbt1949]

I love how people think freedom of speech applies to everyone but those they disagree with.

[El Guapo]

It's too early for Polls.

If it were today, I'd say "a centrist" candidate with a modicum of charisma and ground game in "the flyover states" would clean up way more than a Sanders progressive but really the political landscape is so much a frying pan or fire situation right now, who knows?

I never thought anything would get Congress to turn on Trump and then he one two punched them in the nuts by admonishing them for not passing his or their mystery plans for health care provision and then taking 48 hours to say "nazis are bad".

If you asked me two weeks ago, in spite of all the shit that is going down, do I see a possibility of Trump being impeached, I would have said "I don't see a circumstance where that ever happens." Today it seems to have somehow crossed the magic line from seemingly impossible to merely improbable. In short, the landscape is now a mystery to me though I will be seriously fucked up if in three weeks from now, something turns the tide back to Trump will always have a perceived 35% support level and Congress will never turn on him.

And how the nation reacts to Trump will directly affect who runs, how they run, and if they can win at pretty much all levels of government over he next three years.

If the election were to be held in a month from now (say), I think a steaming turd with a (D) next to it could beat Trump. Which is kind of scary in a way, because anyone, even a left wing Trump, who gets through the democratic primary probably will have a good shot in the general (unless things turn around bigly over the next few years).

[Unagi]

because anyone, even a left wing Trump, who gets through the democratic primary probably will have a good shot in the general

It's comical. What does that guy do? Over extend taxes on the rich in order to grant insurance to the country? lols. truly - that's what it would be.

[El Guapo]

because anyone, even a left wing Trump, who gets through the democratic primary probably will have a good shot in the general

It's comical. What does that guy do? Over extend taxes on the rich in order to grant insurance to the country? lols. truly - that's what it would be.

Well, a left wing Trump would be Hugo Chavez-esque, essentially.

To be clear, I'm not saying that the democratic nominee in 2020 will be anything like Hugo Chavez, just that this is yet another danger in our political system. In the right environment, a crazy person can get the presidency by winning their party primary (based on a votes of a minority of the electorate) then be in the right political environment in the general (when the electorate can effectively only choose between two main party candidates), combined with an electorate college which allows a minority of the general electorate to pick the president.

[Holman]

Alabama's senate primary is today. Results are coming in now.

The race is between Luther Strange (incumbent recently appointed to replace Jeff Sessions) and Roy Moore (Christian Supremacist and former chief justice). Strange has been endorsed by Trump and McConnell, but as an appointee he doesn't enjoy the incumbent's usual advantage. Moore has led in the polls.

Right now (with about 20% reporting) Moore is leading 41%-31%. (Mo Brooks is also running, but he's around 21%.) However, the most populous counties have just begun to report, and they are expected to lean towards Strange.

The Dems are having a primary too, but, seriously, right.

I trust the people of Alabama to do the worst possible thing and to send Roy Moore to the U.S. Senate.

So it's a runoff. Moore got 49% to Strange's 33%. Since no one got more than 50%, the two top candidates will face each other again next month.

Third-placer Mo Brooks got 20%. It's very unlikely that they'll all shift to Strange.

[stessier]

So it's a runoff. Moore got 49% to Strange's 33%. Since no one got more than 50%, the two top candidates will face each other again next month.

Third-placer Mo Brooks got 20%. It's very unlikely that they'll all shift to Strange.

Because that would make 102% and it's more obvious when on 2 are on the ballot?

[El Guapo]

Somewhat amusingly, Inside Elections has changed the AL senate race "strongly Republican" to "likely Republican" due to Moore's first place finish (even though it will require a run-off).

Basically it's still a virtual lock for the Republicans, but because Moore is erratic / high variance, and the democrats have a respectable figure on the ballot, there's at least an outside chance of crazy shit happening, basically.

[Holman]

Maybe, but Moore alone got more votes than the entire Democratic field. The turnout ratio for the two primaries approached 3:1.

[ImLawBoy]

Were the Dems running a competitive primary race? If not, that could lower turnout on their end. (Not that I expect a D to win in Alabama or anything.)

[El Guapo]

Maybe, but Moore alone got more votes than the entire Democratic field. The turnout ratio for the two primaries approached 3:1.

Yeah, although as someone pointed out on the internet yesterday, in the 2010 Massachusetts special election the democratic candidates got 664,000 votes, while the Republicans got 162,000, but Scott Brown still won.

Alabama is still incredibly conservative, and the democrats are a very very long shot in the race, but Moore widens the democratic path to victory a bit. Basically it would have to be something like Moore does something incredibly crazy / offensive on tape (a "macaca moment", essentially) + Jackson runs a strong campaign + Trump continues to collapse and becomes a major dead weight (bear in mind that it's possible that senior Trump people will be indicted before the general election).

Of course, that also assumes that Moore wins the GOP run-off, which right now seems likely but not a sure thing.

[Jeff V]

So it's a runoff. Moore got 49% to Strange's 33%. Since no one got more than 50%, the two top candidates will face each other again next month.

Third-placer Mo Brooks got 20%. It's very unlikely that they'll all shift to Strange.

Because that would make 102% and it's more obvious when on 2 are on the ballot?

I believe you've uncovered the most conclusive evidence of election fraud to date! And all it took was...basic math!

[Holman]

Maybe, but Moore alone got more votes than the entire Democratic field. The turnout ratio for the two primaries approached 3:1.

Yeah, although as someone pointed out on the internet yesterday, in the 2010 Massachusetts special election the democratic candidates got 664,000 votes, while the Republicans got 162,000, but Scott Brown still won.

Alabama is still incredibly conservative, and the democrats are a very very long shot in the race, but Moore widens the democratic path to victory a bit. Basically it would have to be something like Moore does something incredibly crazy / offensive on tape (a "macaca moment", essentially) + Jackson runs a strong campaign + Trump continues to collapse and becomes a major dead weight (bear in mind that it's possible that senior Trump people will be indicted before the general election).

Of course, that also assumes that Moore wins the GOP run-off, which right now seems likely but not a sure thing.

But while Moore supports Trump, Trump chose Strange for his endorsement. Bad news for Trump won't necessarily rub off on Moore, and it's very hard to believe that anything will demoralize Alabama Republicans enough to give Dems a majority on election day.

Even in 2008, a great year for Democrats, Jeff Sessions won 63-37. The last time senate races in Alabama were close was in the 1980s, when party realignment was still ongoing and both candidates (D and R) were usually deep conservatives.

I think Moore's lead in the polls and the votes is a case of all politics being local. This is Alabama. Moore really came in first through his Christian Right bona fides, not because of Trump. The never-Moore Republicans in AL won't outweigh those willing to choose any Republican over every Democrat.

[Smoove_B]

I really hope this is all televised:

A pro-Trump rally dubbed the "Mother of All Rallies" (MOAR) is set to take place in Washington, D.C. the very same day as a march on the mall is being held by the Juggalos, the fanbase of the rap-rock group Insane Clown Posse, in protest of the FBI's classification of Juggalos as a "loosely organized hybrid gang."

Both demonstrations are set to take place on September 16th and both eye the National Mall as the backdrop for their protests.

[El Guapo]

Maybe, but Moore alone got more votes than the entire Democratic field. The turnout ratio for the two primaries approached 3:1.

Yeah, although as someone pointed out on the internet yesterday, in the 2010 Massachusetts special election the democratic candidates got 664,000 votes, while the Republicans got 162,000, but Scott Brown still won.

Alabama is still incredibly conservative, and the democrats are a very very long shot in the race, but Moore widens the democratic path to victory a bit. Basically it would have to be something like Moore does something incredibly crazy / offensive on tape (a "macaca moment", essentially) + Jackson runs a strong campaign + Trump continues to collapse and becomes a major dead weight (bear in mind that it's possible that senior Trump people will be indicted before the general election).

Of course, that also assumes that Moore wins the GOP run-off, which right now seems likely but not a sure thing.

But while Moore supports Trump, Trump chose Strange for his endorsement. Bad news for Trump won't necessarily rub off on Moore, and it's very hard to believe that anything will demoralize Alabama Republicans enough to give Dems a majority on election day.

Even in 2008, a great year for Democrats, Jeff Sessions won 63-37. The last time senate races in Alabama were close was in the 1980s, when party realignment was still ongoing and both candidates (D and R) were usually deep conservatives.

I think Moore's lead in the polls and the votes is a case of all politics being local. This is Alabama. Moore really came in first through his Christian Right bona fides, not because of Trump. The never-Moore Republicans in AL won't outweigh those willing to choose any Republican over every Democrat.

An unpopular / radioactive president drags down the entire party to some degree. Plus if Moore pushes back against Trump too much then he would risk losing the Trump base.

The Republican candidate (probably Moore) is a virtual lock, but I'm just saying it's possible if the national environment for Republicans gets toxic enough and a few other things happen (Moore needs to do something public and crazy as well). Not that it would suddenly turn Republicans into democrats, but it could be enough to get Republicans to stay home in droves, energize democrats, and get a few Republicans to vote democratic as an FU to the party.

Again, not going to happen, but possible in a "coming back from down 3-0 in a 7 game series" way.

[Grifman]

I really hope this is all televised:

A pro-Trump rally dubbed the "Mother of All Rallies" (MOAR) is set to take place in Washington, D.C. the very same day as a march on the mall is being held by the Juggalos, the fanbase of the rap-rock group Insane Clown Posse, in protest of the FBI's classification of Juggalos as a "loosely organized hybrid gang."

Both demonstrations are set to take place on September 16th and both eye the National Mall as the backdrop for their protests.

I would by tickets to this!

[Unagi]

Educate me a little here. What do we expect to go down?
What will the ICP do ?

[ImLawBoy]

Educate me a little here. What do we expect to go down?
What will the ICP do ?

I think that's the beauty of it. No one has any clue what the juggalos will do, but it will likely be something insane.