Octopus Overlords

YellowKing wrote: Mon Aug 20, 2018 4:19 pm I like to believe that post-Trump, we will return to some manner of civility and decency in the White House. It takes a special kind of narcissistic moron to be as unhinged as Trump, and I just don't see a "normal" person acting that way just because a precedent has been set. That doesn't mean we won't feel the scars from this administration for many years to come, but I don't think his behavior will necessarily be replicated just because he got away with it.

I agree. Some people are worried that with the mores of normality broken, we are doomed to a future of drumpfhood. I like to believe that will not be the case. It sure does mean that it will take more than having a mistress to kill someone's career though, as one small example.

If Trump goes away and a Democrat follows, I think we'll see a move to codify former norms as actual laws.

There was a similar effort at reform after Nixon, and it made genuine changes to government secrecy and many of Tricky Dick's other abuses. Trump's violations are just as extreme and more extensive, and I think the will exists to make sure they don't happen again so easily.

Holman wrote: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:04 pmIf Trump goes away and a Democrat follows, I think we'll see a move to codify former norms as actual laws.

I very much hope so. I don't think the nation can survive another Trump-style disgrace as a leader.

Things I want from the next president...

• Generate a list of every policy Trump has reversed/broken/upended and reverse it in the first week. Effectively "erasing" his presidency with one signature on a huge presidential decree. We can't delay years on getting treaties, trade, taxes, and alliances back in order, getting back on the climate bandwagon, and many other things.
• Apologize publicly for the office of President, and incorporate a public decree/law that the office with forever be maintained with dignity and never be used as a social platform to attack individuals and businesses whose only crime is disagreeing with the President.
• Work tirelessly to restore good relations with allies we've been alienating.
• Round up all current Trump supporters and send them to Mars so they can test out their reality-bending "vision" somewhere away from the rest of us.

Paingod wrote: Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:57 am

Holman wrote: Mon Aug 20, 2018 5:04 pmIf Trump goes away and a Democrat follows, I think we'll see a move to codify former norms as actual laws.

I very much hope so. I don't think the nation can survive another Trump-style disgrace as a leader.

Things I want from the next president...

• Generate a list of every policy Trump has reversed/broken/upended and reverse it in the first week. Effectively "erasing" his presidency with one signature on a huge presidential decree. We can't delay years on getting treaties, trade, taxes, and alliances back in order, getting back on the climate bandwagon, and many other things.

I want that too, but the problem is that one of the most lasting impacts of the Trump years is going to be judges. The GOP orchestrated a years-long effort to hold open a ton of Federal judgeships during the Obama years, and now that they've got a rubber stamp in the Oval, they're jamming judges into those openings as fast as humanly possible. Even if the Dems take the White House and Congress, there's really no mechanism for undoing that damage, so we're going to be living with a more right-leaning federal bench for a very long time.

Unfortunately in politics, the party that plays dirtiest wins. And right now there's only one party willing to wallow in the mud.

The very first thing a new president should do is draft a formal apology for his predecessor's behavior.

Paingod wrote: Tue Aug 21, 2018 7:57 am [*]Round up all current Trump supporters and send them to Mars so they can test out their reality-bending "vision" somewhere away from the rest of us.[/list]

While I'm sure NASA would appreciate the funding, Russia would be happy to take them for free.

Fox News is excited today. Looks like Mollie Tibbet's murderer is Mexican. Oh, and an illegal immigrant. You can look forward to Trump using her tragic death in the most cynical, self serving manner possible.

Mexicans 1 Putin 10 (at least)

hepcat wrote: Tue Aug 21, 2018 6:51 pm Fox News is excited today. Looks like Mollie Tibbet's murderer is Mexican. Oh, and an illegal immigrant. You can look forward to Trump using her tragic death in the most cynical, self serving manner possible.

Turns out the suspect is not an illegal immigrant

And, of course, the truth is that the statistics show that illegal immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the average citizen Trump campaign staffer.

https://twitter.com/MeghanMcCain/status ... 8732022785
link

John McCain and his family have decided to discontinue medical treatment.

Awww. Unsurprising, but sad anyway.

I love the fact that he never backed down from the Mangerine. The GOP is losing even more of its soul when he passes.

I ended up liking him.

McCain's politics have been bad and wrong in typical Republican ways, although even there he has occasionally (e.g. opposition to torture and to Trump) and impressively been guided by principle above party.

As a person, though, his example is nothing but honorable and inspiring, most of all in his refusal to accept an offer of early POW release not extended to his fellow prisoners.

hepcat wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 2:40 pm I love the fact that he never backed down from the Mangerine. The GOP is losing even more of its soul when he passes.

Sort of. Other than the skinny repeal vote, he's been in the Flake-Corker camp of bitching about Trump but not doing much to actually slow him down. He even helped him by staying in the Senate to this point - had he stepped down a couple months ago, there would be another special election in Arizona this fall (which would drastically improve the odds of Democrats taking the Senate). He could have helped release Trump's tax returns. Hell, just continuing to support McConnell has been hugely helpful to Trump.

Though to be fair, the skinny repeal vote, while the exception to the rule, is a fairly big deal.

Agreed.

Still, a good man and better than most.

El Guapo wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 11:59 pm Though to be fair, the skinny repeal vote, while the exception to the rule, is a fairly big deal.

I agree. However, I can't help but blame his Palin pick as when Trump's base was being pre-heated. So, I can't help but point to that in the time-line (and as a consiquence, him) as a hot-spot.

Unagi wrote: Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:32 am

El Guapo wrote: Fri Aug 24, 2018 11:59 pm Though to be fair, the skinny repeal vote, while the exception to the rule, is a fairly big deal.

I agree. However, I can't help but blame his Palin pick as when Trump's base was being pre-heated. So, I can't help but point to that in the time-line (and as a consiquence, him) as a hot-spot.

I would agree that picking Palin is the lowest moment in McCain's career, but I don't think it's fair to blame McCain (or most other politicians) for Trump. They were simply responding to what the base wanted. They could have had more courage to stand up and say "stop, this is going too far". Which McCain actually did.

Of course it didn't help. Those people in the video won.

Sure, but there are numerous examples of McCain saying all the right things then folding when push came to shove. He was not a perfect man, but he was a good man who clearly was trying. In this day and age that practically makes him a saint, even though he failed often.

GreenGoo wrote: Sat Aug 25, 2018 11:55 am Sure, but there are numerous examples of McCain saying all the right things then folding when push came to shove. He was not a perfect man, but he was a good man who clearly was trying. In this day and age that practically makes him a saint, even though he failed often.

In political choices, though, the things that make McCain a "saint" only seem so by contrast with his fellow GOPers.

McCain's finest hours in Congress are just a regular Tuesday for, say, John Lewis.

That's what "in this day and age" means. Obviously as far as politics go it makes sense to compare him to others of his party, rather than "the other" party.

Was that not clear?

To be clear, he's a conservative hack that doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

I think that’s unfair. I would save that kind of vitriol for people like Trump. If we simply label everyone across the aisle as such, we aren’t helping the cause of those in that camp that actually do stand up to the orange doofus...even if it’s not in as grand a style as we might want.

One should respect one's adversaries if they are worthy and willing to return the favor. McCain tried to do what was best for his country and dealt fairly with his opponents. He was just usually wrong (IMO) about what "best" was.

If there's strong evidence that he was about his own fortune first, or a toady to some lobby, then I'm willing to reconsider my opinion of him.

I do think that he would have beaten Obama if he hadn't made the Palin blunder. Would he have been a good president? IDK. But I'll betcha that if there hadn't been an Obama presidency, we wouldn't have Trump now. Thanks, Obama!

Yeah, McCain's choice to attempt to put Palin that close to the Presidency is an unforgivable lapse in judgement. That said, he seemed like someone who did what he thought was right, which is worth credit.

https://twitter.com/cnnbrk/status/10337 ... 59648?s=19

Sen. Jeff Flake remembers John McCain: “It’s tough to have a voice like that silenced. But this voice for civility, to put the country above your party, these are things he taught for years, and never more important than the last year"

"It's a set of lessons I purposely chose to ignore until I decided to retire, but YOLO!" continued Flake.

Kraken wrote:
I do think that he would have beaten Obama if he hadn't made the Palin blunder.

I think you’re underestimating or misremembering the enthusiasm Obama was generating. Obama won by 10 million votes and almost 200 EC votes. McCain picked Palin in the first place because he was down in the polls and desperately was trying to generate his own enthusiasm.

It's being reported that McCain wished for both GWB and Obama to speak at his funeral.

Is Trump even invited?

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 10:49 am

Kraken wrote:
I do think that he would have beaten Obama if he hadn't made the Palin blunder.

I think you’re underestimating or misremembering the enthusiasm Obama was generating. Obama won by 10 million votes and almost 200 EC votes. McCain picked Palin in the first place because he was down in the polls and desperately was trying to generate his own enthusiasm.

Kraken also thinks that Bernie would have been president if not for Clinton. I find his political views...confusing at times. Kraken is clearly farther left than I am up here in my socialist utopia. I found most of Bernie's positions hopelessly naive and pandering. But that's me. With that said, I also assumed that Drumpf had zero chance whereas Kraken had real concerns much earlier than most, so there's that.

Holman wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 11:23 am It's being reported that McCain wished for both GWB and Obama to speak at his funeral.

Is Trump even invited?

Reports from a few months back were that Trump was not invited to the funeral.

GreenGoo wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 11:50 am

Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 10:49 am

Kraken wrote:
I do think that he would have beaten Obama if he hadn't made the Palin blunder.

I think you’re underestimating or misremembering the enthusiasm Obama was generating. Obama won by 10 million votes and almost 200 EC votes. McCain picked Palin in the first place because he was down in the polls and desperately was trying to generate his own enthusiasm.

Kraken also thinks that Bernie would have been president if not for Clinton. I find his political views...confusing at times. Kraken is clearly farther left than I am up here in my socialist utopia. I found most of Bernie's positions hopelessly naive and pandering. But that's me. With that said, I also assumed that Drumpf had zero chance whereas Kraken had real concerns much earlier than most, so there's that.

Positions are secondary to packaging. Maybe Obama would have still beaten McCain on that basis; Obama did have the excitement edge. I only remember that I was leaning toward voting for McCain before the Palin pick, and I can't tell you why that was -- maybe because McCain was genuine and pragmatic vs. Obama being slick and inexperienced. (Bernie had the burn and I do still think that if America had been given the choice between socialism and authoritarianism, we would've gone for the former, but we'll never know.)

If I'm inconsistent, it's because I'm an independent, and often ambivalent. Trump has made me more pragmatic over these past couple of years. I'll support whomever can beat him, and I'm still unsure if that will be a leftist or a centrist. At this early stage I like both Warren and Biden.

Kraken wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:23 pm I only remember that I was leaning toward voting for McCain before the Palin pick, and I can't tell you why that was

It was racism. It's always racism with your generation.

For the record I was just awkwardly pointing out that your views often can't be classified as the common view of either the right or the left. I consider myself left socially right fiscally but even I couldn't get behind some of Bernie's positions. You could.

It wasn't supposed to be as critical sounding as it was.

GreenGoo wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:25 pm

Kraken wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 12:23 pm I only remember that I was leaning toward voting for McCain before the Palin pick, and I can't tell you why that was

It was racism. It's always racism with your generation.

More likely it was ageism. I don't trust anyone younger than me.

FWIW I'm flattered that you don't think I fit neatly into a box. My philosophy and beliefs are a framework, but my mind can always be changed by circumstances, new facts, or a strong argument.

Kraken wrote: Sun Aug 26, 2018 1:01 pm FWIW I'm flattered that you don't think I fit neatly into a box. My philosophy and beliefs are a framework, but my mind can always be changed by circumstances, new facts, or a strong argument.

Translation: "I was high enough to vote for Bernie."

(I kid!)

An overwhelming majority of Donald Trump voters don't think that using the n-word makes white people racist and less than half think the slur is offensive, according to a new poll.

A combination of two polls conducted over the past two weeks found that only 18 percent of Trump voters believe using the racial epithet makes white people racist and just 42 percent find the term offensive. On the other side of the aisle, more than three-quarters of Hillary Clinton voters said that the n-word is offensive and racist.

Over 70 percent of Trump supporters indicated that they would still cast their vote for a political candidate even if they had said the n-word. By contrast, nearly 90 percent of Clinton voters say it would deter them from supporting a candidate if they had used the slur before.

link

What? That can't be. I was assured that supporting drumpf didn't make you racist by some fine members of this very forum. What they cleverly hid was that you're racist BEFORE voting for drumpf.

Clever little dickens. Gotta watch out for their shenanigans.

I don't really like the wording of that question. A word can't "make you racist."

Racism is far too complex a subject to boil down to "if you have ever said this word, you're a racist. And if you've never said this word, you're not a racist." That's ridiculous.

I understand the point of the poll and what they're driving at, but it's rather ham-fisted and sloppy IMO.

The second question - "do you find the n-word offensive" is a far better indicator. But then again, if you're asking a white person, they may say it doesn't offend them because they're not the target of the slur.

YellowKing wrote: Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:29 am I don't really like the wording of that question. A word can't "make you racist."

Racism is far too complex a subject to boil down to "if you have ever said this word, you're a racist. And if you've never said this word, you're not a racist." That's ridiculous.

I understand the point of the poll and what they're driving at, but it's rather ham-fisted and sloppy IMO.

The second question - "do you find the n-word offensive" is a far better indicator. But then again, if you're asking a white person, they may say it doesn't offend them because they're not the target of the slur.

I'm pretty sure most people would understand the question as "Is using the N-word racist?"

Too much complexity in polling is as problematic as too little. With a long and qualified setup, people begin to add more personal nuance and filters until no one is answering the same question.

YellowKing wrote: Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:29 am The second question - "do you find the n-word offensive" is a far better indicator. But then again, if you're asking a white person, they may say it doesn't offend them because they're not the target of the slur.

Only if they're trying really hard to find a way to answer "no".