Trump

[akiva]

[Phoebe]

Comey is unfit to be the damn town dogcatcher, but if he resigns or is ejected, what comes next? Hulk Hogan? Eduardo Morales? Semion Mogilevich? You think I'm kidding but these nominees 100% fit the pattern we have seen so far.

[Bonefish]

I think people have been a little hard, unnecessarily, on Comey. I can understand his legitimate fears: a Clinton presidency marks the end of his career, his lower ranks are frothing for blood, his boss was basically in the clinton's circle. And he had a relatively simple case against her, one that was complicated by politics. At the end of the day, her handling of classified information was not in line with federal statutes and she did things that would get any federal contractor shitcanned and denied clearance. I have a host of friends who are federal contractors, mostly for the CDC in atlanta, and while they are all liberal(or Anarchist), they were absolutely astounded at the results. Many of them went on to vote for Clinton, because... well... i mean, you know why.

But dude was in a horribly bad place to make decisions. If he actually makes the recomendation, he has to know that it will be seen as tampering in the electoral process. If he DOESNT recomend, then he is blamed for obstruction of justice for political ends. Either way he went, he was essentially going to get mauled for it. So he played it safe, right down the middle, and he got roasted by the left for not vindicating a character who hasn't the common sense to NOT throw fuel on the fire, and roasted by the right as a traitor. I think he did the best he could reasonably do under the circumstances . I am not happy about it, but he did what he could do, without expecting him to fall on his sword for the honor of the Republic.

We are in a horrible place in general. We have two political parties that are absolutely bonkers, and completely out of touch with the regular world we live in. They seem, either incompetent or worse, actively nefarious and self interested. And both play to identity politics, while fostering the belief that there can be no compromise, while secretly and not so secretly acting in their self interests as a political class.

On the one hand you have the republican part, which panders to the idea that everyman can be great if he just works at it, that the only reason YOU are not living in the house on the hill is that you didn't work for it. They play to the idea that you are forgotten, that no one in power pays attention to you, that your way of life is rapidly being replaced or destroyed. And they are right. No, not that sharia law is being enforce, or that the coloreds are gonna be owning them one day. They are right that their economic conditions have been ripped apart and left a bleeding, supperating wound, They are right that a rash of opiate addiction has swept their communities, they are right that they are being screwed. But the republicans have the mastery to convince them that they are being screwed by the coloreds and immigrants(though there is a healthy reason to disilike our immigration policy that isn't racist). They have also been told for twenty years that they are racist, misogynists and everything wrong with the country. So, there's an element on animosity to anything from the "other side".

On the other hand we have a a party that, on the face of it, advocates for the equality of all peoples, and the betterment of the nation. Which sounds great. Then you see the lip service played to the minorities, where they are eagerly welcomed as a demographic voting bloc, but generally denied access to the heights of power and the leadership of the party. From "all lives matter" cries, to the failure of the democratic party to capture the younger african american vote, while clinging to the Church Women. We have also been shown over the last two decades, an increasingly sycophantic, corporatist democratic party, the eagerly takes money from the very same interests that it nominally opposes.

I don't know if this is completely a political tension, as I do see the social aspects of it as well. Our very entertainmet has been structures and segregated, so as to make the two sides insular in nature. The coastal liberal see's himself as smarter, more sophisticated, harder working and generally better than the rural bumpkin. The Rural bumpkin see's himself as having more common sense, a harder worker, and generally a more moral, better person than the city slicker. We have decdes of sitcoms portraying working class men as affable idiots, while the sophisticate is incapable of changing a tire. There may be some truth to these stereotypes, but they have done damage, regardless.

And then there's the Anarchists. We just wanna burn it all.

[Phoebe]

I appreciate your defense of Comey but that line of argument only would have worked in August. He was walking a difficult line at that time, and while he shouldn't have added extemporaneous comments once the decision was made, it wasn't the worst thing ever. The October surprise WAS the worst thing. It significantly damaged Clinton in the polls. And in hindsight we discovered the whole thing was an utter fabrication, concerning emails that already had been reviewed. There was nothing new, nothing he needed to disclose either privately or publicly. So things were already bad for Comey's ethical standing at that point, but I still would have trusted him as dogcatcher.

Now we know that the whole time he was intentionally, actively harming Clinton's interests with his disclosures, he was keeping mum about vastly more serious crimes being investigated on the other side. While he was making disclosures and giving warnings to his political friends, he didn't extend the same courtesy to Democrats. At this point people are seriously wondering if he's compromised, either by domestic or foreign agents. No, he is not fit to be dogcatcher; he has demonstrated himself to be, on an ethical level, the sort of person who would cover up the dogfighting going on in his friend's back yard, while letting rabid dogs freely roam the streets of his political enemies. On the other hand, is he better than Sheriff Joe? And I'm not sure we'd even get that much: Trump has consistently picked people who actively oppose the very raison d'etre of whatever they're about to lead.

Democrats have (for another week, and the past eight years) a multiracial man at the head of their party as President, and a black woman at the head of their national committee. How are they excluding minorities from leadership posts exactly? The Democratic party has not been the "all lives matter" party. Yes they serve corporate masters, and that's why I would have rather had Bernie run, but there's a small difference between "no more democracy" and "someone I disagree with on things and didn't really want".

I totally agree with you about the damaging urban/rural, coastal/central stereotypes, however!

[Ronster]

Getting all bent out of shape before anything has actually happened is really unhealthy. Lighten up, Francis...it's going to be fantastic, just wait and see.

[Phoebe]

At least I appreciate that you're cheerful and optimistic. From other Trump voters one gets not, "yay, we won, you're gonna love it" but "F you, we won, shut up, and now you'll get the punishment you deserve!" Um, why they so angry? They won. From others, of course, we get "ovens!" But i know why they're angry; they're worried they're not white. Why is Trump still so thin-skinned about everything? He won! Or... Asterisk, but nobody wants to upset the collective applecart because that's even better for Putin, and some portion of the nation is still patriotic enough to put country over rank partisanship.

[bralbovsky]

1 - Hoping against hope that this works out well for everyone because, after all, it's one boat. (Although I could say something about access to life jackets)
2 - As pointed out by the Independent Senator from Maine, Comey's decisons to reveal or not reveal are inconsistent and appear to follow no policy whatsoever. One of the things that makes a DA's life difficult is that the deliberations of the grand jury are secret. So we indict or we do not indict, no explanation. That's the professional standard. None of this "almost" nonsense. He's blundered professionally, I don't want him evaluated politically. It's sad and unfair that guys subject to the uniform code are in the brig for less, but civilians, cabinet posts and congressmen aren't subject to that code. I wish they were.
3 - He's in deep water with the Russia stuff, #FBI knew, maybe #trump knew.
4 - If one more person with a confederate flag sticker on his truck says, "get over it, you lost".......

Documents uncovered recently (6-8 months ago) indicate Exxon not only knew about global warming, but maybe purposely accelerated it so that the polar deposits would no longer be protected by ice.
My theory is simple: (not about how this happened, but about why the direction now) 93% of the recovery stimulus went to the top guys. They think that was pretty sweet. Is the US economy, US productivity, US resilience sufficient to jump that kind of chasm again?
"Rex, open 'er up. Mike, hold my beer, let's see what this baby can do... we got insurance, right?...."

[Phoebe]

Betsy DeVos, making sure your tax dollars can support Islamist and Fundamentalist Christian and - one can only assume this is next - Satanist charter schools! Hey, if we have to tolerate some Turkish Islamist schools and Wiccan schools for the overall benefit of the Kingdom, why wouldn't we, right? At least this will solve my dilemma about where to send my son to school, because the day i get a voucher is the day he goes to Hebrew school.

[Phoebe]

I read more about Betsy DeVos' confirmation hearing. I am having trouble believing this is real. This really is the equivalent of getting the #1 person on the most-wanted list to run the FBI.

[akiva]

[TheMaster]

The more of her hearings that I watch/Listen to the more I want her to not be confirmed. Surely we could find a dog or something that has a better way of getting its point across. There are a few of her views I agree with (not many, but a few). However, she doesn't believe in her own ideas enough to say them out loud in front of someone that may disagree with her. I want someone in that position that can and will change our educational system. someone that won't say one thing and then not do anything because someone didn't like what she said... and really, she is going to say we need guns in schools because of bears... Her stupidity knows no bounds (IMHO)

[akiva]

[Phoebe]

Oh God the EPA guy is even worse than the Education gal. Lord God help us all, this is unbelievable. EPA guy won't agree not to pursue LAWSUITS he filed against the EPA, while he is running the EPA! EPA guy also used his office as Atty Gen to sue the EPA on behalf of private companies, even going so far as to put language written by them into his official docs.

Draining the swamp turns out to be accomplished by picking the one person who is not only least qualified to do the job, but is most actively menacing to the specific job in question. Whoever is doing the most aggressive job of trying to destroy the environment, let's pick that person to "protect" it. Whoever is pouring the most money into destroying public education while literally knowing nothing about it, let's pick that person to be responsible for it! That woman is entirely ignorant of the most basic possible concepts related to education policy. All of this is surreal, especially considering that most people in America do not want what is happening now.

You can disagree with Obamacare all day long and consider it bad policy, but it's still A POLICY. Whatever is wrong with it, the policy was not fundamentally premised on the need to drive as many people off of insurance as possible and prevent them from having access to medical care. THAT IS LITERALLY WHAT THESE EPA AND EDUCATION PEOPLE WANT TO DO. So help me God, I am so offended by Betsy DeVos that if charter schools come to my world because of her, I am seriously contemplating opening a taxpayer-funded school organized in every detail around opposition to Calvinist ideology. A school called "The Opposite of Hateful, Shitty Calvinism" is not really a catchy title, but give me time.

[Ronster]

“you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables," “some of those folks – they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America.” -Hillary Clinton

Still not "traitor", but these words came at a cost.

FWiW, Newt's only competition for his district was Ben Jones...aka "Cooter" from The Dukes of Hazzard who hard a hard time breaking with his television persona.."Crazy Cooter comin' at ya. I may be crazy, but I ain't dumb." I know this all too well as I was in Newt's district, then the lines were re-drawn by our democrat controlled state legislature...happens all the time on both sides of the aisle.

[Phoebe]

She was 100% correct. The problem is not with the extreme rhetoric on both sides; the problem is that one side is factually correct and the other one has gone straight to crazy town. They either do not grasp, or grasp and prefer to lie about, fundamental facts, nor do they think anyone needs to be equipped with or responsive to such facts in order to responsibly perform a powerful job.

The only thing being confirmed in these hearings is that all the worst predictions about the next four years are indeed starting to come true! This is not the fault of tit-for-tat rhetoric; it is the fault of a very large group of people taking total leave of their senses and reason! It is one thing to disagree about policies and think that we need to do things differently. I am no fan of Arne Duncan, for instance. What good did he do? What great ideas did he have? IMO he was a zero as education secretary, but he was an intelligent person with whom I disagreed about policy. We had the same end goal: the best possible education for our kids. That is not Betsy DeVos' goal. Her explicit goal is to ensure that public education = a tool in the Calvinist God's Kingdom. It is her goal to usher in and soldier for God's Kingdom, period. Public education is a hindrance to that goal so it has to be dismantled by any means necessary. The more people in taxpayer-funded private Christian schools, the better. And what happens when those laws accidentally permit things like taxpayer-funded Islamic schools? Oh, we'll try to shut those down! (Except that they failed to shut them down, thanks to a weird thing called the Law, which IMO is a big problem because I do not want one dime of my tax dollars supporting an Islamic school, sorry.) She knows nothing about education whatsoever - literally nothing. Read the hearing transcript. Unless you're a teacher, in which case you might faint, so read it sitting down. She has done absolutely nothing to qualify her to lead anything in this area up to and including a PTO classroom party, besides donating the big bucks her family gained (and how they gained it! If little people got screwed over in the process, well, they probably weren't part of the elect anyway! It was their own fault for not making money, and the fact that God didn't bless them with money only proves it was their fault. Sorry, if there is one form of Christian fundamentalist I loathe more than any other, it is Calvinism. Deplorable is too kind a word.)

[Bonefish]

So 1 out of 2 trump supporters are racists, and all that other jazz? Only on the republican side can we find deplorable who use racist language, sexist language, etc? Sorry, that doesn't pass the smell test.

Look, Democrats lost most among their "core": minorities. Hispanic, African American, Gay. They lost those constituencies in a rather impressive fashion. It wasn't that trump managed to get all the racist rednecks out to vote: He only got 1% more of a 1% smaller demographic. No, Democrats lost big among their "core" demographics. Trump actually won more support from Hispanics, Blacks, Gays, and Muslims than Romney. So either he appealed to the hidden racist, misogynistic and homophobic democrats(which, again, raises the fact that there are a lot of democrats who hold those views), OR something else happened.

I myself have run into the racist firewall. The same objections I had against republicans critcizing Obama, were levied against me, when I began to question policies that I found, well, questionable. It's one thing to be a nativist know nothing and be accused of being a racist, it's another to be someone who actively protests institutional racism and find yourself being accused of being a closet racist. It's a bit surreal to see how rapidly I went from being an "ally" to a rapist, wife beating, lynching lunatic. All because I spoke up about not agreeing.

It's really simple: Most americans do not identify as republican or democrat. Everytime the major party loyalists paint their opposition as the sole reason for where we are, those of use who are in the middle? We get a little more disgusted and a little more apathetic. We stop actually caring. We stop participating. Because the participation trophy is made out of fecal matter and blood. We don't want anything to do with it.

Stop pointing fingers, start fixing problems. Or face more defeats. And sadly, I just don't think the Democrats can weather being the party of "no". I don't think they can continue to blame republicans while advancing candidates who do the same things. And that scares me, because the republican party, while batshit insane, is eerily competent at winning. They may be dirty, they may be psychoatic, but they are good at winning. They are the Tito to the Stalin. Both are horrible options, but at the end of the day, Tito wins.

[Tahlvin]

[Stan]

These examinations of the potential cabinet members can expose as many bizarre policy ideas as they want. It won't matter unless some in the GOP blink and vote against them. Most of the public doesn't pay attention to things at that level. I'm curious to see if every confirmation vote happens along party lines.

Given the attempt to gut the ethics committee and that many cabinet nominations have not filed paperwork, I'm guessing that some of them have bigger issues than mere incompetence or horrid viewpoints.

I'm curious how well congress and Trump will get along. Trump isn't really tied to the GOP but they might keep cooperating if it suits them both. It's hard to say what Trump really wants to do as he's said many contradictory things. But some of his ideas are in direct opposition to the GOP and congress in general. If he pushes something like term limits, the honeymoon is over. He can also be vindictive - if he tries to punish anyone in congress for things they said/did during the election (such as telling their party to not give them good committee positions), it will not go well. All it takes is 3 senators who say 'screw this, I'm independent and am going to caucus with the Dems' to make the whole plan fall apart, including control of committees. It would take a lot for defection but if someone feels they are getting hosed and/or if they are never running for election again, they might do it. Especially with all the personality conflicts involved.

[Phoebe]

It is my fond hope this will occur, and also that Ben Sasse plans to mount a primary challenge to Trump in 4 years.

[TheMaster]

Sen. Ted Cruz has already put forth a bill to limit terms in congress.