• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.

Status
Not open for further replies.
W

whyamihere

Banned
Both Ossoff and Handel have their own challenges that are going to present themselves in a runoff. I think Handel has a 51/49 chance of winning, but like, I wouldn't put any money on her.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
whyamihere said:
Both Ossoff and Handel have their own challenges that are going to present themselves in a runoff. I think Handel has a 51/49 chance of winning, but like, I wouldn't put any money on her.
Click to expand...

Are they going to send Cruz and Pence to Georgia?

You know because they're not outsiders like people supporting Ossoff or anything.

Posted?

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump is claiming he cannot be sued now that he has won the White House -- a defense in a lawsuit that alleges Trump incited rally-goers to violence when they allegedly assaulted protesters during the 2016 campaign.

In a court filing Friday, Trump's lawyers argue twice that the President has blanket immunity against lawsuits.
"Mr. Trump is immune from suit because he is President of the United States," the attorneys wrote, adding, "Mr. Trump is immune from proceedings pursuant to Clinton v. Jones."
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/17/polit...nity-lawsuits0400AMVODtopLink&linkId=36606560
 
F

Frank the Great

Banned
Someone please explain something to me. Even if Ossoff loses the runoff by a few points, doesn't that still bode well for Dems? Like, we don't need to be flipping R +20 districts to win the House, right?

But if we can flip most R+7 districts, just to throw out a number, do we win the House? If so then even Ossoff losing bodes well . . .
 
B

BoogieWoogie

Banned
Frank the Great said:
Someone please explain something to me. Even if Ossoff loses the runoff by a few points, doesn't that still bode well for Dems? Like, we don't need to be flipping R +20 districts to win the House, right?

But if we can flip most R+7 districts, just to throw out a number, do we win the House? If so then even Ossoff losing bodes well . . .
Click to expand...

I mean ultimately a win would have been great, but you're right, this is still very very good for 2018 and the results of this and Kansas has gotta have the House GOP scared shitless.
 
M

metalslimer

Member
Frank the Great said:
Someone please explain something to me. Even if Ossoff loses the runoff by a few points, doesn't that still bode well for Dems? Like, we don't need to be flipping R +20 districts to win the House, right?

But if we can flip most R+7 districts, just to throw out a number, do we win the House? If so then even Ossoff losing bodes well . . .
Click to expand...

Right, gerrymandering only continues to work if Republicans keep their margins in the R+5-7 districts. The problem is that the incumbent effect also plays a large part here. It's much harder to pull a large swing on an incumbent.

Umm Clinton v. Jones said the opposite of that. The holding was that the President is NOT immune from actions that occurred prior to entering office.
Click to expand...

Yep, Trump's idiocy extends ot his lawyers as well it seems.
 
Emerson

Emerson

May contain jokes =>
Frank the Great said:
Someone please explain something to me. Even if Ossoff loses the runoff by a few points, doesn't that still bode well for Dems? Like, we don't need to be flipping R +20 districts to win the House, right?

But if we can flip most R+7 districts, just to throw out a number, do we win the House? If so then even Ossoff losing bodes well . . .
Click to expand...

Yes. A nationwide swing on the level of the one seen in Kansas and Georgia would reclaim the House. It's a positive sign. Those arguing "a loss is a loss" have utterly failed to see the context of the situation.

I understand the disappointment, and I even have a bit of fear a loss in this Georgia race could deflate the energy of the left, but people need to be rational about this stuff.
 
W

Wilsongt

Member
Frank the Great said:
Someone please explain something to me. Even if Ossoff loses the runoff by a few points, doesn't that still bode well for Dems? Like, we don't need to be flipping R +20 districts to win the House, right?

But if we can flip most R+7 districts, just to throw out a number, do we win the House? If so then even Ossoff losing bodes well . . .
Click to expand...

Well... It was expected that Ossoff would get pretty decent numbers in this election because the GOP doesn't know how to not run a clowncar of candidates for races.

However, the fact that you have the GOP on a nationally level feeling threatened by one or two solidly R seats in a special election is still uplifting for Democrats.

The only problem is getting Democrats to actually vote in the midterms. Provided we are alive and actually have voting rights left by then.
 
B

BoogieWoogie

Banned
Emerson said:
I understand the disappointment, and I even have a bit of fear a loss in this Georgia race could deflate the energy of the left, but people need to be rational about this stuff.
Click to expand...

The thing about deflation is that Trump never shuts up and is constantly making the Left mad on an almost hourly basis with his bullshit. I don't see energy going down any time soon.
 
S

studyguy

Member
C9yY6iAXcAEHnfJ.jpg:large
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
studyguy said:
C9yY6iAXcAEHnfJ.jpg:large
Click to expand...

Man that guy is made of strong stuff. I suspect he is fueled by a willful refusal to die under a Trump presidency.

By the way, for all the racists-and-nazis-have-won sentiment lately, this year has already scalped Milo Yiannopoulis, Mike Flynn and Bill O'Reilly, with Steve Bannon currently being eyed for a haircut. Don't get cocky, Pepes.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
cartoon_soldier said:
Stop listening to Louise Mensch. Seriously guys, don't just believe anything. She is now a nut case.
Click to expand...
I know she is kooky. But its fun speculating!

Chaffetz is the shitlord who held how many, 30 hearings into EMAailZz and Benghazi? Nothing would be more satisfying than him be on the receiving end.
 
V

VendettaRed07

Member
Ted is too smart and has too good of a work ethic to lose re-election. Even if he starts to slip, he'll know how to readjust.

Joaquin if he wanted to win would need to pull some crazy shit and cover literally every single inch of Texas to even have hope of having a shot.
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
VendettaRed07 said:
Even if he starts to slip, he'll know how to readjust
Click to expand...

Ted Cruz is a true believing tea partier. He only knows how to "adjust" further right, which, unfortunately for him, is the opposite direction Texas is moving.

When Texas shifts into a more purple state, you're not going to see Ted become a moderate.

Joe Shlabotnik said:
Man that guy is made of strong stuff. I suspect he is fueled by a willful refusal to die under a Trump presidency.
Click to expand...
There's actually a decent chance Trump will have to do two presidential funerals in his term. Both GW and Carter are very old, and GW is in and out of the hospital almost monthly.

I'm... not really sure how that's going to work. These are past presidents that Trump hates. Both of them also hate him. There's no way Trump will be able to give a tasteful speech.
 
B

BlastProcessing

Member
BoogieWoogie said:
This is...unexpected. News like this really makes me think that the GOP is utterly crumbling under Trump.
Click to expand...

Chaffetz put himself in a difficult situation. Oversight is an amazing job for someone with political aspirations if the opposing party is in office. It's a terrible job if your party holds the White House even in normal times.

Of course, if he simply valued serving his constituents over his political future, there wouldn't be any conflict...
 
D

dramatis

Member
Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer has the potential to shape everything from state constitutions to school-voucher policies—if it doesn’t get thrown out.
In 2012, Trinity Lutheran Church in Missouri applied for a state grant to fix up its pre-school playground. Under the program, Missouri would provide rubber from recycled tires to cover play areas like Trinity Lutheran’s, which had a pea gravel surface that was “unforgiving if/when a child falls.” While the church’s application was ranked high by the state, Missouri declined to grant the money because of a state constitutional provision holding that “no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, or denomination of religion.”

Trinity Lutheran v. Comer asks whether Missouri can exclude religious institutions from otherwise secular and neutral aid programs under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This is the first case the court has heard in a decade and a half about providing resources to churches, and the stakes are about more than just tire scraps. The court’s decision could shape future fights over school-voucher programs. It could also speak to the constitutionality of state-level church-funding prohibitions like Missouri’s, which, some scholars say, have a dark and discriminatory past.
Click to expand...
“The American tradition is that we don’t give direct money to churches,” said Marty Lederman, an associate professor at Georgetown University Law Center.

In recent years, though, that tradition shifted somewhat. In 2000, the Supreme Court ruled in Mitchell v. Helms that a Louisiana parish could provide computers and library books to private schools, including the region’s many Catholic schools. The Court stopped short of saying the government could give cash to religious schools, though. Some legal scholars argue that Trinity Lutheran could shift that standard: If the Court were to rule that Missouri can and should provide grants to eligible religious organizations, a whole new set of legal challenges and policy questions could open up.

In particular, the decision in Trinity Lutheran could influence the debate over school vouchers. “For a long time, it was thought that the federal Establishment Clause stood in the way of school-voucher programs that allowed religious institutions to participate,” said Garnett. “Over time, in the late ’80s and through the ’90s, the court’s doctrine evolved.” In the early 2000s, he said, the Supreme Court ruled that the Establishment Clause doesn’t allow the government to directly fund religious activities, but it’s not a problem if people use state-funded vouchers to attend private religious schools.
Click to expand...
 
B

balladofwindfishes

Member
Why shouldn't a Lutheran school be able to receive aid that is irrelevant to them being a Lutheran school?
”no money shall ever be taken from the public treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, or denomination of religion."
Click to expand...
This also seems bizarrely specific. What if there was a huge flood that destroyed a church, would Missouri be barred from providing aid to rebuild the church?
 
D

dramatis

Member
balladofwindfishes said:
Why shouldn't a Lutheran school be able to receive aid that is irrelevant to them being a Lutheran school?

This also seems bizarrely specific. What if there was a huge flood that destroyed a church, would Missouri be barred from providing aid to rebuild the church?
Click to expand...
Article goes into a bit of history (aka anti-Catholic)

whyamihere said:
lol

jasonforgovernor.com

He's such an idiot.
Click to expand...
Wow this link actually works
 
B

Blader

Member
balladofwindfishes said:
There's actually a decent chance Trump will have to do two presidential funerals in his term. Both GW and Carter are very old, and GW is in and out of the hospital almost monthly.

I'm... not really sure how that's going to work. These are past presidents that Trump hates. Both of them also hate him. There's no way Trump will be able to give a tasteful speech.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking, if HW passes away in the next few years, do we think Trump will mention or not mention HW's electoral college win? "President Bush had a huge, and I mean huge, win in the electoral college. Over 400 votes -- a beautiful thing, and mine was almost as incredible."

BlastProcessing said:
Chaffetz put himself in a difficult situation. Oversight is an amazing job for someone with political aspirations if the opposing party is in office. It's a terrible job if your party holds the White House even in normal times.

Of course, if he simply valued serving his constituents over his political future, there wouldn't be any conflict...
Click to expand...

I mean, he still has to serve for almost two more years. And if he were going to run for governor, that campaign would have to start a few months after he leaves Congress. If he's leaving his House seat so isn't he dragged down by his abdication of his oversight duties, well, uh, I don't know if he's totally thought that through.
 
K

Kid Kamikaze10

Member
You know, it's been a while.

And I am still not convinced that black people, namely black women, among other POCs, would really have a seat on the table if Sander's wing of the Dem's took power. Not one of any real influence.

Sanders himself hasn't convinced me, his supporters damn sure haven't, and the media figures, especially the black ones, have done anything but.



The whole wing just feels like a (white) working class is first priority, everyone else is a side issue at best.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
Kid Kamikaze10 said:
You know, it's been a while.

And I am still not convinced that black people, namely black women, among other POCs, would really have a seat on the table if Sander's wing of the Dem's took power. Not one of any real influence.

Sanders himself hasn't convinced me, his supporters damn sure haven't, and the media figures, especially the black ones, have done anything but.



The whole wing just feels like a (white) working class is first priority, everyone else is a side issue at best.
Click to expand...


When you think that being wealthy means you can hold all the cards and not face any discrimination, it isn't surprising that people think class and wealth is very heavily tied to racism. By making people richer racism should be lessened. It is different to those that think racism is the biggest obstacles that prevents PoC from getting richer, and be given fairer cases.

Bernie possibly very much believes in that. The reason he talks about the WWC the most is one he is a politician, he is looking at the fact that the WWC is represents one the biggest voting blocks and his ideas helps them out, plus he doesn't have much interaction with PoC in his own state.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
The Democrats are spineless and worthless in opposing Trump & the GOP
8 9 10 11 12
571
59K
sugarhigh4242 replied
  • Locked
This week in Trump’s America: Week 2 by ThinkProgress
8
2K
stuminus3 replied
  • Locked
Hillary Clinton retweets Slate voter guide calling her most corrupt candidate
3
3K
ModBot replied
  • Locked
Blacklist 2014 - Hollywood's most liked scripts of the year
30
6K
Sho_Nuff82 replied
Top Bottom