• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ithil

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,394
The president doesn't understand words.


Yeah, he doesn't understand the "Elite" thing is an insult, because he's jealous of how he was never accepted by the New York elite. He's been trying to be one of them since the 80s, but they always saw him for what he is, a boorish, stupid clown, and always kept him on the outside. He doesn't understand having money doesn't make you classy.
 

VectorPrime

Banned
Apr 4, 2018
11,781
2009.jpg

I know this is a Soviet Leader making an ass of himself but what are the details?
 

Zeno

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,150
Even if one Republican senator flipped (not going to happen), McCain would be dragged into court or simply retire and have his replacement vote.
 

Deleted member 3082

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,099
Replying because I saw the pop-up alert and can't leave well enough alone. I'm actually burying my social media bookmarks shortly. =p

Have fun! That looks super pretty.

Thanks, though I'm not there, or even the camping type or anything. I plan to spend all weekend in the air conditioning playing board games, actually. The picture was a reference to something I wrote three OTs ago when I was feeling hopeless, and a lot of people seemed to appreciate. Maybe people can benefit from reading it now too, since today is a hell of a lot darker.

- - - -

You know, I had the thought tonight after Laurence O'Donnell kicked off his show with a quote from near the end of Comey's book where he refers to the Trump presidency as "a forest fire."

He could have picked any disaster to describe this administration, but he picked a forest fire and I'm not entirely sure it was accidental. With a hurricane, earthquake, tornado, killer bee swarm, whatever; those happen suddenly, we're all in shock as they happen and then we clean up the mess and try to prepare for next time.

Catastrophic forest fires happen because we mostly use total fire suppression programs that treat all fire as bad, because they will inevitably destroy something, be it a house or timber or whatever. The problem with that is, without the natural fires that come through every decade or so, forests get so heavy with dead plants and underbrush that they become a tinderbox (and all of that fuel allows them to spread much more quickly and unpredictably). But forest fires can be beneficial too, in that they clear the forest floor of overgrowth, allowing for more room and sunlight at the forest floor, resulting in greater plant diversity and growth (for example, sequoia trees basically need fire to populate). The indigenous peoples of California thrived without anything we would recognize as agriculture by having a regional fire ecology, using controlled fires to optimize growth.

The point is, after a forest fire, life returns stronger and more diverse than before, and having the occasional controlled fire keeps the big ones from starting.

The Trump Administration is a catastrophic forest fire. It's big and loud, destroying lives and spreading everywhere no matter how hard we fight it; we're literally going through a sort of hell. It's fueled by all the nasty undergrowth that we've been allowing to fester in this country, carefully fed into the hateful little fires that Republicans have been stoking since they adopted the southern strategy. Trump is the spark that got away from them and is now burning wild through the land. But it's consuming all of that fuel, because people are now intimately familiar with and learning to despise it in a way that hasn't happened in a long time. So while they're burning the government to cinders with these weekly constitutional crises, when this is over they'll have very likely killed their brand of conservatism for a generation, if not forever.

What comes after is stronger and more diverse than before, and if we're smart we'll burn that ideology away every time it starts to grow again, to keep the big ones from starting.

That kind of gives me the hope that we desperately need.​
 
Last edited:

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
So Maddow went 25 minutes straight tonight with her opening. Wasn't in the mood for it until about 10 minutes in, she began with Luther Strange, after all.

But the summation was if all Senate Democrats can agree to "not be doormats" for the nomination process, and get one Republican to "flip". Yep, it's basically what we already know, but under the "Hey, Doug Jones was elected in Alabama, so it can happen" scenario. Didn't mince words about it being about protecting Roe v. Wade though.

Senator Chris Murphy was on afterwards, and basically admitted they can't do it on their own, they need all the public pressure of the Democratic voters who voted to keep the supreme court favorable to Roe v. Wade, and also the Democratic voters who didn't.
I think the absolute most Democrats can achieve is getting the process pushed past election day (which I'm not in favor of anyway; I don't want anything that might goose Republican turnout). I also agree with Pigeon's take that Manchin and some others might give the Republicans bipartisan cover to just get the confirmation over with.

Not a single Republican will flip. A president's SC pick hasn't been voted down on the floor since Robert Bork. If Trump nominated someone heinously unqualified, they might pressure him to pick someone else, but they're not flipping on the floor. Someone's getting confirmed.
 

Punished Goku

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
9,952
So Maddow went 25 minutes straight tonight with her opening. Wasn't in the mood for it until about 10 minutes in, she began with Luther Strange, after all.

But the summation was if all Senate Democrats can agree to "not be doormats" for the nomination process, and get one Republican to "flip". Yep, it's basically what we already know, but under the "Hey, Doug Jones was elected in Alabama, so it can happen" scenario. Didn't mince words about it being about protecting Roe v. Wade though.

Senator Chris Murphy was on afterwards, and basically admitted they can't do it on their own, they need all the public pressure of the Democratic voters who voted to keep the supreme court favorable to Roe v. Wade, and also the Democratic voters who didn't.
Got a link?
 

Jack Remington

User requested permanent ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,083
If Dems can get to 51 in November, they still have a great shot at eventually securing a 5-4 liberal court via the Thomas seat.

My thought is that if they get to 51 this year, they're unlikely to lose their majority in either 2020 (should be a Dem WH victory that leads to a bunch of the 2014 losses flipping back), or the 2022 midterm (the GOP did about as well in the 2016 races as it could possibly do).

The biggest risk will be 2024 when this year's seats are up again, likely with a Dem incumbent running for re-election. But that's a solid 6 year window.
 

Dr. Benton Quest

Resettlement Advisor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,367
I think the absolute most Democrats can achieve is getting the process pushed past election day (which I'm not in favor of anyway; I don't want anything that might goose Republican turnout). I also agree with Pigeon's take that Manchin and some others might give the Republicans bipartisan cover to just get the confirmation over with.

Not a single Republican will flip. A president's SC pick hasn't been voted down on the floor since Robert Bork. If Trump nominated someone heinously unqualified, they might pressure him to pick someone else, but they're not flipping on the floor. Someone's getting confirmed.
This is the correct take. We have to just accept it, internalize it, and use it to engergize voters.

I hate it, but it's our reality.

He's laughing merrily while observing a fine specimen
Stop hacking me.
 

Mr.Mike

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,677
I know this is a Soviet Leader making an ass of himself but what are the details?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikita_Khrushchev#Agricultural_policy

Since the 1940s, Khrushchev had advocated the cultivation of corn (maize) in the Soviet Union.[157] He established a corn institute in Ukraine and ordered thousands of acres to be planted with corn in the Virgin Lands.[158] In February 1955, Khrushchev gave a speech in which he advocated an Iowa-style corn belt in the Soviet Union, and a Soviet delegation visited the U.S. state that summer. While their intent was to visit only small farms, the delegation chief was approached by farmer and corn salesman Roswell Garst, who persuaded him to insist on visiting Garst's large farm.[158] The Iowan visited the Soviet Union in September, where he became great friends with Khrushchev, and Garst sold the USSR 5,000 short tons (4,500 t) of seed corn.[159] Garst warned the Soviets to grow the corn in the southern part of the country, and to ensure there were sufficient stocks of fertilizer, insecticides, and herbicides.[160] This, however, was not done, as Khrushchev sought to plant corn even in Siberia, and without the necessary chemicals. While Khrushchev warned against those who "would have us plant the whole planet with corn", he displayed a great passion for corn, so much so that when he visited a Latvian kolkhoz, he stated that some in his audience were probably wondering, "Will Khrushchev say something about corn or won't he?"[160] He did, rebuking the farmers for not planting more corn.[160] The corn experiment was not a great success, and he later wrote that overenthusiastic officials, wanting to please him, had overplanted without laying the proper groundwork, and "as a result corn was discredited as a silage crop—and so was I".[160]

http://soviethistory.msu.edu/1961-2/corn-campaign/

Just as he promoted the Virgin Lands Program as a solution to the grain problem, so Nikita Khrushchev touted the expansion of corn cultivation as a solution to the livestock problem. "There will be no communism if our country has as much metal and cement as you like but meat and grain are in short supply," he remarked in early 1954. To increase the supply of meat, Khrushchev sought at every opportunity to popularize corn as a fodder crop. Seed corn was imported from the United States, a corn research institute was established in Ukraine, the Ministry of Agriculture issued a new scientific journal entitled Corn, a Corn Pavilion was opened at the All-Union Agricultural Exhibition, and sown acreage of corn rose from 4.3 million hectares in 1954 to 18 million hectares in 1955. Thanks to favorably hot weather during two successive years' growing seasons, corn harvests were abundant. It appeared that "Mr. Corn" ("Kukuruzshchik") had achieved another agricultural "miracle."

But rather than concentrating on more efficient methods of cultivating, fertilizing, and mechanically harvesting corn, Soviet agricultural authorities continued to expand corn acreage to areas lacking in appropriate climatic conditions and sufficient labor supplies. By 1960 total acreage had increased to 28 million hectares and reached 37 million by 1962. The latter year, cool and rainy in the spring and early summer throughout European Russia, proved disastrous for corn. Some 70 to 80 per cent of the acreage planted died. Even in southern regions, where grain corn harvests rose from four million tons in 1953 to 14 million in 1964, yields remained low and labor inputs averaged three times higher than inputs for wheat. What made matters worse was that all the while, hay production had declined throughout the country, from 64 million tons in 1953 to 47 million in 1965. Collective farmers' suspicions of corn as an "alien" crop were vindicated, but not before a great deal of damage had been done to Soviet agriculture and Khrushchev's reputation as a wise leader.
 

CatDoggo

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
775
Because I hate myself, I went and looked at the heavily brigaded r/politics thread on Kennedy retiring and holy shit Trump supporters really do live for nothing but 'liberal tears', don't they? It almost makes me want everything to crash and burn so that these smug fuckers will finally hurt a little.
 

Albert

Member
Oct 25, 2017
866
While Khrushchev warned against those who "would have us plant the whole planet with corn", he displayed a great passion for corn, so much so that when he visited a Latvian kolkhoz, he stated that some in his audience were probably wondering, "Will Khrushchev say something about corn or won't he?"[160] He did, rebuking the farmers for not planting more corn.[160] [160]
I don't know why, but this put a smile on my face.
 

Jack Remington

User requested permanent ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
3,083
Because I hate myself, I went and looked at the heavily brigaded r/politics thread on Kennedy retiring and holy shit Trump supporters really do live for nothing but 'liberal tears', don't they? It almost makes me want everything to crash and burn so that these smug fuckers will finally hurt a little.

I always go into those and sort by Controversial, because apparently I want to lower my life expectancy.
 

Dr. Benton Quest

Resettlement Advisor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,367
Because I hate myself, I went and looked at the heavily brigaded r/politics thread on Kennedy retiring and holy shit Trump supporters really do live for nothing but 'liberal tears', don't they? It almost makes me want everything to crash and burn so that these smug fuckers will finally hurt a little.
I want nothing more, but we can't hurt them.

Poor whites identify with rich whites, and rich whites could literally not give a shit about anything but racism and money.

The only way we hurt them is from the top down. Remove their power from the Congress, and you'll suddenly see them very interested in 'social justice'.
 

VectorPrime

Banned
Apr 4, 2018
11,781
If Dems pack the courts a 6-5 liberal majority would turn into a 8-3 pretty quickly if Thomas and Alito retire/die.
 

ned_ballad

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
48,255
Rochester, New York
I want nothing more, but we can't hurt them.

Poor whites identify with rich whites, and rich whites could literally not give a shit about anything but racism and money.

The only way we hurt them is from the top down. Removed their power from the Congress, and you'll suddenly see them very interested in 'social justice'.
I mean, we could pretty easily hurt them badly by ending certain subsidies and writing laws specifically to help larger population centers

If we really wanted to.
 

Dr. Benton Quest

Resettlement Advisor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,367

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
There have been rumblings about Thomas wanting to retire. Nobody cared until now because it would just mean replacing one solidly conservative stooge with another.

He has to see that his window to have a Republican president nominate my successor might be shrinking quickly. If Democrats win the Senate this year and/or win the presidency in 2020, he may have to wait another 11 years (until 2029) to retire. If there are already rumors about his getting restless at 70, I doubt he'll want to wait that long. My gut tells me he lacks RBG's stubbornness and fortitude.
 

Stinkles

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,459
I wonder how many cycles of: GOP starts war, wrecks economy and gives massive tax breaks to billionaires, Dems win and slowly fix shit, GOP starts war, wrecks economy and gives massive tax breaks to billionaires rinse repeat; that we'll have before racist morons figure it out.
 

CatDoggo

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
775
I want nothing more, but we can't hurt them.

Poor whites identify with rich whites, and rich whites could literally not give a shit about anything but racism and money.

The only way we hurt them is from the top down. Remove their power from the Congress, and you'll suddenly see them very interested in 'social justice'.

I've come to realize that I genuinely hate them with every fiber of my being. I genuinely thought people like this who get such a kick out of 'dem tears' would start to drop the act once things got bad enough, but now it's painfully clear they're still having the time of their life. These people genuinely want someone like me to suffer as much as possible so that they can have a laugh and have someone to look down on. I don't give them the benefit of the doubt anymore. I despise them as much as they despise me. They'll sit there giggling about 'owning the dems' even as the country they claim they love goes down in flames. I kinda hate that they've made me as spiteful as they are.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
I wonder how many cycles of: GOP starts war, wrecks economy and gives massive tax breaks to billionaires, Dems win and slowly fix shit, GOP starts war, wrecks economy and gives massive tax breaks to billionaires rinse repeat; that we'll have before racist morons figure it out.

Not until they are less than 20% of the US population and all the rigging they do can't save an election outside of actual tampering, which imo will happen in 2020.

That 20% looks like 45-50 percent on paper with suppression and gerrymandering.
 

Blader

Member
Oct 27, 2017
26,623
We've seen multiple polls now where Warren seems to greatly hurt Bernie's numbers.
Huh, I was wondering why Bernie seems to poll so lowly for a guy who was a popular run-up not two years ago and - I'm told - one of the most popular political figures in the country today. But Warren and Bernie cannibalizing each's other base makes sense.
 

Deleted member 17092

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
20,360
Does the irony of Fox crying about injecting race in to an election really need to be pointed out?

Edit: Not attacking you Freeze, just more of a general thought. Republicans are beyond pathetic at this point.

Yes, fox news is the mouthpiece of this fascist adminstration and someone needs to point it out to all the fascists to latch onto.
 

Linkura

Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,943
I think it's more for the POS anti-science chick from RI I know who voted for Stein cuz Trump would be bad but Killary would be worse. She'd start WW3, yknow.

*hic* glory glory hallelujah *hic*
At least her vote didn't "count." Much like how my husband's Bernie vote in the general (write-in) didn't count because we're in MA. I still give him shit for it, but he maintains he didn't matter because we were in MA (which is true... but I still give him shit for it). He says he would have voted for Hillary if we weren't in one of the bluest states in the nation, FWIW.


Finally talking some sense.

She's running
This reminds me of Idiocracy and how they tried to grow plants with Brawndo instead of water.
 

Autodidact

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,729
Harry Enten assuaging my fears about this opening goosing GOP turnout:

Seems to me looking at polling that GOP voters are already quite enthusiastic (Pew), as likely to be certain to vote as Dems (Gallup), and have turned out in strong numbers in in major elections this cycle. It's just that vs. 10/14 Dems are far more enthusiastic than they were...
My pt being is IDK how much more you energize the GOP base. I mean SC stuff doesn't hurt, but look at VA where @patrickruffini found turnout among modeled GOPers was as high as 2013. It was just Dems were way more up compared to that baseline.

One of the replies, far from being a dumpster fire, states it more succinctly:
Are you basically saying Republicans are always enthusiastic, but there's simply fewer of them, so election results depend on Democratic turnout?
 

JustinP

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,343
I agree, but how do you do it? If no one from the GOP flips then it's a done deal.
This seat may be lost, but I think the important lesson is the "new rules" bit -- it's not about what was normal before Trump, it's not about paying back republicans or trump by using their rules, it's about dems reevaluating the current state of play and inventing new rules they play by for this and future SCOTUS seats, but also every other fight.
 

VectorPrime

Banned
Apr 4, 2018
11,781
Harry Enten assuaging my fears about this opening goosing GOP turnout:




One of the replies, far from being a dumpster fire, states it more succinctly:


The Kennedy replacement won't motivate GOP voters at all if it's done, as we expect it to be, safely before midterms. All it'll do is motivate Dems who are rightfully mad as all hell.
 

Kirblar

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
30,744
This seat may be lost, but I think the important lesson is the "new rules" bit -- it's not about what was normal before Trump, it's not about paying back republicans or trump by using their rules, it's about dems reevaluating the current state of play and inventing new rules they play by for this SCOTUS seat, future SCOTUS seats, and every other fight.
To change the rules you need to change the board.
 

MizerMan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,182
Harry Enten assuaging my fears about this opening goosing GOP turnout:




One of the replies, far from being a dumpster fire, states it more succinctly:


Basically, even though GOP voters are already as motivated as they can be, it won't really matter as long as Dem voters are as motivated (even more so) and come out in droves (as they have).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.