Yup there are ways you can approach it to make him look dumb. That is what they should do.

Don is having a grand time. Jokes with Putin about election influence, gets down with MBS (Trump praises Saudi crown prince, ignores questions on Khashoggi killing), and invites KJU to party in the DMZ. His people/Best People.

Gimpy wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Gimpy wrote:What does the senate map look like in 2020? If I could choose between replacing Trump with Biden or flipping the senate, I’m taking the senate 100 times out of 100.

This is an insane taek btw

I was just asking if the senate could flip and pointing out that it’s as important as the presidency. Not saying that it’s one or the other.

It's not as important as the presidency. In Obama's last two years with a GOP Congress he entered into the Iran Deal and Paris accords (not that those were great things IMO, but they happened). He also didn't trot around the world fellating Kim Jong Un and trashing our allies in NATO and whatnot. In Trump's first three years he's torn up various agreements, slapped tariffs on everything that moves, done a lot of not great and inhumane things on the immigration front, and seems to be teetering on the brink of declaring war via tweet all without the backing of Congress.

In order to enact lasting policy change you need both houses of Congress and the White House. But if you're only gonna have one of the two, you can achieve (or destroy) a lot more with the White House than with Congress.

When you have an incompetent criminal in office, having a senate and house that don’t bow down to him would make a world of difference. Trump would likely be impeached and removed from office if there were a democratic majority in the legislative branch. Hell, we’d probably be looking at President Pelosi before this term is up.

I was mainly referring to the awful shit that’s being enabled because Mitch McConnell is a shitstain who doesn’t care about duty.

And yea, I don’t like Biden and have zero faith in him doing anything productive in the interest of the public while he has a Republican senate. So at least I’d have the catharsis of watching Trump go down miserably.

We're probably approaching agree to disagree territory here, and I have very different opinions and goals from most of you on politics so maybe we're just talking past each other. But a few things...

The first paragraph about how Trump would be impeached if the Dems had the Senate is I think obviously wrong, and the addendum that Pelosi might become president is several magnitudes of more wrong beyond that. Unless the Dem Congress was funding off the books kill squads to hit Pence, I suppose.

As for the other bit, we have a House with a Dem majority that doesn't seem to much like Trump. Does he appear way more constrained or law abiding? He's the same fucking idiot who was president when the GOP had the House. Swapping Chuck Schumer in for Mitch McConnell as Majority Leader isn't going to change that. Trump would continue to be 'enabled' to do things in his second term because he would be president, and the head of the executive branch of government.

As for Biden, I don't see any reason to think he wouldn't try to do what he could from the executive branch despite a GOP senate a la Obama. I dunno.

TenuredVulture wrote:I think it's better if you leave off the "go fuck yourself".

I wonder if instead of running away from "basket of deplorables" if it would've helped Hillary to double down on it. I guess it wouldn't be good for the country as it is divisive, but we're pretty much past that as a reason for doing or not doing a thing anyway.

I also think it's a bit too vague. Sure, he IS a vile, racist liar, but it's also an easy thing to brush off. If a candidate is going to attack him that way, bring up specific things he's done. One nice thing about him being the incumbent rather than the "outsider" is you can actually attack his record and real stuff he's done. In 2016, he got to just pretend he never did anything wrong because there's no official record because as a D-list celebrity game show host, he didn't do things like have to vote on the Iraq war, etc.

JFLNYC wrote:You’ll never beat him at that game. It’s his home turf and he’s too good at it. Rubio tried it last time.

Besides he and his supporters don't really mind that he's a vile lying racist piece of shit, and there's others that admire it for him. His whole message has been that if you're nasty and bullying enough you get what you want, and there's plenty of people that want to be on the winning side enough to go along with.

Now "loser" seems like a far better epithet, has plenty of material and has the advantage of probably really getting his goat. Although for his supporters maybe you spell it "looser." He's made big promises and come back with nothing in North Korea, the Middle East, Syria, Ukraine, China. Dumped the Iran treaty, replaced it with nothing. His own party disowned him on Saudi Arabia. Dumped Obamacare, came back with nothing. Stepped into the immigration "crisis" and made it worse, and lost his wall along the way. Couldn't save coal production. Lost countless staffers, who either just fled or ended up in jail. Tried to kill the Mueller Report and lost. Lost the House of Representatives, lost the census battle. I mean take your pick of whatever works, and there are many more to choose from. My point is you don't emphasize he's an asshole-everyone knows, no one cares. Point out instead how ineffectual and isolated he is, even if you thank God every day for him being ineffectual. #LoserTrump is hardly original but should be more popular.

I wonder what the military thinks off the plan to meet Kim Jong tomorrow at the DMZ since like everything else these days its origin is a tweet from Trump's personal account.

Big news about the President's speech on the 4th. Added security, road and area closures, chaos on the mall and monument areas, but hey, there will be a political speech by a president which has never happened in modern times.

And now the news...

Trump's surprise DMZ invite to Kim Jong Un 'very interesting,' North Korea official says
By Brie Stimson | Fox News

Headline mashup:

Trump suspends new tariffs, U.S. and China to restart trade talks; Trump-Xi meeting at G-20 'went better than expected,' US president says.

No one knows what is happening. We are just living in a random chance world.

Oh, alternately, because we need a new crisis, ICE deportation sweeps are back on immediately.

The idea of the president going out of his way to meet shitheel Kim in the DMZ for shits and giggles is one of those things that used to make most Republicans angry.

Fucking nauseating.

What a shit show. Fucking Ivanka and Jared front and center.

Actually, assuming that this was all arranged by tweet, and was not actually somehow set up ahead of time, it makes it look like Trump has kju jumping through hoops. A more cynical view is that kju is very eager to have this one on one time and keep Trump away from any advisors, or anyone with any knowledge whatsoever. He might give up an old facility or two, but really everybody knows, except maybe Trump, that he will never give up nuclear weapons.

A separate but related story is that apparently the new press secretary got roughed up by the North Korean security contingent. It sounds like she was trying to get the Press close enough to get some good pictures of her boss at the table, but the North Koreans hearing about all this fake news and such engaged in some type of physical altercation.

Trump said earlier Sunday during a news conference with South Korean President Moon Jae-in that Obama "wanted to meet, and Chairman Kim would not meet him."

"The Obama administration was begging for a meeting. They were begging for meetings constantly. And Chairman Kim would not meet with him.”

Former Obama official: ‘Never ever happened, that’s a complete lie.’

https://thehill.com/policy/internationa ... t-with-kim

The presidential hopeful suggested public sentiment toward gay rights issues has come far in a short period of time, saying five years ago if someone at a business meeting in Seattle "made fun of a gay waiter" people would just let it go, according to a pool report of the event. The audience vocally responded to the remark and some in the crowd said homophobic comments would not have gone unchallenged even before five years ago, according to the report.

The event was hosted by public relations executive Roger Nyhus, who is known as a leader in the Seattle gay rights community.

Guess the candidate

Biden won't win this nomination.

pacino wrote:Biden won't win this nomination.

Agree to disagree. We need a candidate who appeals to the middle-aged white men that Trump stole. Biden is that candidate.

pacino wrote:Biden won't win this nomination.

Not a chance. “Nothing will fundamentally change” may not be quite as bad as Arlen Specter’s bragging in front of a camera that he switched parties “in order to get re-elected,” but it’s enough. Particularly if someone can come up with audio.

Once the field thins a bit, if I were one of the realistic candidates left, I would just plaster that line and Biden’s image all over Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Game over.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

pacino wrote:Biden won't win this nomination.

Not a chance. “Nothing will fundamentally change” may not be quite as bad as Arlen Specter’s bragging in front of a camera that he switched parties “in order to get re-elected,” but it’s enough. Particularly if someone can come up with audio.

Once the field thins a bit, if I were one of the realistic candidates left, I would just plaster that line and Biden’s image all over Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Game over.

Again, you and Pacino are looking at this from a progressive's perspective. The majority of Democratic voters are centrists and have no qualms about the restoration of the status quo, which is exactly what Biden is promising.

06hawkalum wrote:

pacino wrote:Biden won't win this nomination.

Agree to disagree. We need a candidate who appeals to the middle-aged white men that Trump stole. Biden is that candidate.

Trump didn't steal any votes from dems when he won, he turned out the gop base in full force. The white republican swing voter is a myth. Chasing middle class conservatives votes lost us 2016 and the same strategy loses again, no matter the candiate. Turning out apathetic and non voters is the key to victory

Appearently most of those eyes on the "debates" were over 55. Something like +65%

06hawkalum wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:

pacino wrote:Biden won't win this nomination.

Not a chance. “Nothing will fundamentally change” may not be quite as bad as Arlen Specter’s bragging in front of a camera that he switched parties “in order to get re-elected,” but it’s enough. Particularly if someone can come up with audio.

Once the field thins a bit, if I were one of the realistic candidates left, I would just plaster that line and Biden’s image all over Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

Game over.

Again, you and Pacino are looking at this from a progressive's perspective. The majority of Democratic voters are centrists and have no qualms about the restoration of the status quo, which is exactly what Biden is promising.

He followed up “nothing will fundamentally change with me in charge” with “you could make fun of a gay waiter at a business lunch five years ago without an issue.”
There are more gaffes coming; the guy can’t keep his foot out of his mouth and the lights are only getting brighter as time goes on.