That's the only conclusion I can come to, between the announcements that noted loon Michele Bachmann is thinking about running for Tina Smith's (formerly Al Franken's) Senate seat in Minnesota (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/01/02/michele-bachmann-tells-televangelist-she-might-run-for-al-frankens-senate-seat/?utm_term=.f8f0f73d6dde) and professional bigot Joe Arpaio is running for Jeff Flake's in Arizona (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42624410).
I'll make the popcorn. If the GOP is going to run their trumpiest nutjobs this yearâ€"and Bannon has said he wants to run his brand of wingnuts against more mainstream Republican congressfolk, Roy Moores coast to coast (with or without his additional baggage)â€"I can even see celebrating with champagne come November.
I don't know, it seems the Republicans can do just about anything and still win elections. But Moore's loss was encouraging, maybe we'll see more like that. I was really disappointed in Franken having to step down.
(https://i.imgur.com/WVR8YMn.gif)
Oh great ... batshit crazy Bachmann is hearing voices in her head again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WH4p1RUfF9A
How appropriate it is for her to float the idea of a possible Senate run on the TV show of that infamous paragon of hypocrisy, Jim Bakker. (Remember Jim and Tammy Faye and the PTL fall from grace ?)
Don't worry, Oprah will save the Democrats ... with running mate Ellen ;-)
I'm not exactly optimistic about the future of this country, but I'll hold onto a little hope that the shit show the Republicans are putting on will convince those in the center that the Left and the Right are not even close to being equal evils.
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 10, 2018, 12:27:43 AM
I'm not exactly optimistic about the future of this country, but I'll hold onto a little hope that the shit show the Republicans are putting on will convince those in the center that the Left and the Right are not even close to being equal evils.
I will vote I-party, or not at all. That is true individualism. I have nothing in common with my fellow Americans, other than disdain for politicians.
The crazier the Rebulica candidates, the better. There HAS to be a bottom SOMEWHERE. The sooner they find it, the better off us non-whackies will be.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 11:11:39 AM
The crazier the Rebulica candidates, the better. There HAS to be a bottom SOMEWHERE. The sooner they find it, the better off us non-whackies will be.
Does there? I used to think so. I'm not so sure any more. But I really, really hope you are right and we have found the bottom now. We have......................haven't we??????
Quote from: Mike Cl on January 10, 2018, 11:43:05 AM
Does there? I used to think so. I'm not so sure any more. But I really, really hope you are right and we have found the bottom now. We have......................haven't we??????
Even the Venetians found solid ground under the mud. And there is that Monty Python sketch about the castle that kept sinking.
There IS a bottom. I hope to live long enough to see it. It has to get better after that.
It almost seems like the party in control of Congress automatically loses control in the election following the election of a president of their party.
Quote from: SGOS on January 10, 2018, 12:08:20 PM
It almost seems like the party in control of Congress automatically loses control in the election following the election of a president of their party.
Dare I point out that too many voters are actually stupid? They respond more to "charisma" ,being unable to recognize skill.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 12:30:40 PM
Dare I point out that too many voters are actually stupid? They respond more to "charisma" ,being unable to recognize skill.
Most of the time when I go to the polls, I look at the crowd and say to myself, "We are so fucked!"
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 12:30:40 PM
Dare I point out that too many voters are actually stupid? They respond more to "charisma" ,being unable to recognize skill.
I've noticed that pattern too. Control always seems to flipflop from one side to the other. After a President serves 8 years (Kami help us if Trump is re-elected), the opposite party wins the next Presidency. The thought patterns of those in the center seems to be, "I don't like how things are. Maybe the other team will do better." So Republicans make a mess, people vote them out. Democrats don't fix that mess fast enough, they're elected out. And the cycle continues.
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 10, 2018, 01:41:16 PM
I've noticed that pattern too. Control always seems to flipflop from one side to the other. After a President serves 8 years (Kami help us if Trump is re-elected), the opposite party wins the next Presidency. The thought patterns of those in the center seems to be, "I don't like how things are. Maybe the other team will do better." So Republicans make a mess, people vote them out. Democrats don't fix that mess fast enough, they're elected out. And the cycle continues.
It is worse. The Republicans ruin the general economy to give more to the rich. The Democrats get elected and have to fix things. Then people get unhappy and go for the Republicans again.
Quote from: SGOS on January 10, 2018, 12:08:20 PM
It almost seems like the party in control of Congress automatically loses control in the election following the election of a president of their party.
Typically, midterm elections go against the party in the White House more than they do the party in control of the houses of Congress. That's what made the 1998 midterms so stunning, forcing the Newtster to resign: he pitched the '98 midterms as a referendum on President Clinton and Witchfinder General Ken Starr's hatchet job... and lost seats. It was the first time in 64 years that the non-presidential party failed to gain seats in a midterm, and the first in 176 years that the non-presidential party failed to pick up seats in the second midterm of a President's term. The 2002 midterms were similarly anomalous -- pickups for the GOP in the wake of 9/11. They didn't lose control of the House until the 2006 midterms that swept in 31 new Democrats... which were swept out again in Obama's first midterms.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 11:11:39 AM
The crazier the Rebulica candidates, the better. There HAS to be a bottom SOMEWHERE. The sooner they find it, the better off us non-whackies will be.
Our Chinese overlords will eventually lose their patience. They understand the current US government is a new Reality show, and that the American people are too stupid to get it.
(https://i.imgflip.com/1fb7eh.jpg)
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 10, 2018, 02:39:44 PM
(https://i.imgflip.com/1fb7eh.jpg)
Looks like that guy got it ... advanced aging illness.
Well, in the movie he was pretty old.
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 10, 2018, 02:41:59 PM
Well, in the movie he was pretty old.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA7J0KkanzM
Entropy in action, suddenly. Also don't trust women.
Quote from: trdsf on January 10, 2018, 02:12:14 PM
Typically, midterm elections go against the party in the White House more than they do the party in control of the houses of Congress. That's what made the 1998 midterms so stunning, forcing the Newtster to resign: he pitched the '98 midterms as a referendum on President Clinton and Witchfinder General Ken Starr's hatchet job... and lost seats. It was the first time in 64 years that the non-presidential party failed to gain seats in a midterm, and the first in 176 years that the non-presidential party failed to pick up seats in the second midterm of a President's term. The 2002 midterms were similarly anomalous -- pickups for the GOP in the wake of 9/11. They didn't lose control of the House until the 2006 midterms that swept in 31 new Democrats... which were swept out again in Obama's first midterms.
My political science paper was comparing Goldwater's takeover of the Republican party and McGovern's of the Democrats. And it was so polite by comparison today...
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 02:59:48 PM
My political science paper was comparing Goldwater's takeover of the Republican party and McGovern's of the Democrats. And it was so polite by comparison today...
Yea, too bad they didn't kill their parties, so we could have started over in 1974!
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 02:59:48 PM
My political science paper was comparing Goldwater's takeover of the Republican party and McGovern's of the Democrats. And it was so polite by comparison today...
Yeah, I seem to recall a day when Democrats and Republicans could go at it hammer and tongs all day... and after hours, be perfectly friendly and civil with each other. Reagan and Tip O'Neill were like that -- wonderfully partisan all day, wonderfully civil after 'work'.
I think that may be because neither of them really believed in their political tripe.
Quote from: Unbeliever on January 10, 2018, 03:23:43 PM
I think that may be because neither of them really believed in their political tripe.
It might also be that they knew they had differences but could be civil about them. A lesson unlearned today...
Quote from: trdsf on January 10, 2018, 03:22:31 PM
Yeah, I seem to recall a day when Democrats and Republicans could go at it hammer and tongs all day... and after hours, be perfectly friendly and civil with each other. Reagan and Tip O'Neill were like that -- wonderfully partisan all day, wonderfully civil after 'work'.
Just like crooked prosecuting and defense attorneys. A bad thing. I want them to kill each other, permanently ;-)
Quote from: Cavebear on January 10, 2018, 03:25:18 PM
It might also be that they knew they had differences but could be civil about them. A lesson unlearned today...
O'Neill was really clear that he personally liked Reagan, no matter how much they disagreed on policy. There was a sense on both sides of the partisan divide that the left and right both had the betterment of the country at heart, but disagreed on how best to get there.
I no longer believe that the Republicans give even the slightest shit about the improvement of the country, of course.
Quote from: trdsf on January 10, 2018, 04:40:37 PM
O'Neill was really clear that he personally liked Reagan, no matter how much they disagreed on policy. There was a sense on both sides of the partisan divide that the left and right both had the betterment of the country at heart, but disagreed on how best to get there.
I no longer believe that the Republicans give even the slightest shit about the improvement of the country, of course.
I won't disagree in the slightest there. But the Republicans might be out of power after 2018 for a decade. And that might mean the Democrats can un-screw-up the laws... As they are often forced to do.
Quote from: SGOS on January 10, 2018, 12:08:20 PM
It almost seems like the party in control of Congress automatically loses control in the election following the election of a president of their party.
The blatant abortion of Obamacare sunk the 2010 Congress. It wouldn't have mattered if Romney had been in the White House.
Dems should just hand out $100 bills to each Dem voter at each polling station, as a thank you.
Quote from: Blackleaf on January 10, 2018, 01:41:16 PM
I've noticed that pattern too. Control always seems to flipflop from one side to the other. After a President serves 8 years (Kami help us if Trump is re-elected), the opposite party wins the next Presidency. The thought patterns of those in the center seems to be, "I don't like how things are. Maybe the other team will do better." So Republicans make a mess, people vote them out. Democrats don't fix that mess fast enough, they're elected out. And the cycle continues.
Only if you back the two-headed Bohemian Grove party.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 18, 2018, 10:31:49 AM
I won't disagree in the slightest there. But the Republicans might be out of power after 2018 for a decade. And that might mean the Democrats can un-screw-up the laws... As they are often forced to do.
Yeah, like they tried to do in the 1860 election. Just say no to New England.
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 01:25:54 PM
The blatant abortion of Obamacare sunk the 2010 Congress. It wouldn't have mattered if Romney had been in the White House.
Dems should just hand out $100 bills to each Dem voter at each polling station, as a thank you.
Obamacare was a first step to catch up to the REST Of The World. And the Repubs hated it because it helped the poor and needy. The Repubs should read 'A Christmas Carol'.
HINT! It isn't really about Scrooge. It is about the world he lived in. It was a novel describing the social transition underway at the time.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 18, 2018, 01:39:33 PM
Obamacare was a first step to catch up to the REST Of The World. And the Repubs hated it because it helped the poor and needy. The Repubs should read 'A Christmas Carol'.
HINT! It isn't really about Scrooge. It is about the world he lived in. It was a novel describing the social transition underway at the time.
Move to Canada, Kiss your Trudeau ;-) As a Federal retiree, don't you get free everything yet?
Obamacare was Romneycare ... from Heritage Foundation ... pure Republican crap, redressed as Democrat crap.
If you want to do something, there are seniors who cost $5000 per month, in nursing homes all over America. Give a little.
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 01:44:23 PM
Move to Canada, Kiss your Trudeau ;-) As a Federal retiree, don't you get free everything yet?
Obamacare was Romneycare ... from Heritage Foundation ... pure Republican crap, redressed as Democrat crap.
If you want to do something, there are seniors who cost $5000 per month, in nursing homes all over America. Give a little.
I know Obamacare was RomneyCare. Give me some credit... Which is why the Repubs hatred of it is all the more irrational.
And BTW, my elderly Dad stayed with me several years so he could avoid that $5000 monthly cost. He finally couldn't stand upright and I couldn't lift him anymore.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 18, 2018, 02:04:21 PM
I know Obamacare was RomneyCare. Give me some credit... Which is why the Repubs hatred of it is all the more irrational.
And BTW, my elderly Dad stayed with me several years so he could avoid that $5000 monthly cost. He finally couldn't stand upright and I couldn't lift him anymore.
Yes, life with seniors sucks like that. Went thru it with my mom. But no, you have irrational reaction to Republicans ... they didn't hate it, they pretended to hate it. They are getting money from the crooked insurance companies, same as the Democrats. In that regard, they are just the same damn party. Democrats are all for Romneycare as long as Obama proposes it ... with a friend like that, who needs enemies!
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 02:14:39 PM
Yes, life with seniors sucks like that. Went thru it with my mom. But no, you have irrational reaction to Republicans ... they didn't hate it, they pretended to hate it. They are getting money from the crooked insurance companies, same as the Democrats. In that regard, they are just the same damn party. Democrats are all for Romneycare as long as Obama proposes it ... with a friend like that, who needs enemies!
I hate it when you are right. Fortunately, this isn't one of those times. I say that ObamaCare didn't go far enough to catch us up to TROTW!
Quote from: Cavebear on January 18, 2018, 02:18:29 PM
I hate it when you are right. Fortunately, this isn't one of those times. I say that ObamaCare didn't go far enough to catch us up to TROTW!
I support that ... but not Single-Payer. You have to cut the insurance companies completely out of it. It can be afforded, if you stop the existing foreign policy, so you can cut the DoD in half, and use the savings. Paying for all the college student loans is pocket change ... but reps want to suck loan officer cocks.
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 02:21:23 PM
I support that ... but not Single-Payer. You have to cut the insurance companies completely out of it. It can be afforded, if you stop the existing foreign policy, so you can cut the DoD in half, and use the savings. Paying for all the college student loans is pocket change ... but reps want to suck loan officer cocks.
Businesses aren't government agencies. Aren't the Repubs the ones who say commercial competition is good? Some technologies get outdated. Otherwise, I will buy a whale oil lamp company and sue the electric bulb ones...
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 02:21:23 PM
I support that ... but not Single-Payer. You have to cut the insurance companies completely out of it. It can be afforded, if you stop the existing foreign policy, so you can cut the DoD in half, and use the savings. Paying for all the college student loans is pocket change ... but reps want to suck loan officer cocks.
Even I talk about single payer. But I don't envision it ever. No politician is going to kill the insurance companies, but to get something like universal, they will have to be downsized. Ideally, they should be removed entirely from the picture. Don't panic. Insurance companies will never die. Even with Medicare, which most Americans see as fantastic, it's still all relative, and you will still have to buy extra coverage from a corporation, as I now pay out of pocket approaching the amount it cost me before I had Medicare. Medicare is quite good, but don't expect it to it save your ass by itself. Americans will never see full coverage in Medicare or universal, no matter how much it would benefit everyone, as "universal" suggests it should. Insurance companies hold the cards, as they hold the politicians. But to get something like so called universal coverage, we will still be owing the insurance companies, and quite a lot at that, I fear. Corporations will survive. We still haven't taken a baby step toward achieving something that approaches universal.
Obamacare is not it. It's forced participation that serves the identity politics that Sanders reasoned is failing the Democratic party and was part of what lost the White House. I don't know that I agree with Sanders. I'm not a strategist, but I am willing to consider that he might be right. I'm pretty sure the others are wrong. If he's right, social legislation needs to help everyone, not just those who are identified as having some kind of identity, be they people of color, women, or the poor. And it needs to include the 1 percent of the economic elite too in order to be universal.
Quote from: Cavebear on January 18, 2018, 03:06:10 PM
Businesses aren't government agencies. Aren't the Repubs the ones who say commercial competition is good? Some technologies get outdated. Otherwise, I will buy a whale oil lamp company and sue the electric bulb ones...
insurance is fraud ... it isn't high technology.
Politics is fraud too. Honesty would kill half of the world economy, and I am not sure of the other half. We need WWIII. Maybe the mutant humans in Planet of the Apes II will be more reasonable ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gr71NZTjRu4
Quote from: SGOS on January 18, 2018, 06:32:53 PM
Even I talk about single payer. But I don't envision it ever. No politician is going to kill the insurance companies, but to get something like universal, they will have to be downsized. Ideally, they should be removed entirely from the picture. Don't panic. Insurance companies will never die. Even with Medicare, which most Americans see as fantastic, it's still all relative, and you will still have to buy extra coverage from a corporation, as I now pay out of pocket approaching the amount it cost me before I had Medicare. Medicare is quite good, but don't expect it to it save your ass by itself. Americans will never see full coverage in Medicare or universal, no matter how much it would benefit everyone, as "universal" suggests it should. Insurance companies hold the cards, as they hold the politicians. But to get something like so called universal coverage, we will still be owing the insurance companies, and quite a lot at that, I fear. Corporations will survive. We still haven't taken a baby step toward achieving something that approaches universal.
Obamacare is not it. It's forced participation that serves the identity politics that Sanders reasoned is failing the Democratic party and was part of what lost the White House. I don't know that I agree with Sanders. I'm not a strategist, but I am willing to consider that he might be right. I'm pretty sure the others are wrong. If he's right, social legislation needs to help everyone, not just those who are identified as having some kind of identity, be they people of color, women, or the poor. And it needs to include the 1 percent of the economic elite too in order to be universal.
Pooling stupidity, just makes compounded stupidity. Just enslave the doctors, make them work for free. Particularly Dr Zhivago.
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on January 19, 2018, 12:29:19 AM
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
I had a teacher who was adamant that Trump was an intentionally terrible candidate who's in league with the Clintons and was going to throw the race to ensure that Clinton would be the next President. I was going to check back with him after the election to see if he was open to amending his theory, but I never did.
Quote from: Hydra009 on January 19, 2018, 12:44:51 AM
I had a teacher who was adamant that Trump was an intentionally terrible candidate who's in league with the Clintons and was going to throw the race to ensure that Clinton would be the next President. I was going to check back with him after the election to see if he was open to amending his theory, but I never did.
I'd be curious to know how he arrived at that conclusion.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on January 19, 2018, 12:29:19 AM
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
The wise say little, but what they say is correct.
We will see soon, if Trump signs the new bill, just passed by the Senate, that declares that NSA is god!
Quote from: SGOS on January 19, 2018, 06:19:44 AM
I'd be curious to know how he arrived at that conclusion.
I find it incredible that Trump ran, I find it incredible that he won the nomination, I find it incredible that he "won" the election.
So obviously an Illuminati conspiracy, and the Clintons are a deep part of the Deep State. Didn't the Clinton's encourage him to run in the first place? And didn't even Democrat commentators after the election say that Hillary had decided that if Trump won the nomination, he would the be the weakest possible opponent? Of course their plans turned to ashes. Hubris burns.
Quote from: Baruch on January 19, 2018, 07:24:53 AM
I find it incredible that Trump ran, I find it incredible that he won the nomination, I find it incredible that he "won" the election.
So obviously an Illuminati conspiracy, and the Clintons are a deep part of the Deep State. Didn't the Clinton's encourage him to run in the first place? And didn't even Democrat commentators after the election say that Hillary had decided that if Trump won the nomination, he would the be the weakest possible opponent? Of course their plans turned to ashes. Hubris burns.
It would seem that Trump was really only the second weakest opponent.
Quote from: SGOS on January 19, 2018, 06:19:44 AM
I'd be curious to know how he arrived at that conclusion.
Superimpose a dartboard on a photo of the human brain.
Less flippant explaination: dislike of Trump and dislike of Clinton and trying to make sense of it all in a way that "feels" correct can generate a variety of conspiracy theories.
Quote from: Baruch on January 18, 2018, 09:21:04 PM
Pooling stupidity, just makes compounded stupidity. Just enslave the doctors, make them work for free. Particularly Dr Zhivago.
We'd probably end up with Dr. Srangelove.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on January 19, 2018, 12:29:19 AM
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
I doubt that most Republicans are convinced, either.
Quote from: Hydra009 on January 19, 2018, 11:43:59 AM
Superimpose a dartboard on a photo of the human brain.
Less flippant explaination: dislike of Trump and dislike of Clinton and trying to make sense of it all in a way that "feels" correct can generate a variety of conspiracy theories.
Yeah, that's what conspiracy theories often do. They provide a sense of closure when there isn't enough information or when the information is not to ones liking. If the theory is paradoxical, it's even more tempting, because people are drawn to paradoxes for some reason. I think they are intellectually titillating, as they do require thought, although not always rational thought.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on January 19, 2018, 12:29:19 AM
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
Trump cares nothing about political labels. He is totally Trumpite--period.
Quote from: Jason Harvestdancer on January 19, 2018, 12:29:19 AM
I'm still not convinced that Trumps conversion to Republican was genuine.
It isn't. Trump's only belief is money. And, it seems, he never wanted to win the office at all; just leverage his greater fame into new business deals.
Enough people around him have mentioned that, as election night progressed, he was first surprised and then horrified that he was winning.
This Trump administration has "falling apart around him while he slowly goes mad" all over it. I would hope for a heart attack (all those fast food dinners, borderline obesity, and high "bad" cholestoral), but then there would be Pence, and he is no prize either.
Pence and Sessions are Sith. I will take Donald any day. The Resistance aren't Star Wars material either. More like Trade Federation trying to screw over Naboo.
Quote from: Baruch on January 24, 2018, 07:23:24 AM
Pence and Sessions are Sith. I will take Donald any day. The Resistance aren't Star Wars material either. More like Trade Federation trying to screw over Naboo.
You are welcome to Trump. He evades all his public statements. He suits you like a glove. And I don't mean OJ's...