Mourning in America - Trump Year One: November '16 to

More on the issues Howie Klein writes about---

Can the 2/3 progressive Dems in the House win over this 1/3, plus voters

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/229291-stephanie-murphy-joining-blue-dogs-new-democrats

The combined membership of the New Democrat Coalition and the Blue Dog Coalition represents more than one-third of the Democratic caucus.

Both coalitions have strong bipartisan reputations and a history of working with Republicans. Murphy said she will work with her New Dem colleagues to advocate legislation that strengthens our nation’s middle class and will work with her Blue Dog colleagues to help introduce No Budget, No Pay, which says Members of Congress must pass a budget and appropriations bills on time or they don’t get paid.

Ugh to wasting time on Blue Dog ideas

But I do worry about losing more seats in the Senate unlike sometimes nihilist purist Howie Klein

LOL, fucking idiot.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-38397644

I know Alan Grayson makes pepole wretch, but the link to this interview in Klein's post is a good one:

“Unless there is substantial structural change, the Blue Dogs will continue to make the argument that a populist Democrat, or for that matter a progressive Democrat, which is not exactly the same thing, has no chance of winning – because that’s the way they continue to dominate the statewide machinery,” Grayson said. “Even though they’ve been proved wrong in every single race except for Alex Sink’s race for CFO, every single race for a quarter century.”

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/229174-alan-grayson-florida-democrats-need-someone-message

he seems like an interesting choice for 'people to go to for advice about winning elections'

Thought that was good despite who said it. Too bad Grayson's faults and loss will hurt the reception of that message.

Meanwhile in a related issue --

Garland is not the only judge, who won't get a vote

https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/dozens-of-obamas-judicial-nominees-including-historic-picks?utm_term=.rfXKrNbjY#.vqBVY1Xwr

Abid Qureshi, nominated to the federal bench by President Obama in the fall, would have been the nation’s first Muslim federal judge had the Senate confirmed him. But nominated late in a presidential election year, when traditionally few nominees get a vote, time — and politics — were always against him.
With the US Senate gone for the rest of the year, Qureshi is one of 52 nominees for federal district and appeals courts and the US Supreme Court who won’t make it onto the bench, at least for now. That group includes more than a dozen nominees who, like Qureshi, would have broken racial, gender, and religious barriers....

...The Senate confirmed 20 judges to federal district and appeals courts during Obama’s final two years in office, and left for the holiday recess with 99 court vacancies. More seats are expected to open up by the time Trump takes office in January. Of the vacant seats, 38 are considered “emergencies” by the judiciary because of the caseload. Those numbers don’t include the US Court of International Trade and the US Court of Federal Claims, where there are also open seats.
By comparison, the Senate confirmed 68 federal judges during President George W. Bush’s last two years, according to the judiciary. By the end of December 2008, there were 26 nominees pending and 53 vacancies.

middle american populist rage is probably not going to be channeled towards tearing down an voting system that gives disproportionate voting power to middle american populist rage.

― iatee

because these people have never voted against their own interests before, right? :)

Those people are not going to willingly give more representative power to Ny and cali come on

Even many of his supporters seem to have voted for him because or in spite of his issues. I can't imagine there are many people who don't think he's mentally ill.

― what is the lever disease? (Old Lunch), Wednesday, December 21, 2016 12:59 PM (one hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I don't know I'm having a really hard time imagining this comment not resulting in a giant cartoonish eye roll from 90% of his supporters...

Those people are not going to willingly give more representative power to Ny and cali come on

― Treeship

sigh. y'all are such despair bears! you think it's not possible to sell this by pinning it all on those horrible undemocratic assholes in, i don't know, wyoming?

really, i'm not totally sure what the long-term plan is here. to win back the congress by building a coalition of people whose first priority is to shoot down any idea they personally think is stupid? because "stupid but popular" will beat "considered and nuanced" every damn time.

@dick_nixon
Half the Hill is run by kids who watch "West Wing," the other the American "House of Cards." It's no wonder we're going to hell.

such a shame vaughn meader didn't live long enough to get a twitter account

JFK is nuthin w/out the accent

Doesn't using the popular vote give *less* representative power to the big lefty states? The righty votes from these states would now matter, rather than the entire state tally going to the Dem.

Doesn't using the popular vote give *less* representative power to the big lefty states? The righty votes from these states would now matter, rather than the entire state tally going to the Dem.

― nickn

i don't know, but your argument is plausible, and i will definitely use it with the next populist i'm still on speaking terms with.

sigh. y'all are such despair bears! you think it's not possible to sell this by pinning it all on those horrible undemocratic assholes in, i don't know, wyoming?

dude it's just really fucking annoying to see someone be super optimistic when things look as bleak as they do. just wallow with the rest of us and drop the act

i mean it's clear you haven't even given any thought to these dumb pipe dreams you're selling. what's the point?

really, i'm not totally sure what the long-term plan is here. to win back the congress by building a coalition of people whose first priority is to shoot down any idea they personally think is stupid? because "stupid but popular" will beat "considered and nuanced" every damn time.

'are you interested in joining our movement to subvert the electoral college using something called the national popular vote interstate compact' probably falls under 'considered and nuanced'

Making the popular vote count would help to engage a lot of people who otherwise abstain from voting, I'm sure. When I lived in IN, there was usually no point in voting D ('08 was SHOCKING), so most people I knew didn't even bother.

A reporter asked Trump about his Muslim ban in the context of the attack on a Christmas market in Berlin that left 12 dead. The suspected perpetrator is Anis Amri, a Tunisian who German authorities say was known to be in touch with radical Islamist groups.
“Has the attack caused you to rethink or reevaluate your plans to create a Muslim registry or ban Muslim immigration in the United States?” the reporter asked.
“Hey, you’ve known my plans all along and it’s, they’ve proven to be right. 100 percent correct. What’s happening is disgraceful,” he replied.
Indeed, the December 2015 statement in which Trump called “for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on” is still on Trump’s website.

Trump then had to be reminded by another reporter that his own statement about the Berlin attack characterized it as an example of “ISIS and other Islamist terrorists continually slaughtering Christians in their communities and places of worship as part of their global jihad.”
The reporter asked him, “Your comments about the attack in Berlin being against Christians, do you think that might —”
“Who said that, when did, when was that said?” Trump replied.
“I believe you said it in a press release,” the reporter reminded him.
“It’s an attack on humanity. That’s what it is, it’s an attack on humanity and it’s got to be stopped. Thank you.” Trump replied, ending the availability.

Doesn't using the popular vote give *less* representative power to the big lefty states? The righty votes from these states would now matter, rather than the entire state tally going to the Dem.

there are lots of republicans in california, but the opposite of this is also true - there are more democrats in texas than in massachusetts and their votes aren't doing much at the moment. it's usually close to a wash. it's not inconceivable that the electoral college map could actually be structurally favorable to dems at some point in the near future. in 2004 we would have won the election despite losing the popular vote if something like 60,000 people in ohio had switched their vote.

the real constant is that the system benefits small states (who get 3 votes no matter how few people live there) and swing states (where voters have disproportionate ability to actually turn the election). with a popular vote, population centers would all become vastly more important in the campaign, so urban california and new york, but texas too. I suspect that ultimately the dems would benefit overall from a popular vote in ways that aren't reflected in current numbers cause massive gotv operations in LA and NYC would lead to turnout in those places being a lot higher than it is today.

Doesn't using the popular vote give *less* representative power to the big lefty states?

A glance at the past few elections shows the Dems winning the popular vote in presidential elections 4 of the past 5, but winning the presidency only 2 of the past 5. Seems like that answers your question.

Making the popular vote count would help to engage a lot of people who otherwise abstain from voting, I'm sure. When I lived in IN, there was usually no point in voting D ('08 was SHOCKING), so most people I knew didn't even bother.

exactly - I do wonder how switching over would affect turnout. If I lived in NY or AL I dunno if I'd take time off work to vote, honestly

pretty sure you could solve voter suppression/id, turnout issues, etc by making voting mandatory and agreeing on a system of implementation and enforcement by small fines, etc.

then again someone dickhead will argue its 'unamerican'.

or having it on a Sunday?

'are you interested in joining our movement to subvert the electoral college using something called the national popular vote interstate compact' probably falls under 'considered and nuanced'

― iatee

wow is that your idea of a sales pitch? i was thinking more like "one person, one vote" myself but if your proposed slogan tests better with focus groups i'm certainly open to amending it

xpost everyone knows we can't hold a vote on a sunday. how will the farmers get back to their crops on time for the workweek?

dude it's just really fucking annoying to see someone be super optimistic when things look as bleak as they do. just wallow with the rest of us and drop the act

― k3vin k.

ok, i guess i need to establish some bona fides. yes, i confront despair on a daily basis. i see no practical cause for optimism, no practical cause to believe that things will get better in my lifetime.

but i decided not to kill myself. and if i'm not going to kill myself, i have to do _something_ to pass the time, even if the odds are against it, even if in all likelihood it's futile. and in the past months, all of my trust in human nature, all of my assumptions about humanity have fallen away. i have lost pretty much everything of worth this year except for my values and beliefs. that's the only purpose to my existence right now. i don't see any reason _anybody_ should continue living right now except to advocate for and defend their values and beliefs.

so no, i'm not going to accept futility, i'm not going to accept a permanent state of despair, not while i'm still breathing. if it helps you to visualize my dead eyes when reading my posts, go ahead and do so.

xpost everyone knows we can't hold a vote on a sunday. how will the farmers get back to their crops on time for the workweek?

― Karl Malone, Wednesday, December 21, 2016 8:50 PM (two minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

or get in the way of people's designated time for worshiping christ

or watching the nfl, which is the same

it's important for us to go down guns blazin' like Butch & Sundance

that means the womenfolk (Katharine Ross) can go home

pretty sure you could solve voter suppression/id, turnout issues, etc by making voting mandatory and agreeing on a system of implementation and enforcement by small fines, etc.

then again someone dickhead will argue its 'unamerican'.

― carthago delenda est (mayor jingleberries), Wednesday, December 21, 2016 8:45 PM (five minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

This is not unamerican, it's just silly. Belgium has this system, where its mandatory. In theory you can get fined about $30 if you don't vote (voting 'blanco' ie. nothing is allowed), abstaining four times could get your voting right revoked. But the administrative hassle too big for the state to actually act up on fines etc.

In principle I think everyone has the right to not vote, not care. Trying to make every vote count in your country seems like a better idea than forcing people to vote.

so no, i'm not going to accept futility, i'm not going to accept a permanent state of despair, not while i'm still breathing. if it helps you to visualize my dead eyes when reading my posts, go ahead and do so.

you don't have to accept futility, but putting mental or emotional energy into anything that requires republican cooperation is a pretty bad plan. we all agree the electoral college is just the worst. (okay, second worst, after the senate.) but overhauling our system of electing presidents isn't something that can happen until most of the country is on board. it is not inconceivable that one day republicans will decide that the electoral college is bad and they too oppose it. it is likely that that will be the day after it costs them an election and not immediately after it wins them one. until then we have to work within the system we're stuck with.

President-elect Donald Trump's doctor recently gave an interview to a health publication and then threatened to end the reporter's career if he published it.

STAT News sat down with Trump's doctor, Harold Bornstein, for three hours earlier this month for his first interview since the election.

Bornstein seemed unconcerned about the effect the stress of the presidency could have on Trump, who is in line to be the oldest any US president has been on Inauguration Day.

"If something happens to him, then it happens to him," Bornstein told STAT News. "It's like all the rest of us, no? That's why we have a vice president and a speaker of the House and a whole line of people. They can just keep dying."

Five days after the interview, STAT reported, Bornstein told the publication he didn't want any photos or an article from the interview to be published.

"I happen to have known the Sulzbergers for 50 years," Bornstein told STAT, referring to the family that publishes The New York Times. "I'm going to make sure you don't ever work again if you do this."

Needless to say, the story was published: http://www.businessinsider.com/stat-interview-harold-bornstein-donald-trump-doctor-2016-12

where have I heard the "if he dies, he dies" line before

The back of his business cards are written in Italian, with the phrase "dottore molto famoso," or "very famous doctor," below his name. (For 10 years, he took private Italian lessons from women he found through Craigslist postings, paying them about $60 an hour for weekly sessions, he said.)

Uh-huh.

Mods can we change thread title to "wallowing in..."

sorry for having made the No Ideas Gang feel like pale imitations of larry appleton

If I said stuff with hope or ideas in it please feel free to FP

...Mulvaney is one of them. In June, he conceded there had been surprisingly little conservative opposition to Trump but promised that Freedom Caucus members would hold the Republican nominee to the same standard as they did to Obama — particularly on the issue of executive power. “I’m not concerned about Donald Trump shredding the Constitution, because I know the people who stand in the House between him and the Constitution,” Mulvaney told me at the time. “We’ve been fighting against an imperial presidency for five and a half years. Every time we go to the floor and push back against an overreaching president, we get accused of being partisan at best and racist at worst. When we do it against a Republican president, maybe people will see that it was a principled objection in the first place. So we actually welcome that opportunity. It might actually be fun, being a strict-constitutionalist congressman doing battle with a non-strict-constitutionalist Republican president.” Instead, he’s joining Trump’s administration. Mulvaney was recently named director of the Office of Management and Budget, the powerful agency that supervises and coordinates the government’s financial planning.

one of many fun little tidbits in http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443236/donald-trump-conservatism-right-wing-future

These dueling outlooks frame an essential and defining question for Republicans entering the era of Trump: With unified control of government and a president who bullied his way into the White House, will Congress dare to flout recent history and serve as a principled check on the executive?

aaaaahh!
aaah haahaha! hahahahahaha!!! aaaahhaahaaahahahaaAAAA! HA!!!! HAAAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!!!! AAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
AAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAYES YES YES YAHAHAHAHHAHAHA AOHHAHAHHWOOOOOAAAAAAAAAhttp://i.giphy.com/FYnYcQoFmlPeU.gif
http://i.giphy.com/4EAsUT8kcgIta.gif

I'm definitely getting the feeling that WH staff are trying to give it their best shot heading into January but are also so ready to take a nice 2+ month vacation very far away

sorry for having made the No Ideas Gang feel like pale imitations of larry appleton

If I said stuff with hope or ideas in it please feel free to FP

― a Warren Beatty film about Earth (El Tomboto), Wednesday, December 21, 2016 11:50 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Don't let my doom and gloom influence or persuade you to any degree, I have my own idiosyncratic reasons for reacting like that, and they're short-term reactions anyway. Doing something's better than doing nothing, I just hope people do things differently than the ways that got us here in the first place.

Lol chris hayes's segment on Trump's doctor

well FWIW probably shouldn't take my bitter rage at the wallowers and pessimists as anything more than sour grapes because we're all doomed

zackly

I just hope people do things differently than the ways that got us here in the first place.

may i introduce you to the Democratic party?

what is the point of this withering fatalism about the democrats, morbs?

sisyphean effort to teach you dang whippersnappers a thing or two

I'm just kind of hung up on their signature achievement of the last 25 years being dismantling the New Deal.

I'm just kind of hung up on their signature achievement of the last 25 years being dismantling the New Deal.