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

oh man yes – I hope it's true

Senate Democrats are preparing to put Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks through a grinding confirmation process, weighing delay tactics that could eat up weeks of the Senate calendar and hamper his first 100 days in office.

Multiple Democratic senators told POLITICO in interviews last week that after watching Republicans sit on Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year, they’re in no mood to fast-track Trump’s selections.

But it’s not just about exacting revenge.

Democrats argue that some of the president-elect’s more controversial Cabinet picks — such as Jeff Sessions for attorney general and Steven Mnuchin for treasury secretary — demand a thorough public airing.

“They’ve been rewarded for stealing a Supreme Court justice. We’re going to help them confirm their nominees, many of whom are disqualified?” fumed Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). “It’s not obstruction, it’s not partisan, it’s just a duty to find out what they’d do in these jobs.”

Senate Democrats can’t block Trump’s appointments, which in all but one case need only 51 votes for confirmation. But they can turn the confirmation process into a slog.

Any individual senator can force Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to hold procedural votes on nominees. Senior Democrats said a series of such votes are likely for many of Trump’s picks.

Democrats could conceivably force up to 30 hours of debate for each Cabinet nominee, which would be highly disruptive for a GOP Senate that usually works limited hours but has big ambitions for next year. The minority could also stymie lower-level nominees and potentially keep the Senate focused on executive confirmations for weeks as Trump assumes the presidency and congressional Republicans try to capitalize on their political momentum.

but fuck this guy:

Not all Democrats are on board with a strategy of delay.

Informed that Democrats might hold up Sessions and other nominations past Jan. 20, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia responded: “That’s just bullshit.”

I am 100% in support of this even though I hate this style of governing, the GOP already started this "we're going to refuse Hillary's Supreme Court nominee for 4 years" bullshit, turnabout is fair play

Generally pretty fed up with governmental intransigence but riding the brakes on confirming Trump's cabinet of deplorables is the kind of noble intransigence I can get behind.

oh i hope this is true xxxp

which in all but one case need only 51 votes for confirmation

two weeks ago:

"I generally oppose the filibuster and I'm going to vote my conscience on these nominees, particularly when it comes to conflict of interest and qualifications for the position," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut. "But my feeling generally is that the president should have the opportunity to select his team, and if he makes mistakes, he will be held accountable and so will they."

Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pennsylvania, agreed.

"I think you start with the premise that presidents should have the right to name their cabinet. It's our job to do the oversight and scrutiny and review that's appropriate," he said.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/18/politics/democrats-nuclear-option-donald-trump/

So there are no potential no votes on the GOP side for any of these nominees?

Rand Paul's been making plenty of noise about the noms he doesn't like

i think i read that Susan Collins is already on board for Sessions et al.

particularly the names floated so far for Sec. of State

xp

Senators won't reject a colleague. That's why I wonder why presidents have shied from nominating SCOTUS justices from the Senate.

@tinyrevolution
When you ponder the strategy behind Donald Trump's tweeting, etc., consider this wisdom from Egypt's Gamal Nasser

"The genius of you Americans is that you never made clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which makes us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them we are missing."

i'm p confident Rand Paul opposition will be outweighed by the Dem "give the prez his Cabinet" shitheads.

when it comes down to votes? I don't doubt it. Delays are good though. Gum up the works, delay delay delay

not Tom DeLay though

Sure, the republicans wouldn't let Obama go to the bathroom for the last 6 years, but let's make sure to give the corrupt autocrat a chance to govern.

btw a thousand times this

@DougHenwood
you’re not going to win the political battle by fact-checking Trump - people did it with Reagan and it went nowhere

yeah I've stopped bothering w that angle

The Sad Truth: The Cost Of Stein/Clinton's #Wisconsin Vote Recount Could Have Saved At Least 5,000 Children's Lives https://t.co/sMNQJDfppt

— Eric Trump (@EricTrump) December 4, 2016

somehow Trump's offspring are even worse than he is

btw a thousand times this

@DougHenwood
you’re not going to win the political battle by fact-checking Trump - people did it with Reagan and it went nowhere

― Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Monday, December 5, 2016 12:23 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah I've stopped bothering w that angle

― Οὖτις, Monday, December 5, 2016 1

been saying it since October

i wonder how many lives the trump family could save by giving all their money away and never appearing in public ever again

I made fun of all the "fact checking" a lot during the elections. I still think it should be done, but no one should have the illusion that if we just do enough work to get *the facts* out there it will fix things, or that this election could have been won if only *the facts* were put out even more.

@tinyrevolution
When you ponder the strategy behind Donald Trump's tweeting, etc., consider this wisdom from Egypt's Gamal Nasser

"The genius of you Americans is that you never made clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which makes us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them we are missing."

― Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Monday, December 5, 2016 11:15 AM (sixteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Yes. Some people want to ascribe a clever and inscrutable strategy to Trump's moves because they have an inherent need to leap great distances in resolving cognitive dissonance. It's this need rather than his nonexistent cleverness which has helped him to succeed against all odds. You aren't engaging with an incurious dullard, you see, but rather peeling away the layers of illusory crass self-involvement that obscure the enigmatic sage at the core of his being.

I'm starting a nonprofit to ensure that every household in America receives a complimentary copy of Being There.

has this been shared yet?

http://www.injusticeboycott.com/

yeah there's a thread about it

I'm really disappointed in how dumb it is already

I am sort of ambivalent about it

I mean yes the SFPD is fucked up and should be held accountable/change policies etc. but ... idk there seem like way bigger problems on the nat'l level that aren't going to be helped by boycotting SF. I dunno how I would even begin to boycott my own city.

boycott all corporations headquartered in SF and NYC, lol

like Twitter

don't go to the bank, don't use the internet, don't partake in any entertainment or media

Shaun King seems like a well-meaning but non-brilliant guy.

p much

keep tabs on the boycott via carrier pigeon

i am currently boycotting civilization, except for comcast

join me until any remaining savings are gone, and then we will move forward from there

They aren't recommending any direct boycott activity at the moment beyond Defund DAPL. Today was just a warning shot to NY and SF indicating a 43-day countdown until specific boycott recommendations will be disseminated. It remains to be seen how it all plays out but I don't have any issues as of yet. We'll see how it all plays out, I guess.

I'm generally disinclined to pick it apart too much because, however dubious you may find this particular messenger or message, it's a concerted effort to corral people into doing something in hopes of effecting positive change.

yeah I'm not begrudging the motivation

yeah, I'm all about any attempts at motivating people at this point.

what do you guys think about this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/12/04/democrats-can-look-forward-to-the-coming-republican-era-being-a-disaster-for-republican-voters/?utm_term=.76f40ce3196b

p smart imo

you really think a post-fact republican electorate is somehow going to realise that the reason their lives have gotten worse after trump takes power is because of the people they voted for and not democrat interference / immigrants / a vengeful god / whatever bullshit their Facebook feed tells them?

no but from a policy level it makes sense to preserve things where possible

even if it falls on deaf ears/preaching to the choir, still necessary (if far from sufficient) to 'fact-check' Trump IMO

For blue state Democrats, this is obviously a second-best, half-a-loaf solution that still leaves half the country — alas, along with the federally dependent blue states of Maryland and Virginia and the District — to experience the full impact of the Trump Revolution. Care would also have to be taken to assure that the higher tax rates in blue states don’t prompt too many companies and wealthy taxpayers to flee.

Also, though Virginia voted blue, and has a Democratic governor, it has a Republican led legislature, so all of those things formerly done by the Feds that the writer says blue states can now do themselves if Republican health care plans, etc pass, will not get passed in Virginia. I don't think its going to be so simple for blue Dem states to pick up the ball, or for Dems to get a message out to those in red states that things are now worse because of the new Washington administration.

I'm not going to give King shit over the idea of a boycott, but I don't think this is a productive or realistic way to go about one.

even if it falls on deaf ears/preaching to the choir, still necessary (if far from sufficient) to 'fact-check' Trump IMO

― flopson, Monday, December 5, 2016 1:22 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

just seems depressing to think that the POTUS would spread false information, and no one would fact-check him, because strategically we don't think it's going to work.

my take away from King and the WP article is that there ARE ways to fight back, but as curmudgeon says it won't be simple and will involve lots of resourcefulness and cooperations. I'm getting tired of all the sky is falling/hopelessness and want to start looking for solutions, personally.

you really think a post-fact republican electorate is somehow going to realise that the reason their lives have gotten worse after trump takes power is because of the people they voted for

maybe not 100% of them, but if 20% of them do that could be enough to swing the swing states back in the right direction

not saying he shouldn't be fact-checked -- how often does he tell the truth per day? -- but don't expect it to be his downfall

http://blueamerica.crooksandliars.com/howie-klein/why-its-not-all-gloom-and-doom-around

Howie Klein's Blue America pac funds left-wing candidates in the house.

On his blog and twitter he is doom and gloom though, grumbling about Republicans, corporate Dems, rural centrist Dems, the House Dem progressive caucus for including a Silicon valley Dem rep who he says is not progressive, Pelosi, etc.

http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/

xp- I don't think anyone's expecting that

When I was a kid and "political twitter" was called Usenet, I was in a group with Klein that argued with conservatives in the waning days of the Clinton era. He seemed like a good dude if pretty high-strung, especially about Israel IIRC.
Somewhere I have a mix CD he sent to everyone with a lewd electronic song that samples Rush Limbaugh and Lou Reed doing "Sex With Your Parents."