US Politics, December 2019: Profound procedural deficiencies

also "lying"

Is republicans are pure filth the correct formulation?

Hate to think any of these individuals are going to go onto continued careers.

this is a list of 430 polling firms, rated by 538.

https://github.com/fivethirtyeight/data/blob/master/pollster-ratings/pollster-ratings.csv

firehouse doesn't appear.

also, this is the firehouse strategie's wikipedia description: "Firehouse Strategies is a public relations consulting firm headquartered in Washington, DC. It was founded in 2016 by Republican strategists Terry Sullivan, Alex Conant, and Will Holley, who served on Senator Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential campaign.[1][2]"

Can't trust a sub shop to poll people accurately, they got only two hands

you know what Rubio has to say about hands

They're permanently calloused from all the Brilliantine lathering?

how soon we forget
https://dailycaller.com/2016/02/28/rubio-goes-nuclear-on-trump-by-attacking-the-size-of-his-hands/

oh, looks the other firm mentioned (@Be0ptimus/@FirehouseStrat) is on there: Optimus. they've only done 15 polls so far, so ratings are preliminary, but currently they have a score of C/D

xp

rubio OBLITERATES trump!!!

Trump's bump

I wholeheartedly support the GOP's attempts to inflate Trump's chances of re-election. Keep complacent republicans home on election day and draw concerned democrats to the polls.

inclined to agree w that point

Or make defeatist Dems stay home.

cliche that was always being repeated a couple of years ago had the republicans being the ones who always voted. What does it take to get the same response from the democrats. Hope 3 years of hell is enough of a spark

Dems aren't gonna stay home. There was a BLUE WAVE MIGHT NOT HAPPEN/GET YOUR HOPES RESET message going out for months prior to midterms. They still showed up. 40 seats. And during the election nobody votes in typically.

Dems got caught napping in 16 cos we all thought this unwiped asshole had no chance. Now we have three years of living that Hell.

The Dems could try to compel Bolton to testify, right? Why don't they?

bolton is able and willing to take them to court to avoid doing it, which would take a long time

Why don't they?

My best understanding of that is that Bolton has already declared he would drag the matter into the courts, where it most certainly would not yet be adjudicated by the time the Senate holds its trial.

The Democrats' possible counter strategy that I've heard mentioned (unofficially) makes good sense to me, which is that Bolton will be called as a witness during the impeachment trial, where Chief Justice Roberts will preside. The presumption is that Roberts will be able to adjudicate it on the spot by a ruling from "the bench". If Bolton has already challenged his earlier subpoena in a lower court prior to the trial, Roberts could let himself off the hook and plead that the matter is already under judicial review and he should not interfere in a pending case.

yes, I think he already told them he would sue them if they did

Articles of impeachment: as early as tomorrow morning

Geez, I hope before they release the bill they have someone to double-check their work who hasn't been working on two hours of sleep for days.

They probably just hired a broke student on Craigslist to write it for them.

On climate change I'm afraid that them moving past outright denial isn't necessarily any kind of progress on the issue. It's getting to where outright denial is becoming politically untenable and I'm convinced that they long ago mapped out their future strategy of morphing from 'it isn't happening' to 'it's too late to do anything about it/it doesn't matter what we do cause China and India'.

The only connection I see between progress on impeachment and climate change is that both involve disinformation campaigns initiated by the political lackeys of energy oligarchs. (Which may tie in with a halfassed theory I'm working on involving George Orwell's relationship with the USSR.)

we're only a few years from "climate change is real...and liberals SECRETLY CAUSED IT AND TRIED TO COVER IT UP". so yeah, viborg otm

Yes that was actually the exact Orwell quote I had in mind.

lmao what the fuck is this

“hey you’re bringing your briefcase today for your nationally televised impeachment hearing right?”

“no no i’ll be fine with this.”pic.twitter.com/Uw27J337ra

— j.d. durkin (@jiveDurkey) December 9, 2019

i gotta respect that, briefcases are lame as shit

On climate change I'm afraid that them moving past outright denial isn't necessarily any kind of progress on the issue. It's getting to where outright denial is becoming politically untenable

Office buildings are being evacuated in Sydney because the fire alarms won't stop going off. the Prime Minister says it's "not the time" to discuss whether climate change is involved, is approving more coal mines, refuses to meet with firefighters or allot emergency services any emergency funding, but is pushing one piece of legislation today: to make it legal again to refuse employment or services to gay and trans people

lol we're all gonna die

That's right

good morning!!

lol this is a new one

Read the Transcripts! “us” is a reference to USA, not me!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 10, 2019

I think I tried something like this in 4th grade, "oh oh you said DUE Friday, I thought it was DO Friday..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFELNIpeTjY

it depends what the meaning of us is

Pelosi has literally scheduled back-to-back press conferences to announce articles of impeachment against Trump and then support for his trade deal.

This is insane. What is the message here pic.twitter.com/QGlHjM7JOK

— Will Stancil (@whstancil) December 10, 2019

was thinking about this, because it does seem intentional. i guess the message is "we [democrats] are not obstructionists who are against everything the president does - we are working with him wherever we can bla bla bla" and/or countering the republican talking point that nothing is getting done in congress because of the democrats' obsession with impeachment

yeah seems obvious. Whether it works is another matter.

Of course, there hasn't been much attempt at bipartisan compromise on the many, many bills passed by the house, so I guess that plan only works in one direction.

seems like compartmentalization to a silly degree

the president is illegitimate; his NAFTA replacement is p much a matter of putting his name on something

I think it will be taken in the spirit it was intended and that the GOP will tip their cap to their coworkers across the aisle. They may not agree with them, but dammit they have to respect them.

was thinking about this, because it does seem intentional. i guess the message is "we [democrats] are not obstructionists who are against everything the president does - we are working with him wherever we can bla bla bla" and/or countering the republican talking point that nothing is getting done in congress because of the democrats' obsession with impeachment

brilliant move Nancy, now Republicans are sure to never use that criticism again

the neverending Dem wimp factor

Anytime you temper your response in an attempt to deflect GOP criticism, you walk into their trap and you lose.

What are they going to do, hold up the deal? This is a no-brainer. Get out in front of it, take credit b4 they do.

In general I'd say there are ways to attempt to take the wind out of their sails. However letting them drag you into their narratives by arguing their talking points directly is definitely getting caught in their trap.

Well, I suppose she could potentially sell it as a Dem win for the election. "Trump wanted to tax Canadian toilet imports, but we talked him out of it" or whatever.

truly a gamechanger

"Even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while, and President Blind Pig has found a trade deal. That'll do, pig."

In an interview with ABC News, Wray declared there was “no indication” that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 election. And then he went a step further: He urged people to be savvier consumers of news.Not to put too fine a point on it, but he’s basically saying he doesn’t want them listening to the president of the United States.

“We have no information that indicates that Ukraine interfered with the 2016 presidential election,” Wray said, adding: “Well, look, there’s all kinds of people saying all kinds of things out there. I think it’s important for the American people to be thoughtful consumers of information and to think about the sources of it and to think about the support and predication for what they hear.”