June 28, 2017 at 10:48 pm #2258
Put links here that you think will be of interest but are off topic.
June 28, 2017 at 10:55 pm #2259
Here’s a first one:
What will Happen when Trump’s Dupes Find Out? by Andrew Bacevich
A discourse on how history evolves, and how history might be changed by Donald J. Trump: “Owing his election in large part to my fellow [white heterosexual American males], Donald Trump is now expected to repay that support by putting things right. Yet as events make it apparent that Trump is no more able to run a government than Bill O’Reilly is able to write history, they may well decide that he is not their friend after all. With that, their patience is likely to run short. It is hardly implausible that Trump’s assigned role in history will be once and for all to ring down the curtain on our specious present, demonstrating definitively just how bankrupt all the triumphalist hokum of the past quarter-century — the history that served “for the time being” — has become.
When that happens, when promises of American greatness restored prove empty, there will be hell to pay.”
June 29, 2017 at 8:50 am #2276
I like it. How about this one:
June 30, 2017 at 11:01 pm #2311
Oh and Chris, remember Ben Sasse is a Republican to watch?
Republicans like Nebraskan Ben Sasse are desperately trying to salvage the situation. He admitted that Trump’s latest tweet was “not normal,” and then proposed repealing the ACA — with a one year delay in implementation. Trump seemed to like the idea, tweeting “if Republican senators are unable to pass what they are working on now, they should immediately repeal, and then replace at a later date!”
Perhaps Sasse’s idea could work, though it’s unlikely Republicans would support such a decision, given that more people would be harmed by a complete repeal without replace than the current health care bill in the Senate. According to a study by Brookings, Sasse’s approach would mean that 30 million more people would lose health insurance by 2019 — 82% of whom would be working families.
Looks like he cares more about repealing the ACA than he cares about 30 million Americans; and because he’s a coward, he wants to offset the effects until after the 2018 election so it won’t ruin the midterms.
But at least he thinks Trump’s tweets are ‘not normal’, that totally means he has a moral core and clear conscience.
July 2, 2017 at 6:22 pm #2387
Watching with sadness and concern the rapid repeal by EPA Director Scott Pruitt of years of hard work to protect our environment. The NYT had a detailed piece today that describes Pruitt’s actions. It is noteworthy that he is ignoring EPA staff in favor of seeking input from industry and counsel from without. Slash and burn. Our air, water, and public health…
July 5, 2017 at 8:07 pm #2466
Today in Democrats being the dumbass:
Rahm Emanuel: “So I noticed that we’re really struggling to get work…”
Rahm Emanuel: “… and I noticed that it’s hard to get work without a higher education degree or service experience…”
Rahm Emanuel: “… and a high school degree isn’t enough anymore…”
Rahm Emanuel: “… and, finally, that our city has really poor high school graduation rates…”
Rahm Emanuel: “… thus, all told, we can’t graduate people to a high enough level to get work, and we can’t get people to a level where they can move to the next level to educate themselves for work. This is a circular problem that can’t be fixed.”
Rahm Emanuel: “So, clearly we should withhold high school degrees unless people have jobs.”
- This reply was modified 2 weeks ago by Aaron Dow.
July 6, 2017 at 9:40 am #2472
One of the ongoing questions on this blog is whether Democrats are going crazy in the same way Republicans are. In this article, Brian Beutler points out that the far left of the Democratic Party is defending Obamacare vigorously, even though the Republican plan would make the single-payer plan that they really want much more probable in the future.
“if Republicans kill [Obamacare], single payer will suddenly become much more urgent and politically viable. After all, if Trumpcare becomes law, Democrats won’t abandon their commitment to universal health care, but they also would be foolish to try to organize the party around passing Obamacare all over again. Thus, in a perverse way, it is in the left’s long-term political interest for a GOP health care bill to become law—and yet, the most committed single-payer advocates in the country have distinguished themselves as the most vital and effective soldiers in fight against Trumpcare…(On the other hand) The right is dividing itself now between a small group of moderates who would welcome detente in the partisan health care wars and a larger group that demands ideological rigidity—even if the consequence of ideologically rigid health policy would pull single payer from the far-off horizon into the middle-distance.”
July 6, 2017 at 5:30 pm #2473
The Economist has a special report examining support for Donald Trump: https://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21724115-observers-donald-trumps-presidency-who-hope-politics-will-eventually-return
Part depressing, part interesting. Worth reading.
July 10, 2017 at 11:36 pm #2480
Again: it’s extremely difficult not to get riled up when the administration’s actions are not only blatantly malevolent, but they are incredibly ineffective and stupid at doing it.
From a broader perspective I honestly thought the Russian collusion thing wouldn’t have another major news cycle until after the Senate health care was either passed (I still think most likely), shelved (maybe likely), or killed (least likely). By then maybe some new THING would happen and there’d be enough other news cycles to satisfy before things slowed down in the month long summer recess and reporters got itchy again. The CNN mishandling of sources should have quieted and slowed down the editorial approach to ensure whatever new news on the scandal came out was vetted.
For it to go from “You know it’s sort of fishy the Hillary leaks and Trump’s fondness for Russia let’s investigate” straight to “Oh yeah and this one Russian agent totally reached out to Junior specifically about collaborating in damaging Hillary” after only six months is just pure madness. Any halfway competent kleptocrat would have all that decisively buried by now.
- This reply was modified 1 week, 2 days ago by Aaron Dow.
July 16, 2017 at 12:21 am #2484
The Electoral College and how it resulted in Trump’s victory despite his loss of the popular vote has been discussed frequently. The US has been there before, most recently in 2000. I was browsing Real Clear Politics just now and ran across the article linked below. Following the near disaster of the 1968 election, in 1969 the House Judiciary Committee drafted a Constitutional amendment that would have scrapped the Electoral College and used the popular vote. If no majority was achieved a second round election would be held using just the top two candidates. This would be similar to the system used by France. It passed the House overwhelmingly, but died in the Senate due to a filibuster led by Strom Thurmond. I found it interesting and it might be worth a read.
- This reply was modified 4 days, 15 hours ago by tmerritt15.
July 16, 2017 at 12:42 pm #2486
I just discovered that the above link no longer works. So I copied to the file to a PDF, lightly edited it to eliminate ads and clean up some text. It has been placed it in my dropbox. An updated link is below:
A link to a Facebook page discussing this is below. It also includes the complete text of the proposed constitutional amendment. In reading over this I found that the requirement in the first round was 40% not 50%. I also found that the Electoral College was retained as a formality, but it was required to elect the candidate that met the requirement of 40%.
If an effort to do something like this was revived, this could serve as a good basis. But with the current polarization in the US that is not likely. Unless perhaps Trump’s administration turns out to be so bad (it is on track to do so) that the nation finally reaches a full consensus that something must be done.
- This reply was modified 4 days, 2 hours ago by tmerritt15.
July 19, 2017 at 2:37 pm #2499
Below is a link to an article by Nick Hanauer, a Seattle based venture capitalist, regarding inequity. I believe inequity is a serious problem and may be one of the root causes of the political dysfunction in the U.S. Many of my thoughts are similar to the thoughts expressed in this article.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.