Red Mosquito

How long before he starts introducing policy just to piss people off?

wease wrote:How long before he starts introducing policy just to piss people off?

Yesterday, probably.

Bi_3 wrote:

4/5 wrote:

--- wrote:identity politics has well and truly ruined america, maybe forever

Client politics has definitely done its share as well.

True, but 1.) in client politics the 'client' piece in changeable... if you don't like the MIC you can choose to not be a member of that group. You can't choose to your sexual orientation or race or what social class you are born into. 2.) No major party is openly advocating client politics as their future platform.

I think the 2nd one is actually precisely why its so effective in undermining the people. Both parties are very guilty of making policies that benefit very small but well-funded interests at the expense of the American people. All of the anti-competition regulations we have, the import tariffs, the subsidies and tax breaks that undermine the market economy have been doing greater and greater damage but in such a way that most Americans aren't even aware its happening so what incentive is there for it to end?

According to the ATC in 2010 the US has over 12,000 different import tariffs. Yay for enriching the few at the cost of everybody else.

tragabigzanda wrote:Spicer is a smarmy shit, isn't he?

Hey man, it's not his intention to lie to you.

Spicer just said that Trump has met with Martin Luther King, Jr.

Spoiler: show

I know he just briefly misspoke (he met with Martin Luther King III), but come on now.

I don't know how every question isn't about the 3-5 million fraudulent vote claim.

If we did a little thought experiment: if there was overwhelming evidence of voter fraud in the range that Donald Trump believes, what sort of process would have to be undertaken to invalidate the election? Is that even conceivably possible? There's nothing outlined in the 12th amendment about what to do in such a case, and since each state gets to decide how its votes are collected, you'd probably have to start from the state level and move up from there, right? I.e., sue to invalidate enough electoral votes state-by-state so that Trump no longer had the majority. But there's nothing stopping the federal gov't from saying, "Bah, who cares." So Trump's basically inviting a constitutional crisis, yeah?

Simple Torture wrote:I don't know how every question isn't about the 3-5 million fraudulent vote claim.

Spicer (on fraud): "He believes what he believes."

"What does that mean for democracy?"

"It means I've answered your question."

yeah that was unsettling

That's a very gentle way to put it.

Simple Torture wrote:... So Trump's basically inviting a constitutional crisis, yeah?

He did that the moment he took the oath by not divesting himself of his company.

wease wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:... So Trump's basically inviting a constitutional crisis, yeah?

He did that the moment he took the oath by not divesting himself of his company.

I guess I could've said "another," but, to be fair, there are procedures in place to remove a president who's violated the constitution. There's nothing, AFIK, about what to do if it becomes clear that election results were tainted (not that I believe they were, btw).

Or it is just an ego thing. Or he wants us talking about that instead of the pipeline and the EPA gag.

Bi_3 wrote: With all due respect, the chances that the Republicans would want the first impeached President of the United States to come from their party is zero.

Yo we've had two presidents impeached! They just happened to both have been acquitted.

Well, Trump just pwned the EPA. Invest in mercury and glyphosate futures!

Trump happy to put up picture of inauguration in press room, but it has the date of the Women's March on it:

The only thing that makes me question the notion that what Trump's team is raising is all a ruse is that politicians, even Donald Trump, presumably want a) to pass their agenda and b) get re-elected. The talk about the 3-5 million votes doesn't really seem to do either of those. It's also burying whatever news his supporters might want to know. And maybe I'm too optimistic, but if there's four years where everyday is a dumpster fire, I can't imagine he gets another shot.

I think sometimes I presume that because Trump has been so successful, it must be because he is playing some kind of 3-D chess. I really think it's more likely that whatever you would call what he is just sometimes uniquely and unfortunately suited for the moment.