The Political Junkie Thread

[dudog]

This is purely anecdotal, but may mean something.

I walk several miles several times a week, and while I have a fairly regular route I like to walk different neighborhoods as well. Our city has a sign ordinance that states political signs must be taken down 7 days after an election. Despite this, I saw plenty of Trump signs, flags, and banners still up. After January 6th I'd say 80% of them immediately disappeared. Most of the ones that remained were variations on Fuck Biden and Fuck Your Feelings.

I went to City Hall, no response. Wrote the commission a letter, no response (was not really surprised, they are all Trumpers). Went to the City Attorney's office, no response.

A few weeks ago I walked by the worst offender, and all his flags were down. Several times since, still down.

My hope: that some of his supporters are starting to see through the grift. Sure, some people are just too stupid. But I'm hoping it's only 20% of the population.

The bad news: That's still 50 million adults in this country.

[CameronBornAndBred]

This is purely anecdotal, but may mean something.

I walk several miles several times a week, and while I have a fairly regular route I like to walk different neighborhoods as well. Our city has a sign ordinance that states political signs must be taken down 7 days after an election. Despite this, I saw plenty of Trump signs, flags, and banners still up. After January 6th I'd say 80% of them immediately disappeared. Most of the ones that remained were variations on Fuck Biden and Fuck Your Feelings.

I went to City Hall, no response. Wrote the commission a letter, no response (was not really surprised, they are all Trumpers). Went to the City Attorney's office, no response.

A few weeks ago I walked by the worst offender, and all his flags were down. Several times since, still down.

My hope: that some of his supporters are starting to see through the grift. Sure, some people are just too stupid. But I'm hoping it's only 20% of the population.

The bad news: That's still 50 million adults in this country.

Interesting story. Does the ordinance apply to signs on private property, or public only? I can see how it would be easily enforceable for those on the street corner, but near impossible if they are in someone's private front yard.

[dudog]

This is purely anecdotal, but may mean something.

I walk several miles several times a week, and while I have a fairly regular route I like to walk different neighborhoods as well. Our city has a sign ordinance that states political signs must be taken down 7 days after an election. Despite this, I saw plenty of Trump signs, flags, and banners still up. After January 6th I'd say 80% of them immediately disappeared. Most of the ones that remained were variations on Fuck Biden and Fuck Your Feelings.

I went to City Hall, no response. Wrote the commission a letter, no response (was not really surprised, they are all Trumpers). Went to the City Attorney's office, no response.

A few weeks ago I walked by the worst offender, and all his flags were down. Several times since, still down.

My hope: that some of his supporters are starting to see through the grift. Sure, some people are just too stupid. But I'm hoping it's only 20% of the population.

The bad news: That's still 50 million adults in this country.

Interesting story. Does the ordinance apply to signs on private property, or public only? I can see how it would be easily enforceable for those on the street corner, but near impossible if they are in someone's private front yard.

Campaign signs are not allowed on public property or public right-of-way.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Interesting story. Does the ordinance apply to signs on private property, or public only? I can see how it would be easily enforceable for those on the street corner, but near impossible if they are in someone's private front yard.

Campaign signs are not allowed on public property or public right-of-way.

That makes sense, sucks they stayed up. There are several signs around here, but they are on private property.

[Phredd3]

So what's the end-game on the Debt Limit? I just don't see the point of McConnell invoking the filibuster to block a vote. Is he trying to force the Dems to be the ones to crack the filibuster on "regular" legislation, so that he can appear justified going to town if and when the Republicans win back all three branches? That seems like a pretty big risk, given that chief executive won't change for another 3.5 years. Otherwise, I don't understand the point of this game of chicken. Everyone is pretty much agreed that not raising the debt limit is going to cause all kinds of real, tangible, lasting damage. Does he think nobody will blame him? Because if so, I think he's pretty mistaken. Or is he just wringing out the news cycle and will actually cave if the Dems don't trash the filibuster first?

I keep watching the news shows hoping someone can actually explain this to me, but so far, nobody really has. Anyone?

[CameronBornAndBred]

So what's the end-game on the Debt Limit? I just don't see the point of McConnell invoking the filibuster to block a vote.

He's an obstructionist, plain and simple. If the other side wants to do it, he's firmly against it and will do whatever it takes to stop it. No matter what the bill is or the reasoning behind it.

[dudog]

Obstructionist? I have another name for him. Several, actually.

[Phredd3]

So what's the end-game on the Debt Limit? I just don't see the point of McConnell invoking the filibuster to block a vote.

He's an obstructionist, plain and simple. If the other side wants to do it, he's firmly against it and will do whatever it takes to stop it. No matter what the bill is or the reasoning behind it.

Except that McConnell is well aware of the devastating and lasting effects that economists have long predicted over a failure to raise the debt ceiling. That's been an Established Truth all the way back to the days of Newt, when obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism was truly coming into its own. It's been on par with war as a cross-party unifier, and while the debt limit has often been held hostage while the minority party extracts concessions from the majority, McConnell isn't asking for anything.

I just don't understand playing chicken with the entire economy for no real political benefit. McConnell has been a political pragmatist through his entire career. What's the political upside he perceives in this move?

[Phredd3]

So what's the end-game on the Debt Limit? I just don't see the point of McConnell invoking the filibuster to block a vote.

He's an obstructionist, plain and simple. If the other side wants to do it, he's firmly against it and will do whatever it takes to stop it. No matter what the bill is or the reasoning behind it.

Except that McConnell is well aware of the devastating and lasting effects that economists have long predicted over a failure to raise the debt ceiling. That's been an Established Truth all the way back to the days of Newt, when obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism was truly coming into its own. It's been on par with war as a cross-party unifier, and while the debt limit has often been held hostage while the minority party extracts concessions from the majority, McConnell isn't asking for anything.

I just don't understand playing chicken with the entire economy for no real political benefit. McConnell has been a political pragmatist through his entire career. What's the political upside he perceives in this move?

So he caved and will allow a short-term increase, but still won't allow a long-term one. Is this just a super simple version of the blame game? If Dems pass a debt limit increase on their own as part of reconciliation, Repubs will just message the heck out of "debt is all the Dems fault"? If they don't, he'll try to leverage the next extension to extract concessions and roll back some of what they do pass?

Is all this really just that simple?

Does the first half of that equation even work? I don't see many Americans on either side bothered by government debt or caring about responsible fiscal management any more, unfortunately.

[OPK]

He's an obstructionist, plain and simple. If the other side wants to do it, he's firmly against it and will do whatever it takes to stop it. No matter what the bill is or the reasoning behind it.

Except that McConnell is well aware of the devastating and lasting effects that economists have long predicted over a failure to raise the debt ceiling. That's been an Established Truth all the way back to the days of Newt, when obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism was truly coming into its own. It's been on par with war as a cross-party unifier, and while the debt limit has often been held hostage while the minority party extracts concessions from the majority, McConnell isn't asking for anything.

I just don't understand playing chicken with the entire economy for no real political benefit. McConnell has been a political pragmatist through his entire career. What's the political upside he perceives in this move?

So he caved and will allow a short-term increase, but still won't allow a long-term one. Is this just a super simple version of the blame game? If Dems pass a debt limit increase on their own as part of reconciliation, Repubs will just message the heck out of "debt is all the Dems fault"? If they don't, he'll try to leverage the next extension to extract concessions and roll back some of what they do pass?

Is all this really just that simple?

Does the first half of that equation even work? I don't see many Americans on either side bothered by government debt or caring about responsible fiscal management any more, unfortunately.

I think you summed it all up wonderfully.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So he caved and will allow a short-term increase, but still won't allow a long-term one. Is this just a super simple version of the blame game? If Dems pass a debt limit increase on their own as part of reconciliation, Repubs will just message the heck out of "debt is all the Dems fault"? If they don't, he'll try to leverage the next extension to extract concessions and roll back some of what they do pass?

Is all this really just that simple?

Does the first half of that equation even work? I don't see many Americans on either side bothered by government debt or caring about responsible fiscal management any more, unfortunately.

I think you summed it all up wonderfully.

Simplicity sells.

[dudog]

Any Iowans around here? Is Iowa really going to send Chuck Grassley back to the Senate next year? He'll be 89, which obviously puts him at 95 before he runs for re-election again. I loved my Grandma, but I didn't even trust her with the keys to the car in her 90s.

Yes Grassley won big in '16, but things change a lot in your years between 83 and 89. And I know Trump won Iowa by about 8 points. But that was pre-January 6, and a lot more is bound to come out in the next year.

Will the Ds put up a viable opponent? Will non-Trump Rs finally teach their party a lesson this cycle and stay home (or vote D), and break this fever?

[CameronBornAndBred]

Any Iowans around here? Is Iowa really going to send Chuck Grassley back to the Senate next year? He'll be 89, which obviously puts him at 95 before he runs for re-election again. I loved my Grandma, but I didn't even trust her with the keys to the car in her 90s.

Yes Grassley won big in '16, but things change a lot in your years between 83 and 89. And I know Trump won Iowa by about 8 points. But that was pre-January 6, and a lot more is bound to come out in the next year.

Will the Ds put up a viable opponent? Will non-Trump Rs finally teach their party a lesson this cycle and stay home (or vote D), and break this fever?

How old was Strohm Thurman? I remember him being rolled into the Senate chamber on a gurney so he could vote.

[dudog]

Any Iowans around here? Is Iowa really going to send Chuck Grassley back to the Senate next year? He'll be 89, which obviously puts him at 95 before he runs for re-election again. I loved my Grandma, but I didn't even trust her with the keys to the car in her 90s.

Yes Grassley won big in '16, but things change a lot in your years between 83 and 89. And I know Trump won Iowa by about 8 points. But that was pre-January 6, and a lot more is bound to come out in the next year.

Will the Ds put up a viable opponent? Will non-Trump Rs finally teach their party a lesson this cycle and stay home (or vote D), and break this fever?

How old was Strohm Thurman? I remember him being rolled into the Senate chamber on a gurney so he could vote.

I had the same disgusting vision. I think the old fart was finally dragged out when he was 98. Hoping Iowans have more sense than South Carolinians.

[Phredd3]

Any Iowans around here? Is Iowa really going to send Chuck Grassley back to the Senate next year? He'll be 89, which obviously puts him at 95 before he runs for re-election again. I loved my Grandma, but I didn't even trust her with the keys to the car in her 90s.

Yes Grassley won big in '16, but things change a lot in your years between 83 and 89. And I know Trump won Iowa by about 8 points. But that was pre-January 6, and a lot more is bound to come out in the next year.

Will the Ds put up a viable opponent? Will non-Trump Rs finally teach their party a lesson this cycle and stay home (or vote D), and break this fever?

How old was Strohm Thurman? I remember him being rolled into the Senate chamber on a gurney so he could vote.

I had the same disgusting vision. I think the old fart was finally dragged out when he was 98. Hoping Iowans have more sense than South Carolinians.

I wouldn't bet on it. +8 is a pretty big margin to overcome, and I don't see Grassley getting successfully primaried.

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Trump is telling the Republicans not to vote if the election fraud of 2020 is not resolved. This crazy talk is what won the Dems the Georgia senate seats. Hopefully he will keep it up. Almost a year later I'm still waiting for the first shred of proof from him on his theory. Once someone says they believe that Trump was cheated out of the election they immediately lose all credibility.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-urges-repu ... 14254.html

[Phredd3]

Trump is telling the Republicans not to vote if the election fraud of 2020 is not resolved. This crazy talk is what won the Dems the Georgia senate seats. Hopefully he will keep it up. Almost a year later I'm still waiting for the first shred of proof from him on his theory. Once someone says they believe that Trump was cheated out of the election they immediately lose all credibility.

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-urges-repu ... 14254.html

May his loyal followers listen to that advice in droves.

[Phredd3]

I didn't want to sully the nice tribute thread OY, but as sad as I am about the passing of Colin Powell, I'm just as sad about how his death will be weaponized by anti-vaxxers. They won't bother to read the part about him being 84 and immunocompromised. His death will likely lead indirectly to other deaths.

And as noted OY, although he had his faults, he did have solid principles, which is rare in public figures these days.

RIP.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I didn't want to sully the nice tribute thread OY, but as sad as I am about the passing of Colin Powell, I'm just as sad about how his death will be weaponized by anti-vaxxers. They won't bother to read the part about him being 84 and immunocompromised. His death will likely lead indirectly to other deaths.

And as noted OY, although he had his faults, he did have solid principles, which is rare in public figures these days.

RIP.

He was a seemingly decent guy in the wrong administration.

[OPK]

I didn't want to sully the nice tribute thread OY, but as sad as I am about the passing of Colin Powell, I'm just as sad about how his death will be weaponized by anti-vaxxers. They won't bother to read the part about him being 84 and immunocompromised. His death will likely lead indirectly to other deaths.

And as noted OY, although he had his faults, he did have solid principles, which is rare in public figures these days.

RIP.

He was a seemingly decent guy in the wrong administration.

I agree with both of your points.