Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Lord Jim »

Scooter wrote:Isn't the whole sending the military to enforce domestic laws on U.S. soil thing a violation of Posse Comitatus?
I guess it depends on what orders they actually have...

If all that's happened is that they've been ordered to go to a particular location without any orders beyond that, and essentially just act as performance art props for Trump's pre-election propaganda show...

that clearly undermines military preparedness (since there are obviously other more useful tasks the troops could be performing) and military morale (because the troops can't be happy about being used for such a purpose) and is also a grotesque waste of taxpayer dollars...

but I don't know if it's strictly speaking illegal or Unconstitutional...

Of course that doesn't mean that it still couldn't serve as the basis for an article of impeachment...
ImageImageImage

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by rubato »

Republicans ginned up the "hate Pelosi" meme because she is an effective leader and they are afraid of her. Giving in to it is stupid.

Only people stupid enough to vote for Trump (90% of the Republican party) are stupid enough to fall for that kind of mindless hate-speech.

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Lord Jim »

Once again rube demonstrates just how little he understands the dynamics of contemporary American politics...

51 Democrats running in filppable Congressional districts realize that Pelosi is such a poison pill with their constituencies that they have announced that they will not vote for her for Speaker...

Pelosi's comments serve as a motivator for precisely those Republican and Conservative independent voters (many of whom stopped identifying as Republicans because of Donald Trump) who are not thrilled with Trump but who also find Pelosi odious...(I personally find Pelosi quite odious; just one level behind Harry Reid on the slime-o-meter, but I'm willing to accept her being in charge of 1/2 of 1/3 of the federal government as the price for putting a check on the worst threat to the Constitution and the rule of law in modern times.)

Many of these critical races will probably be decided by less than 10,000 votes; the last thing Pelosi needed to do in the closing days of the campaign was get in the face of these potential voters and dare them to turnout to make her eat her words...

Excellent way to get them to think about her and not Trump (who these voters dislike)...
ImageImageImage

User avatar
RayThom
Posts: 8604
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm
Location: Longwood Gardens PA 19348

Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by RayThom »

Chilling! God, I wish she had quit while slightly ahead. I'm glad to see Colbert understood the stupidity behind this kind of fucked up prognostication. Three days until the election -- and she brings her wet blanket.

Nothing is certain but death and taxes... and Pelosi's big mouth.

Last edited by RayThom on Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
“In a world whose absurdity appears to be so impenetrable, we simply must reach a greater degree of understanding among us, a greater sincerity.” 

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19496
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by BoSoxGal »

I dated a guy when I was in law school who was a staffer for Nancy Pelosi; he stayed with her for 14 or 15 years before moving on to an NGO. He really liked her and spoke highly of his experiences working with her.

I'm of mixed feelings about Pelosi; on the one hand I find her manner very annoying, but I can't argue that she's been an effective legislator in many ways. I agree that it was foolish to declare victory 4 days out with all that is at stake in this election; it's nice that she's feeling enthusiastic, but . . . after 11/9/16 we just can't sit on our laurels until all the votes are counted - and even then there is a lot of work to be done for 2020.
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17061
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17061
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17061
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17061
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Scooter »

Image
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Scooter
Posts: 17061
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 6:04 pm
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Scooter »

Bisexual Candidate Katie Hill Challenges a Homophobe for Congress

One of the key races in Tuesday’s midterm election offers one of the biggest contrasts – a young bisexual woman trying to unseat one of the most anti-LGBTQ members of Congress.

That woman is Katie Hill, 31, a former nonprofit executive, who’s the Democratic candidate running against Steve Knight, the Republican who currently represents California’s 25th District in the U.S. House.

The district is the only one in Los Angeles County that’s represented by a Republican. It covers the northern portion of L.A. County, including the area locals know as the Antelope Valley, and a bit of neighboring Ventura County.

Hill, like many who are either running for office or working for candidates in the midterms, was motivated by the election of Donald Trump as president. As executive director of People Assisting the Homeless, a nonprofit she helped build into California’s largest homeless services provider, she was working on a 2016 ballot initiative aimed at providing more housing for the homeless. It passed overwhelmingly, but the jubilation Hill and her colleagues should have been feeling was undermined by the Electoral College results.

“Everyone was in my office the next day, crying, saying what are we going to do,” she recalls.

The next year, during a campaign for another ballot initiative to fund services for the homeless, she learned that the 25th District would be key to flipping the House to Democratic control. A trusted friend suggested that she run for the seat, and so she decided that if the measure passed, she would run. It did, and the day after the vote, which happened to be International Women’s Day, she became a candidate.

In the primary election in June, she won the nomination. California has a “top two” primary system, in which the two top finishers in the primary advance to the general election, regardless of party. The system has sometimes resulted in two candidates from the same party facing off in the general election, although not in Hill’s case.

Knight received 51.8 percent of the vote in the primary, Hill 20.7 percent. But there were four other Democrats in the primary, and since then Democratic support has coalesced around Hill. Polls show her neck and neck with Knight.

Knight has a famous, some would say infamous, political name – his father, the late Pete Knight, was a California state senator who wrote the ban on same-sex marriage known as the Knight Initiative, passed by voters in 2000. It was struck down by the state Supreme Court in 2008, although same-sex marriage was banned again by the constitutional amendment known as Proposition 8, which was finally struck down in 2013.

Steve Knight has followed his father’s example, compiling a largely anti-LGBTQ and generally ultraconservative record. Hill seems uniquely positioned to challenge him.

Her priority issues, she says, are expanding health care, rebuilding the middle class, and making sure government represents all the people, including LGBTQ people. “Having true equality is just something that I think should be a given,” she says.

As a bisexual woman married to a man, she has faced some pressure to be closeted, along with biphobia. Being out “was a huge decision early on,” she says, as many people urged her to hide her bi identity. But, she says, “I’ve been out as being bi since I was a teenager, right after high school.” She decided that remaining out was part of being “an honest, transparent politician.”

During the primary, she notes, she was accused of pretending to be bi in order to get endorsements from LGBTQ organizations (she has the backing of several, such as Victory Fund and the Human Rights Campaign). In the general election campaign, she’s heard some biphobic comments, with people saying she’s making her sexuality an issue. “I’m not making it an issue,” she says. “It’s just who I am.”

Hill is also out about being a survivor of sexual assault. In response to the hearings on the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh, who was accused of perpetrating assaults, she held meetings with other assault survivors. “We need to be talking about it,” she says. “We need to have a real, honest dialogue” if the nation is to change the culture that allows so many assaults to take place.

From young women who attended, she learned that “there’s no conversation around consent” in sex education. “What they hear is authority figures saying girls shouldn’t dress a certain way because they’ll tempt boys,” she notes. The conversation about consent needs to start early, as soon as children start school, she says.

She remains deeply distressed by Kavanaugh’s confirmation. “It’s going to be incredibly difficult for us to recover,” she says. “It’s going to be very hard for us to restore faith in the Supreme Court, and as a woman, I’m going to be particularly fearful.”

But Hill intends to do her part to at least make Congress work better for all people. She says she’s making promises that can be kept – she’s not promising miracles, but instead vowing to do better than her predecessor.

And the candidate, who’s stepped down from her job because of the campaign, has devoted herself to outreach throughout the district, where she grew up. She estimates that she and her campaign workers have knocked on more than 150,000 doors there in the primary and general election campaigns. She’s seen the midterm effort empower young people, people of color, and many others. “It’s a movement that’s so much bigger than just our race,” she says.

Going into Election Day, she’s confident. “We’re definitely going to flip the House,” she says. “The question is how many seats we’re going to do that by.”
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Lord Jim »

Quoted from another thread:
RayThom wrote: After this election Lord Dampnut will be railing about how the Chinese (and the Russians and the media, maybe?) meddled in the midterms, and how unfair the results were skewed against the Repubs.

YKIAIKI

If the Dems take at least the House tomorrow, absolutely Trump will blame foreign interference and the lying, enemy of the people, fake news...

But he won't stop there...

He'll also blame Paul Ryan, hordes of illegal aliens voting, and the losing candidates themselves for not being Trumpy enough...

The one person, (in his mind anyway) who will be absolutely blameless will of course be Il Boobce himself...

And any success that the GOP has anywhere tomorrow will all be due to him...




Yeah, I know...

Predictions like that ain't exactly going to earn me the nickname "Edgar Cayce Jr."...

Sort of like predicting that the Niners are going to have a losing season...
ImageImageImage

Big RR
Posts: 14640
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Big RR »

And in true Carnac fashion I make another prediction; if the republicans win both Houses Tuesday, Wes will be back gloating right after the reults are announced; if they lose the House and keep control of the Senate, it will be a day before the gloating commences; and it they lose both houses it will be a couple of days before we get one of two reactions--either mimicking Trump in his allegations of voter fraud and the caravan somehow voting, or coming back and making a number of indecipherable stream of consciousness posts ignoring the elections altogether.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by rubato »

My vote " indecipherable stream of consciousness posts ignoring the elections facts altogether."

User avatar
Econoline
Posts: 9607
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 6:25 pm
Location: DeKalb, Illinois...out amidst the corn, soybeans, and Republicans

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Econoline »

From Jim Wright (on Facebook):
  • A few minutes ago, the President of the United States of America made the following statement:
    Image

    This makes literally no sense.

    First of all: VOTING IS A *STATE* RESPONSIBILITY. NOT FEDERAL.

    State. Not Federal.

    Trump has NO authority to issue such an order in the first place. None. Zero.

    In the second place, HOW would "Law Enforcement" be "strongly notified?" What does that even mean? Strong notified? Was the message sent in all caps? Delivered by a large muscular man? I don't understand.

    Third: Law Enforcement? WHAT law enforcement? Federal? State? Local? Is the FBI sending agents to every polling station? If not, then how does the President issue orders to STATE and LOCAL Law Enforcement?

    And again, will there be cops at every polling place?

    On what authority? The police have no jurisdiction regarding voting integrity -- for what should be OBVIOUS reasons. Law enforcement doesn't man polling stations, doesn't count the votes, doesn't register voters, doesn't validate voter registration. Again, that's a state function, not the duty of law enforcement.

    And most states prohibit law enforcement from being stationed at polling stations due to perception of (or, you know, actual) voter intimidation.

    So how would Law Enforcement carry out such an order?

    And HOW exactly would Law Enforcement determine fraudulent voting? What's the methodology? What's the authority? What training does Law Enforcement have in this regard? Is that universal across the nation? What were the standards for the training? Given that each state is responsible for its own voter registration and validation and for the integrity of its voting process, how would this even be possible?

    Do the cops just drive around looking for suspicious voters? What are the signs of possible voter fraud? Shifty eyes? Furtive manner? Skin color?

    Well?

    No, no. Stop. THINK it through. HOW would law enforcement know? We're past registration in most states. You show up at the poll, you have whatever ID your state requires, your name is on the voter roll, so how does a cop know at that point, TOMORROW AT THE POLLS, if you are voting illegally? What is the cop's authority in this process? What authority does he/she have to check your ID against the roll? To check your registration? Isn't that the poll worker's job?

    Define "ILLEGAL VOTING."

    What exactly are we talking about here? Registration? ID? VOTING itself.

    Will the cop check your ballot?

    No? Well, okay, then again where DOES Law Enforcement fit into this process?

    The more I look at it, the more questions I have.

    Trump's comment literally makes no sense. It's impossible. It's ILLEGAL. It's UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    If Trump really has attempted to issue such an order himself, it would be an impeachable offense.

    Such an order would be a massive intrusion into STATE's rights -- the very federal overreach the GOP so often complains about.

    Where are the state governors on this?

    Where is CONGRESS?

    Naturally, various responders on Twitter, both liberal and conservative, are telling me to just ignore Trump's statement.

    No.

    You ignore Trump at your own peril, America. Q.E.D.

    Trump himself has said that his Tweets are official statements from the President.

    The court agrees.

    This is an official statement from the President of the United States telling you, Citizen, that he has either issued an illegal order OR he's lying about issuing an illegal order. He's attempting vote intimidation. He's attempting to give cover to states like Georgia and Wisconsin and North Dakota which are right now actively and openly engaged in voter disenfranchisement and intimidation.

    He can't legally do this.

    And the order, if given, can't be carried out.

    Not yet.

    Not. Yet.

    But this, THIS, right here is the canary in the coal mine, screaming out in warning.

    This is the Republican vision of your future. Right here.

    Trump betrays his own fascism, his own totalitarian vision of America, where armed men under the authority of the president and with the threat of violent arrest determine who can and cannot vote and who you may vote FOR.

    Your Governor, your Senators, your Representatives, THEY are the check on this mad rush to fascism.

    They are now the ONLY check.

    So, you look right now at your governor.

    You look at your senator.

    You look right now at your congress person and you ask yourself if THEY have the guts, the courage, the strength of character to stand in the face of this coming storm.

    Do they?

    THAT, that right there, is why it is so goddamned important that you show up and you vote and you don't let anybody or anything keep you from the polls tomorrow. You fight if you have to. But you show up and you vote. You do your duty to the Republic. This is it. This right here. This is the moment.

    This is your time, Citizen. Now. Right now.

    You get your ass to the polls and you vote and you put Trump and these fascist sons of bitches into check.

    Or you may never get another chance.
People who are wrong are just as sure they're right as people who are right. The only difference is, they're wrong.
God @The Tweet of God

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19496
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by BoSoxGal »

I've been furious about that Tweet all day. :arg
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

Burning Petard
Posts: 4442
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:35 pm
Location: Near Bear, Delaware

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Burning Petard »

I would assume he would send ICE agents. mostly to scare off people of color. Check out the Secretary of State of Georgia who now claims he is incompetent to protect voting information--that's the implication when he claims with nothing to back it up, that his records have been hacked by the Dems. He also has said that if everybody votes, the Dems will win by a landslide, so it is necessary for the security and safety of the country and in order to defend the sacred American way of life from Nancy Pelosi, any and all steps must be taken to prevent Dems from voting.

The federal Civil Rights Voting act has been gutted by the GOP in all three branches of the federal government.

snailgate.

User avatar
BoSoxGal
Posts: 19496
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:36 pm
Location: The Heart of Red Sox Nation

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by BoSoxGal »

Yes, this election is a stark example of just how much Justice Roberts fucked the electorate by gutting the Voting Rights Act. We need to get those protections reinstated, ASAP!
For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
~ Carl Sagan

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Lord Jim »

Too much even for FOX:
NBC, Fox News, Facebook pull controversial Trump anti-immigration ad

NBC, Fox News and Facebook have pulled a controversial anti-immigration ad paid for by President Trump's campaign. CNN, meanwhile, refused to air the ad at all, calling it "racist."

The backdrop: The 30-second ad, a shorter version of a clip Trump tweeted last week, depicts undocumented Mexican immigrant Luis Bracamontes, who received the death penalty for murdering two police officers in 2014.

Unlike Trump's tweet, the ad does not falsely blame Democrats for letting Bracamontes into the country, but it does attempt to connect Bracamontes and his crimes to the migrant caravan traveling through Mexico to the U.S. border.

The ad aired on four networks before being pulled, according to iSpot data obtained by Axios.

Fox Business: 8 airings
Fox News: 6 airings
MSNBC: 3 airings
NBC: 1 airing

What they're saying:

CNN: "CNN has made it abundantly clear in its editorial coverage that this ad is racist. When presented with an opportunity to be paid to take a version of this ad, we declined. Those are the facts."

NBC: "After further review we recognize the insensitive nature of the ad and have decided to cease airing it across our properties as soon as possible.”

Fox News: "Upon further review, Fox News pulled the ad yesterday and it will not appear on either Fox News Channel or Fox Business Network," head of ad sales Marianne Gambelli said through an FNC spokesperson.

Facebook: "This ad violates Facebook's advertising policy against sensational content so we are rejecting it. While the video is allowed to be posted on Facebook, it cannot receive paid distribution,” a spokesman told The Daily Beast.

Donald Trump Jr. mocked CNN as fake news on Twitter for refusing to air the ad, telling his followers to "Remember this on Tuesday."

President Trump, when asked about the controversy, told reporters, "We have a lot of ads. They certainly are effective, based on the numbers that we're seeing. ... A lot of things are offensive. Your questions are offensive."
https://www.axios.com/nbc-fox-news-pull ... 82d69.html
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Joe Guy
Posts: 14952
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:40 pm
Location: Redweird City, California

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Joe Guy »

CNN: "CNN has made it abundantly clear in its editorial coverage that this ad is racist. When presented with an opportunity to be paid to take a version of this ad, we declined. Those are the facts."
Which race is being offended?

Big RR
Posts: 14640
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 9:47 pm

Re: Time For A Democratic Majority In The House...

Post by Big RR »

Does it matter?

Post Reply