MAGAThread XV: Because Another

[Proctopeo]

No doubt. Most people don't mention, however, that this is just as much congress's fault, as they consistently cede power because they don't want the responsibility. As long as they get their $200,000 and invite to the bacon-wrapped-shrimp party, why should they care?



And enrage a third of the nation? I personally can't wait for that shit-show, but Dems would have to give up the "elect us so we can impeach" card as soon as they play it.

The next national election is a presidential year, that's not the angle their going for in trying to get elected. Who gives a fuck what the evidently politically illiterate, if not delusional and indoctrinated third of the nation thinks? Donald Trump's administration has been nothing but toxic and corrosive to the Republics long standing institutions and ideals and even moreso in revent months. His arguments as to why his presidency shouldn't be investigated alone are cause for enough concern for a forced removal from office because letting him get away with it is really bad.

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

[Ifreann]

The next national election is a presidential year, that's not the angle their going for in trying to get elected. Who gives a fuck what the evidently politically illiterate, if not delusional and indoctrinated third of the nation thinks? Donald Trump's administration has been nothing but toxic and corrosive to the Republics long standing institutions and ideals and even moreso in revent months. His arguments as to why his presidency shouldn't be investigated alone are cause for enough concern for a forced removal from office because letting him get away with it is really bad.

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

Well, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval, they have it so that they can remove federal officers for high crimes and misdemeanours.

[Nakena]

The glorious election of Donald Trump was the inevitable Omega Point of the late Reagan era.

25 Years of pop culture, politics becoming entertainment, partisan indoctrination, and increasing despair of the masses made it so.

He is the ultimative President of our times.

The one we deserve.

[Proctopeo]

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

Well, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval, they have it so that they can remove federal officers for high crimes and misdemeanours.

Ignoring the interests of an entire third of the country, which in all likelihood make up at least as much of the electorate, isn't a recipe for them getting reelected.
So outside of the people from hard-blue states it would serve their chances of reelection well to not ignore that portion of the electorate.

[Ifreann]

Well, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval, they have it so that they can remove federal officers for high crimes and misdemeanours.

Ignoring the interests

Ah, we're talking about people think of impeachment, not what their interests are. Let's not get confused between saying that impeachment would upset people and that impeachment would actually harm people in some sense.

of an entire third of the country, which in all likelihood make up at least as much of the electorate, isn't a recipe for them getting reelected.

It may very well not be. I'll repeat, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval.

So outside of the people from hard-blue states it would serve their chances of reelection well to not ignore that portion of the electorate.

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

[Proctopeo]

Ignoring the interests

Ah, we're talking about people think of impeachment, not what their interests are. Let's not get confused between saying that impeachment would upset people and that impeachment would actually harm people in some sense.

It would definitely be a big deal, and I'm sure some people would experience harm just from the act alone.

of an entire third of the country, which in all likelihood make up at least as much of the electorate, isn't a recipe for them getting reelected.

It may very well not be. I'll repeat, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval.

While true, I'll cover the full extent of reality in the next part.

So outside of the people from hard-blue states it would serve their chances of reelection well to not ignore that portion of the electorate.

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

Your naivety is astounding. Most people in congress want to get reelected. Especially if the person who would follow them would be opposite them politically.

[Cekoviu]

Ah, we're talking about people think of impeachment, not what their interests are. Let's not get confused between saying that impeachment would upset people and that impeachment would actually harm people in some sense.

It would definitely be a big deal, and I'm sure some people would experience harm just from the act alone.

It may very well not be. I'll repeat, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval.

While true, I'll cover the full extent of reality in the next part.

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

Your naivety is astounding. Most people in congress want to get reelected. Especially if the person who would follow them would be opposite them politically.

I want to be able to sit on my ass and eat chips all day and get paid $90 million a year, but that's not my job.

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

It's spooky going back to the Romney/Obama debates and realizing just how exactly like Trump Romney, and yet somehow the electoral college/the states that busted the election wide open somehow found Trump better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tecohezcA78

Down to the scandals. Both Trump and Romney were recorded saying stupid shit by hidden camera/microphone.

And the fact that Romney is somehow more moderate.

Romney was a disliked and ridiculed banker. Also Mormon. Nobody sane wanted Mitt Romney style tbh. So they choose a second time Barack Obama despite his hope had been declined.

In 2016 there was an even more disliked democrat candidate and Trump who promised a new dawn to the american people and beyond. People voted for Trump for the same reason as they voted for Obama in the first place.

And that was change.

A very different one.

The infamous Comey letter put Trump ahead for a short period in the small window of time which the election was held. That's precisely why he won.

Trump himself said "if the election was held ten days in a row I'd probably lost 9 of ten times."

[Conserative Morality]

Ah, we're talking about people think of impeachment, not what their interests are. Let's not get confused between saying that impeachment would upset people and that impeachment would actually harm people in some sense.

It would definitely be a big deal, and I'm sure some people would experience harm just from the act alone.

It may very well not be. I'll repeat, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval.

While true, I'll cover the full extent of reality in the next part.

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

Your naivety is astounding. Most people in congress want to get reelected. Especially if the person who would follow them would be opposite them politically.

I propose that any member of Congress who doesn't want to do their fucking job is effectively a traitor.

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

The glorious election of Donald Trump was the inevitable Omega Point of the late Reagan era.

25 Years of pop culture, politics becoming entertainment, partisan indoctrination, and increasing despair of the masses made it so.

He is the ultimative President of our times.

The one we deserve.

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago. And politics has always been entertainment. Entertainment (dawn of cable TV, then internet) just changed the way it's packaged & delivered it. Over the air TV, radio and newspapers are still at it too.

You should say Trump or Hillary was what each party deserved as their nominee. Either being elected would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two. He does not disappoint.

As to what we the people deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

[Ifreann]

Ah, we're talking about people think of impeachment, not what their interests are. Let's not get confused between saying that impeachment would upset people and that impeachment would actually harm people in some sense.

It would definitely be a big deal, and I'm sure some people would experience harm just from the act alone.

And some would benefit. But we're talking about whether it matters that people would get mad at Congress if they impeached Trump.

It may very well not be. I'll repeat, why should it matter? Congress doesn't have the power of impeachment so that they can win public approval.

While true, I'll cover the full extent of reality in the next part.

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

Your naivety is astounding. Most people in congress want to get reelected. Especially if the person who would follow them would be opposite them politically.

I know that that's how they behave, but that isn't actually their job, and certainly isn't what anyone wants them to do.

---

It would definitely be a big deal, and I'm sure some people would experience harm just from the act alone.


While true, I'll cover the full extent of reality in the next part.


Your naivety is astounding. Most people in congress want to get reelected. Especially if the person who would follow them would be opposite them politically.

I want to be able to sit on my ass and eat chips all day and get paid $90 million a year, but that's not my job.

That is the dream.

[West Leas Oros 2]

The glorious election of Donald Trump was the inevitable Omega Point of the late Reagan era.

25 Years of pop culture, politics becoming entertainment, partisan indoctrination, and increasing despair of the masses made it so.

He is the ultimative President of our times.

The one we deserve.

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago. And politics has always been entertainment. Entertainment (dawn of cable TV) just changed the way it delivered it. Over the air TV, radio and newspapers still at it too.

Trump or Hillary was what we deserved. Either would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two.

As to what we deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

I think we all deserve shitty Presidents, considering our “lesser of two evils” mentality. If we keep setting such a low bar, we can’t complain about having shitty choices.

[Valrifell]

The next national election is a presidential year, that's not the angle their going for in trying to get elected. Who gives a fuck what the evidently politically illiterate, if not delusional and indoctrinated third of the nation thinks? Donald Trump's administration has been nothing but toxic and corrosive to the Republics long standing institutions and ideals and even moreso in revent months. His arguments as to why his presidency shouldn't be investigated alone are cause for enough concern for a forced removal from office because letting him get away with it is really bad.

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

My first post and within a half hour of waking up.

So I don't actually believe the people who support Trump to that extent make up the entirety of those who cast his vote for him, maybe like 10% - 25%, even so if I find the Donald to be particularly harmful to the long-standing nstitutions of the Republic, why should I care what they think?

The answer is the same to how you weigh the opinions of your ideological opposites, you don't.

[Valrifell]

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago. And politics has always been entertainment. Entertainment (dawn of cable TV) just changed the way it delivered it. Over the air TV, radio and newspapers still at it too.

Trump or Hillary was what we deserved. Either would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two.

As to what we deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

I think we all deserve shitty Presidents, considering our “lesser of two evils” mentality. If we keep setting such a low bar, we can’t complain about having shitty choices.

There's quite literally no way out of that mentality with the current electoral set up. Either you take the compromise like an adult or you get someone completelt against your interests. You could elect to ignore the whole show, but really that's just the second option.

[Zurkerx]

Trump walks out of a bipartisan meeting, won't work on infrastructure and drug prices unless the Democrats end their investigations

Nixon, is that??

[Nakena]

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago.

I am myself surprised when I came across it but the Reagan Era is apparently considered by historians still to be ongoing.

Trump is its end point and in a way he also comes from its beginning as he had his haydays in the 1980s. The circle is thus closed.

You should say Trump or Hillary was what each party deserved as their nominee. Either being elected would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two. He does not disappoint.

There would have been a lot of drama from the other side too if Hillary had won.

As to what we the people deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

I felt as early as 2012 that Trump would come.

My first post and within a half hour of waking up.

So I don't actually believe the people who support Trump to that extent make up the entirety of those who cast his vote for him, maybe like 10% - 25%, even so if I find the Donald to be particularly harmful to the long-standing nstitutions of the Republic, why should I care what they think?

The answer is the same to how you weigh the opinions of your ideological opposites, you don't.

Millions of very angry people with a lot of guns.

[Conserative Morality]

Millions of very angry people with a lot of guns.

Sorry, the US military has more guns. If they want to try to re-enact Fort Sumter, they are welcome to try so long as they realize there is much less patience for them now than there was in the 1860s.

[Donutlia]

Who gives a fuck what the evidently politically illiterate, if not delusional and indoctrinated third of the nation thinks?

Their job isn't to get re-elected. Their job is to execute their duties as outlined in the Constitution.

Lol. This is why I love you guys.

And politics has always been entertainment. Entertainment (dawn of cable TV, then internet) just changed the way it's packaged & delivered it. Over the air TV, radio and newspapers are still at it too.
You should say Trump or Hillary was what each party deserved as their nominee. Either being elected would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two. He does not disappoint.

Yes. Trump is literally what Americans want. Whether as a savior or a villain. Go down the list of leftist comedians in the Bush era that wanted a "someone who speaks his mind" or "doesn't follow the rules".

There's quite literally no way out of that mentality with the current electoral set up.

The electoral college never gets any love. Well not genuine love- changing your mind after Trump was elected doesn't count. Imagine explaining to numerous conservatives in 2015 how the E.C. was beneficial to Republicans. The media has really done a successful job with their "education". Say "the President is elected by the states, not the people" ... blank stares. Even after Bush 2000. Oh well. Republicans will still probably vote to get rid of it after a new president.

Millions of very angry people with a lot of guns.

Sorry, the US military has more guns. If they want to try to re-enact Fort Sumter, they are welcome to try so long as they realize there is much less patience for them now than there was in the 1860s.

Ummm... what do think of the U.S., soviet, etc. invasions of Afghanistan? Something like the I.R.A. in the United Kingdom? The freaking American Revolution? Occupying a revolting population, seems to me, more a matter of attrition/accounting/logistics than "who has more guns".

[Nakena]

Millions of very angry people with a lot of guns.

Sorry, the US military has more guns. If they want to try to re-enact Fort Sumter, they are welcome to try so long as they realize there is much less patience for them now than there was in the 1860s.

We both know that this isn't the way things go nowadays. No secessionist states, no big armies on the field, no open battlefields or tank battles in the streets of DC.

Instead you have shooting sprees and ever increasing amounts of small scale political violence. The "low intensity conflict" stuff, like the years of lead in Italy or from South America.

Also I wouldn be so sure on which side the military would stand if it came down to it. I dunno they would enjoy getting themself in the firing line for an establishment that doesn't likes them.

I personally however believe if it would come to an very unlikely situation resembling a civil war, the military would stay neutral in the barracks.

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago.

I am myself surprised when I came across it but the Reagan Era is apparently considered by historians still to be ongoing.

Trump is its end point and in a way he also comes from its beginning as he had his haydays in the 1980s. The circle is thus closed.

You should say Trump or Hillary was what each party deserved as their nominee. Either being elected would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two. He does not disappoint.

There would have been a lot of drama from the other side too if Hillary had won.

As to what we the people deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

I felt as early as 2012 that Trump would come.

Much the same as FDR was the beginning and Jimmy Carter the end of the previous era, though some will say it's endpoint was Nixon's win over HHH in 1968.
IMO, Nixon does makes a better starting point for this era than Reagan. Bush's career was saved by Nixon. Gerald Ford came from Nixon thus Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld from there. Many others. But no doubt Reagan was the star of the era.

Trump had a very short lived campaign in 2012 for the nomination. That's when the planning, plotting for 2016 actually began.

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

I think we all deserve shitty Presidents, considering our “lesser of two evils” mentality. If we keep setting such a low bar, we can’t complain about having shitty choices.

There's quite literally no way out of that mentality with the current electoral set up. Either you take the compromise like an adult or you get someone completelt against your interests. You could elect to ignore the whole show, but really that's just the second option.

Besides that, the puppeteers of the politicians, "the big money" dwarfs the 1860 version of "the big money." They do not want their assets put at risk. I have seen some evidence recently that FOX News is beginning to feel that pressure.

[Conserative Morality]

We both know that this isn't the way things go nowadays. No secessionist states, no big armies on the field, no open battlefields or tank battles in the streets of DC.

Instead you have shooting sprees and ever increasing amounts of small scale political violence. The "low intensity conflict" stuff, like the years of lead in Italy or from South America.

Which makes the "Millions of people with guns" comment rather irrelevant. Those who are determined to commit political violence are not going to have a concern of immediacy, in which case the number and distribution of gun owners is fairly irrelevant.

Also I wouldn be so sure on which side the military would stand if it came down to it. I dunno they would enjoy getting themself in the firing line for an establishment that doesn't likes them.

... what the fuck was that rambling incoherent nonsense in that link?

I imagine, tbh, that the military would be on the side of, you know, the government they swore oaths to protect and uphold.

I personally however believe if it would come to an very unlikely situation resembling a civil war, the military would stay neutral in the barracks.

Doubt that. Militaries rarely stay in barracks in times of civil strife. I would find a coup more likely than neutrality; but more likely than that is obeying the orders of the lawful government, regardless of which side is in charge.

[West Leas Oros 2]

The next national election is a presidential year, that's not the angle their going for in trying to get elected. Who gives a fuck what the evidently politically illiterate, if not delusional and indoctrinated third of the nation thinks? Donald Trump's administration has been nothing but toxic and corrosive to the Republics long standing institutions and ideals and even moreso in revent months. His arguments as to why his presidency shouldn't be investigated alone are cause for enough concern for a forced removal from office because letting him get away with it is really bad.

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

I’m quite certain this third of the population wouldn’t support the democrats anyway...

[Upper Saust Latiegebestica]

"Who gives a fuck what... [a] third of the nation thinks?"
I couldn't make this shit up if I tried.

I’m quite certain this third of the population wouldn’t support the democrats anyway...

*CLAPS* Woo-Hoo! Standing up for the Deplorables like you and me!

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

Sorry, but it was 39 years ago. And politics has always been entertainment. Entertainment (dawn of cable TV) just changed the way it delivered it. Over the air TV, radio and newspapers still at it too.

Trump or Hillary was what we deserved. Either would have been wildly divisive. But Trump is the greater divider of the two.

As to what we deserve, speak for yourself. I don't deserve this. Neither do my children.

I think we all deserve shitty Presidents, considering our “lesser of two evils” mentality. If we keep setting such a low bar, we can’t complain about having shitty choices.

That's your mentality. I'm a cup is half full not half empty sort of guy. Generations come, generations go, but technology just grows at an accelerating rate.

Can you imagine what would have been if the internet existed when Martin Luther got the Reformation off the ground? Pope Paul IV and a few others would've went totally nuts, condemning millions of people to death. Still he'd fail.