HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ecstatic » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Wed Oct 29, 2003, 10:22 AM
Number of posts: 28,745

About Me


Journal Archives

Bill Maher has been making a weird but potentially effective argument for Bernie

For the past 2 weeks, Bill Maher has been saying that Bernie Sanders is the only Democratic candidate who controls an army / "angry mob" who will take to the streets if trump & the GOP attempt to cheat and/or nullify the elections this fall.

This argument might appeal to people who share Maher's concerns about trump cheating or refusing to leave office.

I'd like to think that all of us would take to the streets if it came to it. At least, I hope so!


The problem with Bloomberg is his lack of experience and

Stop and frisk. I've already had confirmation from 2 millennials that they will not vote for him. We need our entire coalition on board this November.

Starting to realize the NYT was right, Warren and Klobuchar are our best shots

I've come to this conclusion for many reasons, but mainly because the male candidates have either too little experience, too much baggage, or too many questions surrounding their ability to complete 8 years in office.

To save time and drama, we should choose between Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.

The 48 Senators who voted GUILTY represent 18 million MORE people than the 52 who voted

not guilty.


This cannot continue. Both the Senate and the Electoral College need to be abolished, and quickly. A tall order, I know, but what's the alternative?

Today's upper chamber has completed its transformation into a smaller version of its more populist sibling, the House—except this one does not come close to reflecting the actual population, or for that matter, the actual population's actual interests. The Senate's once-celebrated hallmarks of comity are history. Blue-slipping is on the way out. For judicial and executive branch appointees, the filibuster is gone, and I believe that once a party that holds the White House, the House, and a slim Senate majority feels so moved, it will abolish it for legislation, too. This Republican-controlled Senate's efforts to pass the tax bill and repeal the Affordable Care Act—its two most important policy goals—proceeded under a process that is not subject to filibuster, because Mitch McConnell knew he'd be unable to earn 60 votes for either one, and therefore didn't bother trying.

The Senate's transformation into a funhouse-mirror version of the House is a quiet emergency for democracy, because its members are still allocated equally among states. And since there now are a greater number of sparsely-populated, mostly-white, right-leaning states than there are heavily-populated, racially-diverse, left-leaning states, the Senate acts to preserve power for people and groups who would otherwise have failed to earn it. A voter in Wyoming (population 579,000) enjoys roughly 70 times more influence in the Senate than a voter in California (population 39.5 million), which sounds like the most unfair statistic in American politics, until you remember that taxpaying U.S. citizens in Washington, D.C. and Puerto Rico still have no influence in the Senate at all.

An undemocratic body yields undemocratic results. The 50 senators who voted to confirm the wildly-unpopular Brett Kavanaugh represent only 44 percent of the population; the 51 senators who passed a widely-reviled $1.5 trillion tax cut for the wealthy, about the same. In this year's midterms, across-the-board enthusiasm for Democrats is likely to flip the House but not the Senate, since so many Democrats face built-in partisan disadvantages—the accidental byproducts of border-drawing history. In presidential elections, the Senate guarantees at least three electors to seven states whose populations merit only one seat in the House: Alaska, Delaware, Montana, Vermont, Wyoming, and both Dakotas. This scheme basically guarantees a net of six electoral votes to the Republican candidate, every single time; it is one of many absurd anachronisms that lead to America, say, spending four years under a president who earned a full 3 million votes fewer than his closest competitor.

Read More: https://www.gq.com/story/the-case-for-abolishing-the-senate

This panel is lecturing and warning Democrats about how tough it will

be to run against trump and his lies.

Hello? Isn't it you guys' job to set the record straight and correct his lies!?

Instead, you spend that precious time trying to blame and warn democrats while going on and on about how effective trump's SOTU was.

I don't think I can stomach the next 10 months of news coverage if this is how it's going to be.

Do your jobs, dammitt! Our country needs you!

Chris Matthews: Which of the candidates would stop and help you if you had a flat tire?

I think Biden and Warren would.

I hate to say this, but I think we need another "2nd tier candidates" debate

We still have fairly electable candidates like Deval Patrick, Michael Bennet, and Cory Booker running, but they won't be in the next debate.

A trumper bought a gun because she fears how Democrats will react

”when trump is re-elected."

This woman is a nurse with a gentle personality, but she's a full blown trumper. She truly believes that she's in danger from Democrats.

Meanwhile, trump and his surrogates are the ones threatening extreme violence and retaliation on Democrats if we try to remove him.

I figured, if anything, trump's rhetoric would increase gun ownership on our side, but now I see that his language is actually a double dog whistle for his own supporters.

It'll be interesting (and a bit frightening) to observe this specific trumper's continued radicalization. She bought the gun. Now what?

Warren's post-debate interview on CNN: She's serious about MFA

After watching this interview, I believe her when she says she's sticking with Medicare for all. She was adamant about why she thinks MFA is best, even with all the hosts pressuring her to say otherwise.

I know there have been whispers that she will pivot to the center and adopt the public option approach. Full disclosure: I was hoping the whispers were true.

trump threatened Lindsey Graham to keep him in line?

Have you wondered why @LindseyGrahamSC has been defending @realDonaldTrump like his life depended on it? A friend in federal law enforcement told me about a certain threat @realDonaldTrump has made to Graham. It's personal. It's awful. And it's working very well.


Obviously, Don Winslow's friend could be talking out of his ass. But Graham's 360 is not normal. He even allowed trump to disparage his BFF, McCain, even after McCain's death. If it's true that trump threatened Graham, I wonder how many other Senators/ Congressmen trump has threatened? And what threat is so bad that Graham is willing to betray his country?
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next »