![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
SaltyNZ:
I'd hesitate to say the GOP "lost". The Democrats gained a modest but by no means landslide majority in the House, but lost seats in the Senate. They could use the House majority to make a lot of noise but they will achieve little or nothing substantive, and recent history suggests that making a lot of noise would backfire at the next presidential election.
They were almost certain to lose senate seats. Only half senate seats (50) were up for election. There were many very vulnerable Democrat seats - just the way the draw worked out, historically the most unfavourable to Democrats. Those vulnerable seats weren't the result of 2016, they were seats won in 2014. On a more positive side, in 2020 the reverse should apply - there will be many more vulnerable Republican senate seats than Dem.
I would say the GOP "lost". Importantly IMO, the result was very much in line with pollsters' expectations. Unlike 2016, when they (with the notable exception of Rasmussen) surveyed "registered" voters without adequately allowing for "likely" voters. For various reasons, probably including deliberate actions by the GOP to suppress likely Dem voters, they didn't vote. This time - they did.
I agree that the Democrats need to pick fights carefully. One obvious fight that Trump can't win is sorting out their voting system - to make it more democratic. Florida yesterday amended voting laws - "ex felons" were not allowed to vote. There are apparently 1 million of them in Florida, the senate seat was won by a very slim majority. That law change went through with Republican support - despite the consequences being unfavourable to them at the ballot box in future. Why would they do that? Probably because it's an untenable position to exclude ex-felons from voting, against the principle that having been convicted and serving your sentence - then your "debt to society" is discharged. It is also a potentially corrupting partisan influence on lawmakers - giving them the opportunity to wage campaigns to "create" felons - with the side benefit that you can prevent citizens from voting against you.
tdgeek:
SaltyNZ:
I'd hesitate to say the GOP "lost". The Democrats gained a modest but by no means landslide majority in the House, but lost seats in the Senate. They could use the House majority to make a lot of noise but they will achieve little or nothing substantive, and recent history suggests that making a lot of noise would backfire at the next presidential election.
I feel it goes deeper. Internally Trump cannot do things in the US, the House can and will block him. He can only have a free hand offshore, such as trade, foreign relations etc. So there will be a lot of noise caused by roadblocks, and by investigations, it will be messy. Offshore there is a great dislike of him, and thats the only area he can do things, so he may go hard on trade, get out of more international organisations (so he can say look what great things I am doing) and so on. And he will be continually angry
My understanding is the President under executive powers can still do a lot on national affairs. He also has the power of veto that can block legislation passed by Congress. The Veto can be over-ridden but the reality it wont as it need two thirds of both Congress and Senate.His ego is going to create a mess that will take several elections to mend if ever. The road for the US got a lot rougher yesterday, the United in the United States of America is anoxymoron.
tdgeek:
I feel it goes deeper. Internally Trump cannot do things in the US, the House can and will block him.
That's true, but he hasn't achieved a great deal at home in the last two years with GOP control of all three branches of government anyway. A tax cut for the rich, and a bill that should have gutted the ACA but still ended up watered down to a deep gash. So yes, you're right, he won't get much done, but then again he already wasn't really getting much done.
iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.
Trump has fired / Sessions has resigned.
Next step will probably be an attempt to shut down Mueller before the house is sworn in.
It's probably going to get very ugly.
The New York Times - Trump Forces Out Jeff Sessions as He Cleans House After the Midterms
WASHINGTON - President Trump forced out Attorney General Jeff Sessions on Wednesday, ending a partnership that soured almost from the start of the administration and degenerated into one of the most acrimonious public standoffs between a commander in chief and a senior cabinet member in modern American history.
Mr. Sessions’s resignation, made at the president’s request, was being delivered to John Kelly, Mr. Trump’s chief of staff.
It came just a day after midterm elections in which Democrats captured control of the House, but Republican success in holding onto the Senate and building their slim majority may make it easier for the president to confirm a successor.
“Dear Mr. President, at your request I am submitting my resignation,” Mr. Sessions said in his letter.
Matthew Whitaker, Mr. Sessions’s chief of staff, will take over as acting attorney general, Mr. Trump said in a tweet announcing the shake-up.
... and another one bites the dust ...
Sideface
MikeB4:
tdgeek:
SaltyNZ:
I'd hesitate to say the GOP "lost". The Democrats gained a modest but by no means landslide majority in the House, but lost seats in the Senate. They could use the House majority to make a lot of noise but they will achieve little or nothing substantive, and recent history suggests that making a lot of noise would backfire at the next presidential election.
I feel it goes deeper. Internally Trump cannot do things in the US, the House can and will block him. He can only have a free hand offshore, such as trade, foreign relations etc. So there will be a lot of noise caused by roadblocks, and by investigations, it will be messy. Offshore there is a great dislike of him, and thats the only area he can do things, so he may go hard on trade, get out of more international organisations (so he can say look what great things I am doing) and so on. And he will be continually angry
My understanding is the President under executive powers can still do a lot on national affairs. He also has the power of veto that can block legislation passed by Congress. The Veto can be over-ridden but the reality it wont as it need two thirds of both Congress and Senate.His ego is going to create a mess that will take several elections to mend if ever. The road for the US got a lot rougher yesterday, the United in the United States of America is anoxymoron.
Ok, I was going by what CNN has stated, re House blocking US lawmaking, i.e. passing Bills
Indeed. But Mueller is no fool. He'll already have plans in motion to keep the work going even if he is shut down - I would be staggered if he had not already shared files with state AGs for them to use in carrying on or starting their own investigations into state crimes. New York apparently has state crimes mirroring a lot of federal financial crimes because of Wall Street.
iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.
The New York Times - The Democrats Won the House. Now What?
An opinion piece worth reading.
Executive summary:
Sideface
SaltyNZ:
New York apparently has state crimes mirroring a lot of federal financial crimes because of Wall Street.
Don't be surprised if there's an attempt to change to the law, getting rid of the "dual sovereignty doctrine". Trump would be able to (even possibly preemptively) pardon, and the states wouldn't be able to prosecute. That's where Kavanaugh comes in - it's why he's there.
And so it begins with Sessions gone.
Trump's got two months - to neuter the Mueller enquiry.
If new AG Whitaker fires Mueller, there will probably be riots.
Fred99:
SaltyNZ:
New York apparently has state crimes mirroring a lot of federal financial crimes because of Wall Street.
Don't be surprised if there's an attempt to change to the law, getting rid of the "dual sovereignty doctrine". Trump would be able to (even possibly preemptively) pardon, and the states wouldn't be able to prosecute. That's where Kavanaugh comes in - it's why he's there.
That would be difficult: the House Democrats wouldn't allow it (assuming it requires a normal federal law change), it seems unlikely to be passed as a Constitutional amendment (if it's a constitutional matter) as it would require a majority of states to vote in favour, and the state governments are unlikely to support a law that erodes their authority (not to mention that the next NY governor is expected to be Democrat Andrew Cuomo).
iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.
A friend of mine raised a point last night over coffee. What if there is no crime, what if there is not Russian involvement, what if Trump is right and it is he that is the subject of a take down plot with the collusion of the press and vested interests. It was an interesting discussion, pity I was not in a condition to fully respond having taken pain relief.
Note; like myself my friend detests Trump
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |