And ANOTHER poll says that President Trump is doing awesomely, that his Job Approval tops 55%... :D

If you continue to use a SINGLE poll that "proves" you are right, that President Trump is doing horribly, I will continue to use a SINGLE poll that "proves" you wrong.. That "proves" that President Trump is awesome.. :D

Duly noted. :)

That was a little joke, right?

Because they want no progress at all, and you cannot stop progress. That's why you guide it.

Well, I don't think that's true. Any politician with a group/faction/party has a base that they're trying to both connect with and motivate to show up.

The "left/right" issue is a result of two basic and opposed impulses within people; to rebel and to conform.

The right sees value in conformity and order, the left sees value in rebellion and change.

Where the problem happens is that they each forget the other is ALSO right.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with left/right tension; to me, that's the perfect government. We need progressives to dream, to think big; to see the world the way it should be, not the way it is.

And we need conservatives to make sure we don't end up homeless in the process.

Winning has become more important than doing what needs to be done, and that's the one and only problem that really stands before us. 45 is a walking example of the idea that you should win at all costs.

There is a lot to be said for moderation. :)

It seems to me that talking about what the Democrats - or should I say, politicians, in general, of any stripe - need to do in terms of motivating "their base" is old, left/right thinking that get us nowhere, fast.

No, I don't think the Dems are evil.

Of course, I don't think the other guys are evil, either. They're just terribly misguided, most of the time. Though, I don't think I'll ever forget how congressional Republicans behaved from Jan 20, 2009 through the global financial crisis when they put party way ahead of country and made a bad situation much, much worse than it needed to be.

I'm not sure what exactly you mean when you say that the establishment is the problem.

If you are saying that your two party system is, ah, rigged then you may have a point. But, that system isn't strong enough to prevent up-wing Democratic thinking or stop Democrats who want to move the country forward from acting and proposing real viable solutions to the problems facing the country.

The establishment isn't the problem. Enlightened leadership and Democrats who have a clear vision for progressive change and the courage to carry it out can overcome the barriers that the establishment puts in the way.

And this is why I say the Democrats are bad at politics. It's patently obvious that all they need to do are run actual Democrats and not "moderates", they have a shot of motivating their base.

Instead they're letting the base drive them, but that's okay; Bernie woke up a lot of people, and 45's victory was sobering for others. So if they let their new base drive the narrative, then they should have a chance at getting turnout where they need it.

It's entirely possible we'll see two new parties form as factions split off from the old parties. There are a lot of abandoned moderate Republicans out there, and the some Democrats are actively pushing against the "Bernie Wing" of the party.

Why you would push back against young, energized voters (the most valuable voters of all, since someone who campaigns for your party in their 20's is almost certainly locked in for life) when the opposition party is teetering on the edge of splitting, I will never understand.

For the record and your information, Don, that is not what I am arguing. Remember, I am not cynical to the extreme and I never will be.

It sounds like it's your way or the highway. Am I right about that?

Clearly, my cynicism doesn't rise to the level of yours. And, that's a good thing.

Today's disasters (so far, 4pm PST):

1. Trump’s pick to replace Michael Flynn as national security adviser turns down offer

2. 45's 'unhinged' press conference: 'It was an airing of grievances. It was Festivus.' - Jake Tapper

3. A new Pew poll disputes 45's "fine tuned machine" - only 39% approve: http://www.people-press.org/2017/02/16/in-first-month-views-of-trump-are-already-strongly-felt-deeply-polarized/

If 45 wasn't such a horrible bigot I'd feel sorry for him - he is obviously delusional and one day soon he is going to melt down - it looked like he was starting to lose it today.

President Obama has proven that a POTUS can push a LOT of his agenda without Congress...

In your personal opinion.

Abso-tively and posi-loutly...

But clearly the Democrats didn't lose the entire middle class; if they had, 45 would have won the popular vote.

Not so..

Only ONE state allowed NOT-45 to overtake President Trump in the vanity vote and it's the most liberal state in the country...

Because of that fact, the Popular Vote in the 2016 election is even MORE meaningless than it normally is.

California is mostly made up of the Democrat Party base by far...

That's why I laugh my ass off at the talk of California secession...

If California were to actually secede, there would NEVER be another Democrat majority or a Democrat POTUS...

If he can get Congress to do it. Which is a huge IF. Again, my contention is that unless he can score bipartisan legislation, he will be in trouble going forward.

"If so, then the Establishment MIGHT become acceptable again..

There is nothing wrong with an Establishment per se..

The ESTABLISHMENT of the last 8 years was the problem..."

In your personal opinion. Lots of us would point much further back; as a Republican, the problems started in the 90's with Newt's belief that stopping Clinton at all costs justified any action.

Winning is not more important than doing the right thing, and the GOP forgot that back in the 90's, and never really seemed to recover it.

The Democrats are not, and never have been, organized or homogenous to draw strong conclusions about; as FDR said, it's like herding cats.

But clearly the Democrats didn't lose the entire middle class; if they had, 45 would have won the popular vote.

The Dems held their middle class voters, and even picked some up in some states, but they lost too many voters in one region; the Midwest.

No.. I mean the middle class that cares about jobs and providing for their families more than they care about what bathroom a transgender has to use...

If he wants to keep them, he's going to have to produce results for them, as they aren't "Trump supporters" they were "opposition to the political establishment"

Considering how bad this country has fallen, there is PLENTY of results to be produced..

But again, in 4 years 45 WILL BE the political establishment.

If so, then the Establishment MIGHT become acceptable again..

There is nothing wrong with an Establishment per se..

The ESTABLISHMENT of the last 8 years was the problem...

The Democrats have lost the faith of the Rust Belt, but 45 never had any faith, they were just desperate enough to give anything new a chance.

If he wants to keep them, he's going to have to produce results for them, as they aren't "Trump supporters" they were "opposition to the political establishment"

But again, in 4 years 45 WILL BE the political establishment.

The Democrat's base is made up of middle class voters in large part.

Again, 45's win was so narrow that breaking even will almost assure a loss. He had every advantage possible and still only won by the tiniest of margins.

They have the numbers; the number of people who identify as Democrat or tend to vote that way outnumber the total number of people who voted in the last election.

It's about turnout, as it always has been.

Oooo careful...

That will make CW fall in love with Trump!!! :D

Perhaps.. But we're less than a month into his Presidency...

And so we reach my original contention; if the Democrats can turn out their base with an agenda and candidates the fire them up, they don't need to compromise to win.

But, as I pointed out, there is not enough of the base in the here and now to allow the Democrats to rely SOLELY on their base...

Maybe in 50 years, but definitely not in the here and now..

And anything that excites the base will turn off the middle class voters...

Yes, I am paleolithic....but I get a discount at the movies! My car other is chariot.

Yeah, it was a friends High School car, was old then, would be vintage now. It was amazing how fine you could tune it, and how fast it came out of tune. Carbs. Lost art.

That's true; but he needs more than to not lose support. He needs to bring in fresh supporters from outside the right-wing, and I haven't seen anything yet to indicate he intends to do that.

"NOT-45's problem was that she was an Establishment darling in an election where the Establishment was hated and despised...

Any other NON Establishment candidate could have probably beaten Trump...

NOT-45 was the WORST possible candidate the Democrat Party could have fielded...

But the Democrats were more concerned with whose turn it was rather than electibility..."

Yep. And their base has seen that and they see compromising with 45 as "business as usual" and "protecting their skins" instead of standing up for their constinutents; thus the base's insistence on complete opposition.

And so we reach my original contention; if the Democrats can turn out their base with an agenda and candidates the fire them up, they don't need to compromise to win.

But they HAVE to turn out their base; if they don't then they've basically ceded all ground to their opposition and gained nothing in return.

Thank you.. I have my moments. :D

The Democrats are in a very enviable position.

They are if they can break free from ideological bondage and think about the people first and the Party second..

Their congressional counterparts are treading water and so they are free to offer up cogent policy prescriptions for any number of issues, including immigration, healthcare reform, tax and regulatory reform, nuclear policy, etc, if for no other reason than to demonstrate they have solutions that are worthy of debate and implementation.

Exactly.. They are lost in the woods so they have a real chance to rebuild from the ground up and create a worthwhile Party that puts country first..

This is how Democrats win big league two years from now.

If only they have the wisdom to grasp it...

Well then, JL, please be sure to read the entire thing in actual context and consider his posts over the past couple days. He couldn't just let it go, had to keep up and keep up with the multiple personal insults to multiple posters. Then he made that post to Don with yet another insult.

So with ample time given, I saw he wasn't going to let it go, and I finally answered setting out the facts. A genuine attempt to convince him to let it go. Nothing more. :)

This is really key, Michale.

The Democrats are in a very enviable position.

Their congressional counterparts are treading water and so they are free to offer up cogent policy prescriptions for any number of issues, including immigration, healthcare reform, tax and regulatory reform, nuclear policy, etc, if for no other reason than to demonstrate they have solutions that are worthy of debate and implementation.

This is how Democrats win big league two years from now.

out of context it does read that way.

JL

Granted, they are two different groups, but that really doesn't matter..

If the Democrats don't OFFER change, then those two groups will still go with President Trump and who the president endorses..

But that doesn't work twice. He's gone from the rebel to "The Man" and now has to play on the other side of the fence.

While I agree that he has taken a few steps in that direction (still PO'ed about him letting China off the hook vis a vis Taiwan) I doubt the steps he has taken has cost him any support..

45's true followers are a minority, even within the GOP. The then built something of a coalition to get him the rest of the way.

Maybe.. But a lot can happen in 4 years... Reagan faced similar hurdles and he overcame them...

Anyone except Hillary probably could have beat 45, because of how much of the GOP resists him. Hillary was a perfect storm; she fired up the base, she depressed her own base, and she's such a known entity that the "change things now!" energy completely opposes her.

NOT-45's problem was that she was an Establishment darling in an election where the Establishment was hated and despised...

Any other NON Establishment candidate could have probably beaten Trump...

NOT-45 was the WORST possible candidate the Democrat Party could have fielded...

But the Democrats were more concerned with whose turn it was rather than electibility...

I sent you an email early this morning with the link to the information you posted a few months ago containing your information and Michale's. If you remember the email you used from the link, that's where I sent the information. Remember, it's in multiple posts because it was quoted. :)

The flip side of that is that I'm pretty sure any of a dozen other Republicans, including Romney, could have beaten Hillary much cleaner.

She picked up a few hundred thousand votes in Texas over Obama, which would never happen with a true Republican nominee.

I think you're confusing people who really, passionately support 45 and people who just wanted change.

There was a HUGE push for "something different" this time, and 45 won on that.

But that doesn't work twice. He's gone from the rebel to "The Man" and now has to play on the other side of the fence.

45's true followers are a minority, even within the GOP. The then built something of a coalition to get him the rest of the way.

It's not unlike what Obama did in a lot of ways.

They definitely have to choose between appealing to their base or Trump supporters, but I don't see why they'd choose the latter.

Anyone except Hillary probably could have beat 45, because of how much of the GOP resists him. Hillary was a perfect storm; she fired up the base, she depressed her own base, and she's such a known entity that the "change things now!" energy completely opposes her.

That's not even getting into the fact that in the Midwest (where she lost the election) Bill is still blamed for NAFTA, and NAFTA is blamed for taking factory jobs.

And 45 still only won by the barest of margins; and he won with last minute voters who would have split most likely in a matchup similar to Bernie v Trump.

Is he writing the jokes for the Late Night guys himself?

Seriously - these lucky comedy writers went from coo, no-drama Obama to "it writes itself" 45.

I've been reading some of the recent Onion headlines and they seem more real than actual reality.

michale [101]

I WILL mention that I don't respond well to threats or extortion.. THIS much should have been made painfully obvious...

That's all I am going to say about it....

Wow... "threats or extortion." Seriously? I genuinely feel sorry for you, and that's what you decide to post? When did anyone either threaten or try to extort you? :)

This kind of word twisting is illustrative of the problem. All I said was that you can stop worrying about being stalked because I wouldn't waste my time that way. I also said I know who you are so you can come down off your high horse. Nothing more.

Why did I even have to post this? Because not content with just leaving it alone a few days ago, you kept it up and kept it up, and so now here we are, and you have only yourself to thank for it because you couldn't stop with the personal insults (go back and review if you need to).

Now......

Let it go. Let it go. - Elsa, Frozen

And the majority of the Democrat Party base is simply not compatible with the majority of middle class Trump voters..

The Democrat Party is going to have to choose..

OK, you got me on that one.. :D

Democrats don't NEED Trump supporters to win though. They just need THEIR voters to turn out in higher numbers. That was kind of my point.

I disagree.. You have to remember that millions of Trump voters WERE Obama voters..... Granted, I interchanged "supporters" with "voters"...

To become relevant again the Democrats are going to need the majority of Independents and NPAs and a good portion of those who voted for Trump in 2016...

The base of the Democrat Party is not large enough to win elections all by themselves...

Maybe in 50 years... But not now.. Not in the foreseeable future...

This kind of word twisting is illustrative of the problem. All I said was that you can stop worrying about being stalked because I wouldn't waste my time that way. I also said I know who you are so you can come down off your high horse. Nothing more.

Not content with just leaving it alone a few days ago, you kept it up and kept it up, and so now here we are, and you have only yourself to thank for it because you couldn't stop with the personal insults (go back and review if you need to).

Now......

Let it go. Let it go. - Elsa, Frozen

You're dating yourself with that one haha.

Wanna watch some Dobie Gillis later?

Like a vintage Sunbeam Alpine: fine tuned before every trip out of the driveway, and often by the side of the road.

Nobody has ever claimed that mobs of people are anything but short-sighted.

"They are not going to win over middle class Trump supporters by moving FURTHER Left..."

Democrats don't NEED Trump supporters to win though. They just need THEIR voters to turn out in higher numbers. That was kind of my point.

It's risky, but it has a fair chance of working.

Troo... But in my not so humble opinion, that is very short sighted of the base..

They are not going to win over middle class Trump supporters by moving FURTHER Left...

But they have to overcome the GOP's gerrymandering, the lead they already have, and the GOPs solid lead in getting their voters out in midterms.

Well, to be fair, the Democrats INITIALLY wanted to work with him where it made sense. Their base made it clear that isn't an option.

Honestly, the Democrat's BEST possible solution involves turning 45 into a true outsider and getting him to push the GOP to do those things.

But their base won't allow them to do that, so they're stuck doing something ineffective that only galvanizes the GOP base.

Yep, he is going to need Democrat help..

But, from all reports, the Democrats are taking a page (the WRONG page) from the GOP handbook and opposing everything, JUST because it comes from President Trump..

While, from all outward appearances, it worked out well for the GOP, I have doubts that the Democrats can have the same success...

I mean, are Democrats going to shut down the government to stop President Trump??

How far down the GOP rabbit hole is the Democrat Party willing to go???

Personally, I think Silver was unfairly attacked..

All he was doing was saying, "Ya know, people. This might not be as much of a slam dunk as ya'all think.."

It must have been a quandary for Silver on 9 Nov, eh? :D

http://whybrexitisgreat.co.uk/

He can't do those alone, and on at least one of those (PP) the majority of people don't want to fight over it.

And the rest he has to get through Congress, which is going to be harder than he thinks it is.

If he manages to get legislative successes, maybe. But I don't see any indication he's willing to compromise, and again; the platform he got elected on doesn't appeal to the majority of Americans, that's why he lost the popular vote and why his approval ratings are still low.

I do recall that Silver took an INCREDIBLE amount of heat for giving Trump more of a chance than the Left felt was warranted......

As a matter of fact, I believe I quoted 538 a lot in the months before the election..

But I was never a regular reader of the site before or since...

I don't think 45 has to screw up royally to stay unpopular; he lost the popular vote, and I haven't seen anything from him that looks like it would appeal to moderate Dems to bolster his number.

Trade...... Planned Parenthood...... Tax Overhaul..... Infrastructure....

President Trump and the Left are on the same page on a lot of issues...

He's the only one who gave 45 a real chance of winning (I think it was around 35% last check before the voting started) and he continually criticized the MSM for it's narrative of Hillary's inevitable win.

I don't think 45 has to screw up royally to stay unpopular; he lost the popular vote, and I haven't seen anything from him that looks like it would appeal to moderate Dems to bolster his number.

And the NeverTrump Republicans aren't happy about things right now; if you go to Redstate you can see that in effect.

I did take it down - nobody else was meant to see it. I can't understand why it is still up on Google Drive. I don't have the link any longer, but the jpg isn't in the drive folder - maybe a Google Drive bug?

Well, Neil, I do read every post... sorry. I could have posted the link so everyone could just go back right now and click on it, but I don't roll that way. You should get with CW and take the information off the comment board. It contains your email and his personal information. Michale quoted it so you'll need to remove it from multiple comment boxes. :)

It's already forgotten..

Sorry?? Sorry for what?? :D

I've now disabled the link (hopefully).

This is not good - I use Google Drive as a way to post items temporarily a lot, now I'm going to have to do a lot of clean up.

Sorry again Michale.

@#$%V - sorry Michale - I thought I'd taken that down

Max nichts...

My forbearance is still maintained.. :D

I WILL mention that I don't respond well to threats or extortion.. THIS much should have been made painfully obvious...

The fact that someone is using allegedly compromising information to try and extort and control me says more about that person than it does about me...

That's all I am going to say about it....

@#$%V - sorry Michale - I thought I'd taken that down

I did take it down - nobody else was meant to see it. I can't understand why it is still up on Google Drive. I don't have the link any longer, but the jpg isn't in the drive folder - maybe a Google Drive bug?

BTW it was just so I could send Michale a Christmas Card - for all that we poke fun at each other there is not anything personal.

Because a lot has changed since the 1960s....

Put another way.. If President Trump scrooes up in the magnitude that would allow 38 states to ALL agree on a drastic measure such as a Constitutional Amendment...???

It is unlikely there would be much of a country left....

@#$%V - sorry Michale - I thought I'd taken that down

That article is a pretty good analysis of what we're talking about right now in House races; the Democrats have a steep hill to climb, but unless 45's approval rates go up pretty fast they have a fair shot at retaking the House; assuming they're not completely incompetent at politics (they didn't even run candidates in a bunch of races, as 538 points out.)

We are in complete agreement about this.. We may differ on the steepness of the Democrat's climb, that is probably certain...

And I completely agree that, if President Trump royally screws up (a definite possibility) then all bets are off...

But if the President can avoid starting WWIII, I think the GOP will be in good shape to prevail in 2018...

That's how low the bar has been set for President Trump..

So, even fi the Dems don't win the House, any reduction of the GOP's lead there will empower the smaller factions of the GOP, leading to (possibly) more infighting.

Logical...

Again, it seems to be setting up that the better the Democrats do, the stronger the GOP will be.

I think what we are seeing here is that the better one Party does, the more the opposing Party's base is energized and the more confident the opposing Party is in taking on the other Party...

Now don't ask me to explain that cuz I lost myself after the 3rd Party... :D

I suggest we change the name from Weigantia to Springerville.

michale wrote [151]

heh :D Yea, it does get weird around here..
Which wouldn't happen if people would just get over the fact that I post here and quit trying to delve almost 20 years into my past.. I mean, jeeezus, what kind of sick twisted person does that??

"Sick twisted person"... I will let my buddies know what you think of them, and I'm quite certain they will take that little nugget as a compliment (particularly considering its source). LOL

You can stop worrying about someone stalking you. Speaking for myself, I've got an infinite number of ways to waste my time, and that wouldn't remotely be one of them.

The fact is, Neil posted your name, email and home addresses awhile back; it's actually still posted there.

So let's review. Whenever commenters on this board, myself included, attempt to have a rational conversation, the disruption and name calling by you begins, which naturally leads to the question: Is this guy a troll? You have to admit, it has been the topic of conversation around here many times.

So not unlike Garth Brooks, "I've got friends in low places"... if you know what I mean. My curiosity about your trolliness -- rhymes with holiness -- finally got the better of me so I made a quick phone call. It's good to have friends in the very lowest places in this wonderful free country of ours.

It would serve you well to keep in mind that a commenter on this board knows exactly who you are and can keep you honest when you decide to get all up on your high horse... I know you know what I'm talking about... and I've got nothing but pity for you. :)

Tear down that Wall, Mr. Senator!

Republican on Republican violence can only help the Democrats.

Now all we need is a young leader from the left with Bernie's presence and a vision for progressives.

It also matters WHAT they oppose him on; I doubt he cared about Pudzer so I doubt he'll go after them after up to a dozen GOP senators said they wouldn't back him.

But if they try and stop one of his signature programs, I can't see him just letting it go.

"As for the American Presidency, I think you might see and Congress pass some kind of Constitutional amendment to be submitted to the states for ratification, regarding changing the nature of the Presidency itself. I think that's the only way it could be done, and not thru just simple legislation.

Yer kidding, right??? :D"

No, I am not.

For example: the 25th amendment on presidential succession was a direct response to the assassination of Kennedy, and was prescient when it came to the presidential succession in the aftermath of Watergate. Just like the 26th amendment lowering the voting age to 18 came in the wake of the Vietnam War.

If Trump gets involved in a scandal that blows up as big as Watergate did, why is an amendment concerning the American presidency yet again, so far fetched?

He's going to treat them like everyone else he perceives as attacking him; he will go at them hard and fast, and take no prisoners.

What we're saying is if he goes after them, the most effective way to do it will be to turn their own base against them, which he can do because he controls some 1/3 of their base completely, and another 1/3 is willing to see how he does.

But if the Senate starts subpeonaing his people, or if Sessions starts an investigation that 45 disapproves of, it will be civil war in the GOP, make no mistake about it.

The EDIT function is on the way... :D

"The best defense is a good offense. And I intend to start being offensive!!"
-Captain James T Kirk

It's also a good business strategy...

That's why he doesn't really talk about judicial issues on the large scale (he doesn't care what judges do) but he attacks judges who rule against him (because they opposed him)

OR... because he feels they have made bad decisions...

Time will tell who is right or wrong, but my money is on the President..

All it's going to take is one terrorist attack on US soil and the judges and the Democrats are going to be in deep kimshee...

So, it's not going to be that SENATORS oppose him; it's going to be that ANYONE opposed him publicly.

I think it is more of a case of HOW the President is opposed...

One doesn't get to be as successful in business as the President has been by flying off half cocked at the slightest imagined slight...

That is what it always comes back to..

The man that ya'all describe simply COULD NOT have been as successful in business and, heretofore, in politics...

He showed in the primary that he's more than willing to hit Republicans hard and low any time they challenge him directly.

As Rubio, Cruz or Jeb about it.

Exactly my point...

President Trump is truly a Republican in name only..

And THAT is why I think we're going to find that Republican pressure on the president is NOT going to have the effect that ya'all think it will have...

And, when that happens, I honestly believe it will be the President who comes out on top because he has the American people behind him....

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-very-early-look-at-the-battle-for-the-house-in-2018/

That article is a pretty good analysis of what we're talking about right now in House races; the Democrats have a steep hill to climb, but unless 45's approval rates go up pretty fast they have a fair shot at retaking the House; assuming they're not completely incompetent at politics (they didn't even run candidates in a bunch of races, as 538 points out.)

The GOP doesn't really control the house though, because the House Freedom Caucus is enough to derail any GOP-only bills.

So, even fi the Dems don't win the House, any reduction of the GOP's lead there will empower the smaller factions of the GOP, leading to (possibly) more infighting.

Again, it seems to be setting up that the better the Democrats do, the stronger the GOP will be.

Agreed...

Mid terms are usually good for Republicans because their base is more reliable, but just a few percentage points of ennui on the right and a few percentage points of anger on the left could deliver a shock to the complacency the right currently have.

All things being equal, you would be correct...

But all things are NOT equal..

Democrats have to defend **25** seats in 2018...

It's going to take a *LOT* more than a few percentage points to turn things to the Democrats..

Add to that, the fact that the Democrats STILL haven't recovered from the utter decimation that was wrought in 2016.....

Democrats MIGHT have a chance in 2020 and THAT is only if President Trump does something akin to WWIII...

Barring THAT bad of a scroo-up, the Democrat Party *MIGHT* be ready to go in 2024.. I'll be like 90 then and won't care... :D heh

I don't think 45 cares what "Senators" do, but he's shown time and again that ANYONE who directly opposes him is going to be attacked.

That's why he doesn't really talk about judicial issues on the large scale (he doesn't care what judges do) but he attacks judges who rule against him (because they opposed him)

So, it's not going to be that SENATORS oppose him; it's going to be that ANYONE opposed him publicly.

He showed in the primary that he's more than willing to hit Republicans hard and low any time they challenge him directly.

As Rubio, Cruz or Jeb about it.

The next election is 2018 and Congress and 1/3 of the Senate is running. What happens if Trump goes over their heads with a message to the people that he isn't being supported properly by the party?

Not if Trump is dumb enough to pick a war with the spooks. That path will lead to impeachment and resignation/conviction.....

"The National Security Adviser talked to the Russian Ambassador about Russian Sanctions!???

"OH MY GOD, WHAT A FUCKING NIGHTMARE!!!!"
-Marissa Tomeii, MY COUSIN VINNY

Yer kidding, right??"

EXCEPT, AT THE TIME, Flynn was NOT the National Security Adviser. He was in fact, a PRIVATE citizen, who was a member of Trump's CAMPAIGN TEAM, Trump, who had not yet assumed the office of President, and Flynn was working to UNDERMINE the OFFICIAL foreign policy of the USA at the time, instituted by the ACTUAL President, by possibly promising a lessening of sanctions in exchange for who knows what.

And this doesn't bother you even a little???

Here is the problem Michale. There is a very strong "throw the bums out" anger in the U.S. at the moment. It was stronger on the right than the left in 2016. This was understandable because the right had been losing the big battles - e.g. Gay Marriage, the White House twice, Healthcare reform.

The left tried Bernie, but the anger wasn't as widespread and people like me wanted incremental improvement over revolution, and I was in the majority on the left - right or wrong.

The "throw the bums out" anger is intensifying on the left - you are missing this in your right wing bubble, just as I missed the pro-Trump anger on the right because in my bubble no obvious con man as buffoonish as 45 would ever win an American Presidential election. In two years time most people's lives will probably be at best the same as they are at the moment, and people are not happy bunnies. With the Republicans in full charge, they will get the blame.

Mid terms are usually good for Republicans because their base is more reliable, but just a few percentage points of ennui on the right and a few percentage points of anger on the left could deliver a shock to the complacency the right currently have.

The problem with that reasoning is that President Trump has proven time and time again that he doesn't care what the Senators do.. He will go directly to the people and the people will choose the President every time..

This has been proven time and time again..

Extended grassroots resistance is more likely to help the GOP stay together longer, as they have a common enemy.

Once again, the reality is that the grassroots are with the President...

It's an interesting situatoin; it looks like the less the Democrats do the faster the GOP schisms will come to the fore.

The less the Democrats do, the more room the Republicans will have to do what they want...

As for the American Presidency, I think you might see and Congress pass some kind of Constitutional amendment to be submitted to the states for ratification, regarding changing the nature of the Presidency itself. I think that's the only way it could be done, and not thru just simple legislation.

Yer kidding, right??? :D

And Change too.... :D

I prefer a more pragmatic and realistic approach... :D

Time will tell...

The problem is the Left wants to destroy President Trumpo while STILL ignoring the middle class patriotic Americans who elected him President...

Democrats can do one, but they cannot do both....

And Democrats can't acknowledge the middle class patriotic Americans without utterly and completely changing WHAT a Democrat is...

It's an un-envious corner the Democrats have painted themselves into..

The problem with the reasoned response approach is that it doesn't work. As a general rule of thumb, EVERY comment sent in generates at least one more comment from The Troll. Responding with counter comments simply generates a positive feedback loop.

When a strategy doesn't work, try something else.

We have problem with toxic comments. As any toxicologist will tell you, the first line of defense against any toxin is to avoid exposure. So use the TamperMonkey and encourage other readers to get themselves similarly vaccinated. If most people sign on, that pretty much gets rid of the junk posts - except for the little one line header with a name, date and +.

Newbies will figure out the Troll is full of shit fast enough. Maybe old hands can drop a hint now and then.

"What are the forces that might prevent Congress from taking legislative action to curtail the authority of the president?

And, if they act to do that, then what is next?

Do you see this presidency surviving its first term?"

Despite what Michale thinks, I think it is going to be a very interesting next TWO years. Because I do believe that the Trump administration is not going to survive beyond the next mid-term elections, regardless of whether the Republicans retain or lose control of Congress.

As for the American Presidency, I think you might see and Congress pass some kind of Constitutional amendment to be submitted to the states for ratification, regarding changing the nature of the Presidency itself. I think that's the only way it could be done, and not thru just simple legislation.

Extended grassroots resistance is more likely to help the GOP stay together longer, as they have a common enemy.

It's an interesting situatoin; it looks like the less the Democrats do the faster the GOP schisms will come to the fore.

It's the same thing Bernie could have done if he hadn't conceded and supported Hillary very loudly.

There is always hope, Michale.

That worded to sound like i didn't want debate.

Yea, cause the bothered him SOOOO much during the Primary and the General.. :D

Ya'all are simply rehashing old and proven false wish-ful thinking....

When ya'all gonna learn that wishing it to happen will NOT make it happen... :D

I'm trying to grind things to a halt every time he trolls so that the people here act as a society is supposed to, and enforce basic rules of behavior on its members, via pressure, ostracization, or private conversations.

My IDEAL result would be an end to the personal attacks and actual debates.

It's up to him if he wants that to happen. So long as trolling and character assaults aren't happening, then I have no problem.

Notice this very thread; I didn't flame. I pointed out what he's doing wrong; I told him to stop talking to me.

Telling someone they are lying isn't flaming; telling someone they are accusing you of things you haven't done isn't flaming.

He's being much more civil today, at so am I.

Absolutely. The question is not if, but when.

I'd bet on the former rather than the latter.

Spot on. Here are the three goals I think most rank and file congresspeople and senators have:

1. Pro-life supreme court pick
2. Tax cuts for the wealthy
3. Repeal Obamacare (without incurring a disaster)

Once they have these they will probably judge 45's value on the impact he will have on their 2018 election chances. If his actions are still prompting 100's of angry people to turn up at their Town Halls then they will start to distance themselves from him.

I think 45 is going to go bananas when he starts getting dissed by his own Party - and he is going to start a "loyalty" battle in the Republican base, splitting the fanboys from the traditional Republicans.

if you're not trying to prove moral superiority, what ARE you trying to prove? it's not as if you're going to rid this place of michale by spamming the forum with flame-bait, which you know he'll bite like a fifty pound catfish. as TS says, even those who agree with you generally don't see the point in tilting at that particular windmill, and prefer not to have to scroll through the process.

JL

But the knot in the middle of the rope has barely moved since election day, and if you take Rasmussen out of the mix, 45's numbers soften like baby poo.

ANd if you take the low numbers out of the mix, President Trump's numbers are looking downright awesome..

In other words, if you use your own set of alternate "facts" you are proven correct..

But if you use the REAL set of facts based in reality, you are wrong...

Sa la vie.. :D

And yes, anyone who engages in trolling FOR FUN, is a troll. That's the definition of a troll; someone who antagonizes others for entertainment.

I'm not going to let lies and trolling go unanswered. If you don't like it, I suggest you guys convince him to stop. Because telling me to be the bigger man isn't going to work.

I've been the bigger man for years, watching this go on. I'm tired of it.

But the knot in the middle of the rope has barely moved since election day, and if you take Rasmussen out of the mix, 45's numbers soften like baby poo.

But the gist of it is that the electorate remains as divided today as it was on election day, split about 45-45 with the middle ten percent undecided, perhaps confused, and ready to chase the next rubber ball that flies by. Welcome to Polarized America.

45's reaction has been to simply assert that his numbers are better than they are, and to attempt to bully his agenda into being. Call it 'the Putin approach'. This has been met with catcalls and loud guffaws from the other 45 - all of those who didn't vote for him, and increasingly believe that he should be impeached. This is America after all, not Russia.

Things will remain this way until either moderate Republicans tire of trading principle for job security, or 45 realizes that he can't be president of only half a country.

I'd bet on the former rather than the latter. MSNBC is already filching moderate GOP voices from FoX news, and moderate GOP senators have rallied around a vigorous investigation of Russia-gate. Let's let that marinate for a minute, and see what happens.

Just because someone engages in trolling doesn't make them a troll, as you yourself demonstrate. but two people continuing to troll each other out of contrarian stubbornness does nothing to contribute to the level of discussion in this forum. if you're determined to get into a trolling match with michale, then you're making yourself into more of a nuisance than he is, and proving him right about you in the process. again, please do not engage.

JL

That is what I was looking for - but couldn't find it - only the detailed numbers, so I selected the polls that had three weeks of data - do you have a link to the historical RCP Poll of Polls?

Yea, there isn't a history yet established. Maybe RCP is waiting for a couple months worth of data before they graph it..

But there has been a general upwards trend even if there is a slight jaunt downward now and again..

Once the graph is establishes, we'll both have our baseline...