ChrisWeigant.com

A Monumental Change In Washington

[ Posted Thursday, January 7th, 2021 – 18:08 UTC ]

You'll have to forgive me, but I'm going to wait until tomorrow to write about the yesterday's momentous events at the United States Capitol. Personally, I am still processing what happened, so I'm going to save that rant for Friday. Instead, I'd like to spotlight another momentous event yesterday; one that was seriously overshadowed by the riotous assembly at the Capitol, but will likely have much more long-lasting consequences for the next two years. I speak, of course, of the victories of both Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock in the two Senate runoff elections held Tuesday in Georgia. Because with these two wins, the Democrats will wrest control of the chamber away from Mitch "The Grim Reaper" McConnell. It'll be the smallest of majority margins -- 51-50 (with the addition of Kamala Harris to cast the tie-breaking vote). But the margin doesn't really matter, what does is being able to set the Senate's agenda -- and confirm Biden nominees, as well.

McConnell actually embraces that "Grim Reaper" moniker, shamefully proud that he's been able to scuttle literally thousands of good bills passed by the House while he's been in charge of the Senate. These bills just quietly disappear by the hundreds, while rarely (if ever) drawing any media coverage. McConnell has been, ever since Republicans won control of the chamber, the biggest obstructionist there is in Washington. Now -- at best -- he'll be relegated to minority leader status. That's if he doesn't either quit the Republican leadership ranks or resign his seat outright. Congressional leaders who preside over losing control of their chamber usually take one of these routes. They either become a backbencher with no real power, or they retire and graduate to "elder statesman" status within their party. Occasionally a leader bucks this trend -- Nancy Pelosi being the most prominent current example -- but usually a leader who sees their chamber slip from their party's grasp is not exactly held in the highest of esteem by his or her fellow party members.

But whatever route Mitch takes -- full retirement, backbencher, or minority leader -- his power and influence are going to be seriously diminished for at least the next two years. And that's a good thing indeed for America.

Control of the Senate will -- soon after Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are sworn in -- pass to Democrat Chuck Schumer. This means it will be Schumer who will set the calendar, Schumer who decides what bills will make it to the Senate floor, Schumer in any negotiations with Pelosi and the White House over legislative issues, and Schumer who will set the entire tone and agenda for the Senate for the next two years. It will also mean that -- if all the Democrats stick together -- Joe Biden will be able to nominate anyone he wants both to his cabinet and to federal judgeships.

That last one is important. McConnell has presided over a record number of federal judges being confirmed. There's a reason for that, and the reason is the judicial filibuster was killed in the first two "nukes" dropped in the Senate (the first by Harry Reid over all nominations except Supreme Court justices, and the second by McConnell to jettison Supreme Court nominee filibusters). McConnell and Donald Trump saw the first full term of a president with this expansion of power, which is why they set a record for hustling through judicial nominations on a very fast track.

But now Democrats will have their innings at bat in this game. Chuck Schumer can now do exactly the same thing McConnell has done, which means Biden can go a long way towards balancing this inequity on the federal bench. Which is important for the country at large, of course.

Legislatively, the swap in power in the Senate is going to mean Joe Biden's agenda at least gets a hearing and a vote on the Senate floor. This simply would not have been true without the two wins in Georgia. Mitch McConnell would have blocked just about every important item on Biden's agenda, except maybe an infrastructure bill or two. He would have gone right on doing exactly what he has been doing, obstructing everything except the bare minimum (the federal budget, mostly) that the Senate is required to accomplish. That's just not going to happen now.

Realistically, with a 50-50 Senate, it's going to be very hard indeed to get much of anything done, much less anything which could truly be called progressive. Even on matters which fall under "budget reconciliation" (which covers a lot, but nowhere near everything) and thus only require a simple majority vote, Democrats and Schumer will be limited by what the most conservative Democrat in the Senate agrees to. In other words, if Joe Manchin doesn't like it, it's probably not going to pass (remember Joe Lieberman, anyone?).

That's tough. When one vote changes the outcome, then each and every Democratic senator instantly becomes "the key vote." And some of them will, no doubt, abuse this power. It's what almost always happens in such a circumstance, after all.

And, crucially, Joe Manchin has already said he won't support eliminating the legislative filibuster. Taking this step (dropping the final nuke to kill the filibuster forever) might be the only way Biden really would be able to accomplish big things, so the fact that Manchin won't allow it to happen is likely to become a very big deal.

This will almost certainly mean that Schumer's going to have to get ten Republicans to cross the aisle to pass just about anything of importance. And ten is an awful lot. I mean, sure, there are a handful of what could be called "Republican moderates" ("Republican realists," more like -- Susan Collins, Mitt Romney, Lisa Murkowski, and perhaps a few others), but coming up with ten of them is going to be fairly tough to do. Even if Biden turns out to be right about "the fever breaking within the Republican Party" (which is now an actual possibility, after the Capitol was stormed by insurrectionists), it's still going to be tough to line up so many votes from across the aisle.

Which means Biden might be limited in what he can accomplish to only matters which have been traditionally (pre-Trump) bipartisan issues -- like finally passing an infrastructure bill. Because, without a lot of other buy-in from Republicans, they'll be able to stop anything else in its tracks.

Even so, Schumer will still be able to set the agenda and the floor schedule. This means that even if Biden and the Democrats are doomed to fail on one particular bill or another, Schumer will still be able to exact a political price from the Republicans for blocking it. He'll be able to force votes (cloture votes, but still good enough for this purpose), which will then be able to be used in campaign ads by Democrats looking to unseat the Republicans who cast them. That may sound like an inconsequential thing, but it isn't. Getting senators on the record on things like making it easier for everyone to vote or attacking climate change or raising the minimum wage -- or any number of other Democratic agenda items -- means they'll be forced to defend their position to the voters in the next election. With McConnell allowing bills to just wither on the vine and die without any votes at all, Republicans have been able to avoid this, up to this point. That's no longer going to be true.

The dynamics of Washington changed this week, in a big way. Senators-Elect John Ossoff and Raphael Warnock succeeded in actually turning Georgia blue (although the lion's share of the credit for this should go to Stacey Abrams). Perhaps it'll even stay blue once Trump exits the stage (this is in no way assured, I should admit). But beyond state-level politics, their victories are going to vastly improve the chances that incoming President Joe Biden will be able to make a serious push for consequential (perhaps even fundamental) changes. Which is why -- even in the midst of a constitutional crisis the likes of which have not been seen in a very long while in this country -- I think flipping the Senate might just be (later) seen as the most important political event of the week.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

70 Comments on “A Monumental Change In Washington”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    even if Biden and the Democrats are doomed to fail on one particular bill or another, Schumer will still be able to exact a political price from the Republicans for blocking it. He'll be able to force votes (cloture votes, but still good enough for this purpose), which will then be able to be used in campaign ads by Democrats looking to unseat the Republicans who cast them. That may sound like an inconsequential thing, but it isn't. Getting senators on the record on things like making it easier for everyone to vote or attacking climate change or raising the minimum wage -- or any number of other Democratic agenda items -- means they'll be forced to defend their position to the voters in the next election.

    That deserves repeating, over and over, again!

    Because, I think many of the 74 million who voted for Trump in 2020 have the same concerns about the economy, their own financial position, and about the pandemic and their own health that most of the 80 million who voted for Biden have.

    In other words, there are many Americans who can be persuaded, assuming the art of persuasion and communication is not a lost art.

    Let's just say that importance of the Friday Talking Points pieces have just become even more critical with respect to the interests of a majority of the American people!

  2. [2] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Some of the more colorful Capital Insurgents have already been ID'd:

    https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/07/954518782/law-enforcement-and-social-media-identifying-u-s-capitol-mob-members

    Lawyer up gang, you're going to need them. Big Daddy Trump isn't going rescue you.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Speaking of the filibuster, what do you think about the idea of Biden dangling the possibility of returning the 2/3 vote requirement for federal judges and Supreme Court justices if he gets a certain number of Republicans to support his top 5-10 agenda items (things that Republicans would pay a price for voting against, anyways) and if the two thirds vote requirement for judges and justices would not go into effect until, say, late 2024?

  4. [4] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    I wish I could say that I don't fear for Warnock's and Ossoff's lives just now, but I do. That's just how thin this margin is.

    Given Manchin's position, perhaps there is some adjustment to the legislative filibuster that he would vote for -- limited number of hours, fewer votes to override, or whatever the options might be to kill the 60-vote threshold for absolutely everything but budget reconciliation. Republicans are fine with no legislation passing, but Democrats need to get some stuff done for the people of this country.

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think I can remember Biden saying that "you will rue the day" when you eliminate the filibuster and let the majority rights trample on minority rights.

    Biden was never a fan of the nuclear option.

  6. [6] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    the trouble with trying to exact a political price from senators is that only a third of them will be coming up for reelection anytime soon.

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hmmm. Well, still, do you think it's worth a try, depending on what Biden asks for in return and when his end of the bargain would go into effect.

    And, just for the record, I am working under the assumption that there will be a second Biden term.

  8. [8] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    the larger problem with the senate is that around 28 of the 50 states are pretty conservative in their views. that doesn't mean dems can't be competitive, but they're starting at a deficit, both because the senate grants equal representation regardless of population, and because the house is gerrymandered up to wazoo.

  9. [9] 
    John M wrote:

    John From Censornati wrote:

    "At this point, the Qnut part owns the infrastructure, so if it splits, they're the survivors. "Third" parties don't have much chance. In other words, there will not be a split."

    A) Don't be too sure about that. A split can happen in other ways as well, apart from forming a 3rd party.

    B) Many former Republicans of the Lincoln Project have actually officially become Democrats.

    C) The ranks of those who switch from Republican to just plain old Independent might grow substantially also.

  10. [10] 
    John M wrote:

    [4] MyVoice wrote:

    "I wish I could say that I don't fear for Warnock's and Ossoff's lives just now, but I do. That's just how thin this margin is."

    I hate to say it, but given what just happened, I would also not rule out an attempt on Biden's life, by the MAGA crowd, centered around Inauguration Day.

  11. [11] 
    John M wrote:

    [8] nypoet22 wrote:

    "the larger problem with the senate is that around 28 of the 50 states are pretty conservative in their views. that doesn't mean dems can't be competitive, but they're starting at a deficit, both because the senate grants equal representation regardless of population, and because the house is gerrymandered up to wazoo."

    Still Democrats are already looking at 2 more Republican Senate seats that they have good chances of flipping in 2022. Ron Johnson's in Wisconsin and Pat Toomey's in Pennsylvania.

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua,

    Yeah, I understand that.

    I think the key with regard to my Chris quote in [1] is communication.

    How well will Biden and the Democrats be able to communicate with voters, especially voters in conservative states or conservative voters in any state, what the policies are and how those policies will be in their best interests.

    That's a tall order, I know. And, not because the policies won't be in most voters' best interests. I mean, we are talking about Democrats and communication in the same breath. Ahem.

  13. [13] 
    John M wrote:

    [8] nypoet22 wrote:

    "the larger problem with the senate is that around 28 of the 50 states are pretty conservative in their views. that doesn't mean dems can't be competitive, but they're starting at a deficit, both because the senate grants equal representation regardless of population, and because the house is gerrymandered up to wazoo."

    The trend that has become more and more the rule lately, is that that way a state votes in the electoral college for President, has also become the way it votes for its state Senators as well, in other words, no more split representation. If your state voted for a Democrat for President, then both your state Senators are likely to be Democrats too, and vice versa. That has become more the norm as things have shaken out over the past few election cycles.

  14. [14] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    John,

    The trend that has become more and more the rule lately, is that that way a state votes in the electoral college for President, has also become the way it votes for its state Senators as well, in other words, no more split representation.

    Interesting.

    What do think about the trend of voting for divided government at the national level? I guess a lot will depend on how the Biden administration governs in the first two years of its first term, eh?

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Can I say, in case I haven't already, that I love, love, love saying the Biden administration! :) Biden administration. Sorry. Heh.

  16. [16] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: I think flipping the Senate might just be (later) seen as the most important political event of the week.

    Yes, sir. :)

  17. [17] 
    John M wrote:

    [14] Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    "What do think about the trend of voting for divided government at the national level? I guess a lot will depend on how the Biden administration governs in the first two years of its first term, eh?"

    I think that after Obama lost total Democratic control after his first 2 years in office, Republicans became purely obstructionist, and divided government became a recipe for the disaster known as gridlock. It became no longer workable as bipartisanship died, with Mitch McConnell's vow to make Obama a one term President, and the Tea Party cry of all or nothing and no compromise. Our divided government's almost total lack of effectual response to the covid crisis also bears this out. Divided government just doesn't work anymore, and voters need to realize this. We've had a combined 10 years of it now, 6 years under Obama and 4 under Trump. It's now a take no prisoners zero sum game.

    We would have been better off with Canada's parliamentary system, where one party controls the legislature and the executive, and if you lose support or fail to pass your agenda, you don't have to stagnate, you just hold election after election until voters get tired and break the gridlock so that the entire government is at least on the same page again about some kind of agenda, no matter how small, that you can agree to pass cooperatively.

    Biden talks about changing this, but I don't know that he can, and now with Democrats holding all 3 branches, House, Senate and President, his job will be magnitudes easier. He might actually get something accomplished in the next 2 years. Just like Obama was able to pass Health Care in his first 2 years. So yes, it will depend on how the Biden administration and Democrats do in the next 2 years. Voters might even reward them thru 2 Biden terms and two Harris terms back to back. One can dream and hope.

  18. [18] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Divided government just doesn't work anymore, and voters need to realize this.

    I agree, wholeheartedly.

    So yes, it will depend on how the Biden administration and Democrats do in the next 2 years. Voters might even reward them thru 2 Biden terms and two Harris terms back to back. One can dream and hope.

    Oh, yes! One can and will certainly dream about and hope for that. :)

    We would have been better off with Canada's parliamentary system, where one party controls the legislature and the executive ...

    Okay, you totally lost me there. Heh.

  19. [19] 
    Kick wrote:

    FUN QUOTE OF THE DAY

    Those who violently besieged our Capitol are the opposite of everything this administration stands for.

    ~ Kayleigh McEnany

    *
    Hahahahahahahaha *pause to breathe* hahahahahahahaha

  20. [20] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Did she put that in a tweet? Heh.

  21. [21] 
    Kick wrote:

    FUN VIDEO OF THE DAY

    https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2021/01/08/trump-twitter-video-capitol-riot-response-national-guard-bash-sot-ebof-vpx.cnn

    The demonstrators who infiltrated the Capitol have defiled the seat of American democracy. To those who engaged in the acts of violence and destruction, you do not represent our country.

    ~ Donald Trump

    Yesterday it's, "We love you, you're special," and today "you do not represent."

    Thank you for your service QAnon nuts, Proud Boys, and MAGA lunatics... and now meet the wheels of the Trump bus... you were warned. :)

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    They never even saw it coming!

  23. [23] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    20

    Worse than that:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-press-secretary-kayleigh-mcenany/

    She said it live at the White House. The righties are insinuating that the protesters Trump repeatedly told to "march to the Capitol" and "take back our country" and Rudy Giuliani advised needing "combat justice" are not the ones who were incited by them.

  24. [24] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    No, I meant if she had also put it in a tweet more of his supporters would presumably see it.

  25. [25] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [21] I still expect the orange one to pardon all of Vanilla ISIS.

  26. [26] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    24

    No, I meant if she had also put it in a tweet more of his supporters would presumably see it.

    Oh, got it now. She didn't but Trump did:

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347334804052844550?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

    Full disclosure: Trump did not immediately deploy the National Guard. He went to the White House and gleefully watched the Capitol being stormed by the crowd he had just advised that he would march to the Capitol with them. Then he returned to the White House and had a great time with Mark Meadows and several others yucking it up while his thugs did exactly what he wanted.

    He loves them and they're special... oh, wait... that was yesterday; today they're wallowing in agony under the wheels of the Trump bus. Tomorrow, they're going to jail.

    The Capitol police officer died this afternoon. Trump is trying to distance himself from what he incited. It won't work, and Trump's pardon of himself won't be worth the paper it is written on.

  27. [27] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I'm glad to see that you didn't suggest that Schumer has to come to a power-sharing agreement with McConnell. I heard a lot of that on TV. Ridiculous. If the shoe was on the other foot, the GOP would never agree to that regardless of precedent.

  28. [28] 
    Kick wrote:

    John From Censornati
    25

    I still expect the orange one to pardon all of Vanilla ISIS.

    But, but, but John. He has promised to prosecute them. You're not insinuating he's lying, are you? ;) Heh.

  29. [29] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    He does lie sometimes.

  30. [30] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    DeVos has hit the road not one moment too soon. I suppose that means that the orange one has already pardoned her.

  31. [31] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    It would be great if McConnell resigned. We have a Democratic governor. I won't bet any money on that outcome.

  32. [32] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    The GOP, into sowing but the reaping not so much...

  33. [33] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Iraq has issued an arrest warrant for Short Fingers. He'd better check the extradition treaties in whatever country he decides to flee to.

  34. [34] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @jfc,

    not that donald hasn't done plenty that's worthy of being arrested for, but killing suleimani was one of the few decisions donald actually got right. it was certainly risky, but on balance it probably helped our middle east objectives.

    JL

  35. [35] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    ..."Biden will be able to make a serious push for consequential (perhaps even fundamental) changes."

    Joe Biden to big money donors:
    "Nothing will fundamentally change."

  36. [36] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Quite an amusing discussion on divided government.

    The media hacks claim that the division in our government is determined by whether Deathocrats or Republikillers are in control of the different legislative and executive branches of our government and the commenters here just accept that that is true.

    It is not.

    The Deathocrats and Republikillers are partners working together for the big money interests. The divide between the two partners is only a good cop/bad cop routine put on for the rubes. If you buy into it you are one of the rubes.

    The divided government we really have is the divide between the big money CMP politicians that represent the big money interests and ordinary citizens that have no politiicians representing them.

    Wake up. Wise up. Rise up.
    Get Real.

  37. [37] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    know what is better than divided government? sliced pie. it accomplishes much more, and it tastes a lot sweeter.

  38. [38] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [34] There are a lot of truly awful people in the world (including Fat Donny and Vanilla ISIS), but that doesn't mean that our government should be able to just kill them, so I don't agree with your response to my comment at all. In addition, the might-makes-rightness of that killing is irrelevant because the Iraqis don't agree with you either.

  39. [39] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    You know what's better than when the pie is sliced and divided amongst the big money interests by the big money Deathocrat and Republikiller con artists leaving ordinary citizens with nothing but the leftover crumbs?

    Anything.

  40. [40] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-21

    Trump didn’t exactly throw his schlock troops under the bus, he strongly suggested it might be fun...and most of them seemed to enjoy themselves. Casualties were light and most of the MAGA seems to have gone bar crawling that night. In the cold light of dawn some of them may have realized the charge was not a good idea....They survived the engagement but they didn’t hold their objective and have exposed themselves to legal typhoid. Contrary to pop culture, The Revolution WAS Televised and buddy, you are fingered. You fingered yourself with narcissism. Lawyers are expensive. Sedition is a crime. This is worse than divorce. Enjoy.

  41. [41] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @jfc,

    it seems you're approaching this from a moral perspective. yes, suleimani was most likely evil, and so most likely is donald, but i'm thinking more in utilitarian terms.

    JL

  42. [42] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @don,

    when we'll settle for "anything" outside the status quo, what we get is donald trump, 45th president of the united states. i still prefer pie.

    JL

  43. [43] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    RE: deVos

    don't let the door hit ya.

    JL

  44. [44] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Nypoet (42)-
    NO.

    100% wrong.

    When "we" settle for more of the same false alternative from the Deathocrats as in 2016 we get Trump.

    If we demand better from the Deathocrats to earn our votes and take our votes elsewhere if(when) the Deathocrats don't deliver then we don't get phonies like Trump or Obama or Biden. You know basic democracy. Unless you think democraqy doesn't work.

    Everyone prefers pie. That is not the issue.

    The issue is who is getting a slice of the pie and who is being left with crumbs.

    Your comments show which side of the equation you are on.

    Perhaps you should change your board name to Marie Antoinette. Or maybe just write a poem titled "Let 'Em Eat Crumbs".

  45. [45] 
    TheStig wrote:

    In my considered opinion, the Master Caution Warning Light is blinking with regards to the viability of our Federal Government. Sadly, I believe we will just put a piece of black tape over the indicator and drive heedlessly on.

    Complicated machinery requires routine inspection and repair if it is to remain safe and effective. We are overdue for a Constitutional Convention. They ought to occur at regular intervals...at least one per generation. Waiting for a breakdown to occur is foolish and irresponsible. We accept upgrading our military on a regular basis. Why should our Constitutional Machinery be any different?

  46. [46] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I'm so sick of all the winning. I hope that Republicans cling tight to the orange one while he intentionally destroys them.

  47. [47] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig (45)-
    Why settle for a piece of black tape when you can have the Biden Prism for only the price giving up your votes for nothing?

    The Biden Prism doesn't just cover up the red blinking light, it refracts it into an entertaining display so we don't even notice we have taken the road to oblivion.

    When you use the wrong oil it destroys the engine.

    Big Money is the wrong oil.

    It is the reason "we" don't have a choice but to accept wasting money on expensive military equipment and selling the rest of the world arms and munitions as upgrading our military as both CMPs are working for the big money interests that profit from military spending.

    I, for one, do not accept wasting money on expensive military equipment as upgrading our military.

  48. [48] 
    John M wrote:

    [45] TheStig wrote:

    "Complicated machinery requires routine inspection and repair if it is to remain safe and effective. We are overdue for a Constitutional Convention. They ought to occur at regular intervals...at least one per generation. Waiting for a breakdown to occur is foolish and irresponsible. We accept upgrading our military on a regular basis. Why should our Constitutional Machinery be any different?"

    Please remember that the one and only last time that we actually had a constitutional convention, they completely threw out the old constitution and wrote a totally new one. There's nothing to prevent them from doing the same thing again. Remember, some of the people calling for a constitution convention have explicitly stated that they want to do so, so that they can put specific restrictions on the First Amendment right of Free Speech, among other things. Let's try far less drastic solutions first, like reform laws passed by Congress and the constitutional amendment process itself. That is what it is there for in the first place after all, and has been successfully used 27 times to date. We don't need the added headache of people who voted for Trump because they wanted to blow or shake up the system, doing the same thing with a constitutional convention.

  49. [49] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    JM-
    Whether we are talking about constitutional conventions, amendments or reforming laws passed by Congress none of them will do anything substantial to benefit ordinary citizens as long as the big money politicians are running the conventions or passing the amendments and reforming the laws.

    Until citizens demand small donor candidates and enforce that demand with their votes so we will have legislators representing ordinary citizen instead of the big money interests not even your far less drastic approach has any chance of success.

    That is, after all, what the vote is there for in the first place.

    Lets try using it as it is the only way to make any of the other possible approaches work the way we believe they are supposed to work.

  50. [50] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Behold the complete lack of self-awareness from another obsessive-compulsive guy with an "only I can fix it" sales pitch as our orange nightmare careens toward its disastrous conclusion.

  51. [51] 
    John From Censornati wrote:
  52. [52] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Heh...Kevin Greeson died in the most MAGA way possible and one of the the greatest examples of instant karma. He stormed the capital and while trying to take down a painting of Tip O'Neill accidentally triggered a tazer in his pocket, shocking his testicles and causing a heart attack...

  53. [53] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Isn't that special?

  54. [54] 
    TheStig wrote:

    John M -48

    "remember that the one and only last time that we actually had a constitutional convention, they completely threw out the old constitution and wrote a totally new one"

    True enough, but the Articles of Confederation were deemed inadequate and the Constitutional Convention of '87 produced a system of government good enough to make the USA a 2 ocean, global power instead of a tidal backwater with a 3 cornered economy based on rum, hats and slaves.

    A government can't live on historical glories alone. The last change to the US Constitution was the 27th amendment of 1789, which was rush-ratified 202 years after it was proposed. The 26th amendment was the last modern amendment to be ratified, and that was back in 1971. That's still a longer wait than the line at the BMV!

    Article 5 of the US Constitution sets a very bar to simply hold a constitutional convention.... It would require a lot negotiation to get 2/3 of the US Congress (House & Senate) or 2/3 approval of State Legislatures. So, merely setting up the meeting would require a lot of discussion and negotiation...which in and of itself would be a good, air clearing thing.

    Talking is generally better than fighting. We just bumped into some honest-to-God fighting...and we could see more of it. Trump has flirted with fascism, and he is not out the door on his ass yet. He may continue to make trouble when his ass is out the door, possibly in Scotland if you believe some the recent news reports.

  55. [55] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    JFC-
    The only lack of self awareness around here is those that believe in the Deathocrats as well as a lack of awareness of the reality of the world they live in.

    I did not say only I could fix it.

    I said democracy was the only way to fix it.

    You got a better idea than democacy let's hear it.

  56. [56] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    Insurrection--

    "an organized attempt by a group of people to defeat their government and take control of their country, usually by violence"

    Donald T Trump was and still remains, the head of that government.

    Do you see how inssurection doesn't fit?

    Putsch--

    "an attempt to remove a government by force"

    Elegantly less precise, but more apt.

    source--

    https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/english?q=English

    LL&P

  57. [57] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    [55] You thought I was referring to you?

  58. [58] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    JFC-

    I thought you were referring to him. It fits perfectly. I guess it can refer to more than one thing...

  59. [59] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    What a true Patriot looks like. [apnews.com]

    No, seriously...

  60. [60] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Perdue has conceded! Bye Mitch.

  61. [61] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    They're closing in on the dim-witted, anti-masker flex cuff terrorists that the orange one sent to kidnap and kill Mike Pence. What a shame they won't get to wear their cosplay outfits for their mugshots. Orange is the new MAGA.

  62. [62] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    JFC-
    Yes I did.

    It followed my comment with nothing to suggest it was about anyone else and fit the typical type of comment made about me here.

  63. [63] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    'Permanently suspended'

    Twitter, @realDonaldTrump...

    lol

    LL&P

  64. [64] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    JTC [63]

    Ahhh.... The best news I've heard in a long, long time.

  65. [65] 
    TheStig wrote:

    The wheels have come off the Republican Clown Car and the clowns are running for cover. The photos and video of the ransacking of the US Capital are killing the Republicans. Trump has become radioactive. Very late in the game, but better very late than never.

    I don’t think the costumed vandals being rounded up by law enforcement are going to hold up well under interrogation....if you recall the Seinfeld episode where Kramer was a murder suspect...I think the suspects are going break down just like Kramer did... But Kramer had an alibi. All the Capital Gang have is incriminating videos of their caper. If this was movie, nobody would think the plot was plausible.

  66. [66] 
    TheStig wrote:

    JMC-64

    It does warm the hesrt.

  67. [67] 
    TheStig wrote:

    JMC-64

    It does warm the heart.

  68. [68] 
    John M from Ct. wrote:

    TheStig [65]

    As I've been reading in some more thoughtful pieces, the clowns in the costumes have been getting all the publicity. Colorful idiots, etc.

    But in fact there was a core group that led the penetration of the Capitol, dressed in black combat gear, masked, armed, and carrying wrist-ties in bulk. They showed all the signs of being ex-military, if not worse (i.e., active duty law enforcement or military).

    They missed capturing any Congressmen, but who can doubt they were looking to take, and possibly/probably, execute hostages in exchange for an electoral vote victory for Trump? Give me Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's or Nancy Pelosi's life expectancy if these guys had managed to capture them?

    This looked like a clown show, but at its core it was no clown show at all. And if they ever even capture these guys, I doubt they'll 'talk' or incriminate any higher-ups who may have coordinated this attack with the suspiciously lax security perimeter of the Capitol on the day.

  69. [69] 
    Kick wrote:

    nypoet22
    37

    know what is better than divided government? sliced pie. it accomplishes much more, and it tastes a lot sweeter.

    Yes! And it is the responsibility of every journalist to inform the people about the greatness of pie. Where is our article pushing pie for the people? How long must we troll this site for our just desserts?

    Bake up. Rise up. Pies up.
    Get real whipped cream.

  70. [70] 
    Kick wrote:

    TheStig
    40

    Trump didn’t exactly throw his schlock troops under the bus, he strongly suggested it might be fun...and most of them seemed to enjoy themselves.

    Did you watch the video at the link I posted? It's was the proverbial "cover your ass" video where you distance yourself from the criminals who committed multiple crimes -- up to and including murdering a police officer -- but only after you personally sent them to the capitol to interfere in the constitutional responsibility of America's elected Senators and Representatives who on that day were certifying the election of which you yourself were on the losing end. Immediately after, Trump tells them: "We love you; you're very special." And then the next day, true to Trumpian form, the next day he distances himself from his multiple requests to "march to the capitol" and "take back our country." Trump used them to actively interrupt a constitutional mandate, and that's a violation of his oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." When it backfired and people died, he began covering his own ass and throwing them under the bus. Some of them are upset about it, and others have decided it's a "deep fake" video that isn't Trump at all. Sad isn't it?

    Casualties were light and most of the MAGA seems to have gone bar crawling that night.

    MAGAts are crawlers.

    In the cold light of dawn some of them may have realized the charge was not a good idea....They survived the engagement but they didn’t hold their objective and have exposed themselves to legal typhoid.

    It was preplanned for weeks. They're planning more.

    Contrary to pop culture, The Revolution WAS Televised and buddy, you are fingered.

    Short fingered but fingered nevertheless.

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]