Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Mad_Machine76

Mad_Machine76's Journal
Mad_Machine76's Journal
January 28, 2019

There may not be anything we can do legally to prohibit it

but we can certainly make it politically unacceptable by categorically rejecting them, speaking out against what they're trying to do. I mean, they can still legally run if they want. We just don't have to accept/normalize it.

January 25, 2019

I fail to see how this makes a difference in anything

Whether he wanted it or not, he's been complicit in keeping it going. It could have ended in five seconds on January 3 if he had the Senate vote on the same bill they voted unanimously on in December but that's not what he did- in fact, he didn't allow a vote on ANYTHING for THREE whole weeks and couldn't be found unless it was to hold a vote on sanctions relief on Russian businessmen. Sorry. No sale here. #complicit

January 24, 2019

I don't think the MSM is making this up

But it's pretty clear to me why they're pushing the story now- to sink Biden's chances in the primary *if* he decides to run. While his decision to speak for Upton during an election makes me feel a little uncomfortable, if you read more into the article, it seems as though they have a personal relationship/rapport because of Upton's advocacy for cancer research, which claimed the life of his son, Beau. Given also that Biden came from a different political era where Republicans and Democrats had more comity, I'm not really as shocked about this as some other people might given the state/makeup of the current GOP. I'm not sure that I will support Biden if he chooses to run regardless, however.

January 24, 2019

It's mindblowing

that he wants it to go until March or April! Is he serious? Are Republicans seriously thinking about going there with him? Federal employees are already straining and other things are starting to be affected. Federal Courts run out of money tomorrow. I know that Republicans could care less about some of these people but they seriously can't withstand the increasing political pressures of a partially shut down government for months and months on end. This all is uncharted- and frightening- territory to be in.

January 24, 2019

Also

By the time things even start to get going on the project Trump will (likely) be out of office, either due to impeachment or defeat in 2020. Not even to mention that we shouldn't be normalizing hostage tactics for Presidents/MOC to be able to achieve what they want OUTSIDE of the normal political process. There's a reason we have a legislative branch and if politicians want something but can't muster up the votes for something, it just doesn't happen.

January 23, 2019

Do Republicans even want a Wall?

Or are they just going along with it because they're afraid of Trump/protecting Trump from another embarrassing failure? I don't really hear about Republicans sounding like they're actually much in favor of Trump's Wall so much as they are using it to keep the government shut down (probably to cripple it purposefully) and attack Democrats as "weak" on Border Security. Thoughts?

January 16, 2019

"Failure"?


He did a LOT in his first two years in office with a Democratic Congress and kept the country from falling into the abyss economically. And things were mostly peaceful and government was stable and staffed with actual competent people and we didn't suffer any major disasters. Much of what he didn't- or couldn't accomplish- had more to do with endless Republican Tea Party obstructionism in Congress and the Courts than what he actually might have supported/enacted if he had had more bipartisan cooperation from Congress. Perfect? No. Better than what came before and after? That's a resounding hell yes! Also, we can't keep electing Presidents and then being upset that they are failing to deliver certain policy goals when the obstruction party keeps getting (re-)elected to Congress over and over again. President Obama's biggest sin, at least in the eyes of many people, is that he was a pragmatist/realist who came to understand the truth that only certain things can get done so fast and that things like Medicare For All was likely going to crash and burn and opted for more "conservative" legislation that would at least move the ball down the field. If and when the progressive utopia some people are wishing for comes, it will be a gradual process, not an overnight one.
January 16, 2019

I would love to see a rematch

but I'd also be concerned that it would be a rehash of 2016- as unfair as that would be- with the outcome uncertain. A Trump/Hillary rematch would probably be just like "catnip" for the Trump base and would likely divide us. I have come to the sad but unmistakable conclusion that that 2020 should feature a new and clean slate of candidates (which also means no Bernie as well). Hillary, Gore, Kerry would have all been better Presidents than what we ended up getting in 2000, 2004, and 2016 but I feel that their time has, regrettably, come and gone. :-/

Profile Information

Name: Mara Alis Butler
Gender: Female
Hometown: Indianapolis, Indiana
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Member since: Sat Feb 28, 2004, 12:13 AM
Number of posts: 24,779

About Mad_Machine76

Transgender Woman /Social Worker/Case Manager working for State of Indiana. Huge Sci-Fi/Anime Geek and music lover. Hopeless \"political junkie\" and aspiring writer.
Latest Discussions»Mad_Machine76's Journal