I think the good news is Lamb is a very moderate Dem, a centrist. Perhaps the Dems will take note and run moderate candidates and pull the party back from the edge of stage left and get back to being the party of the working class. If so, the midterms will be the opposite result of the beatings Obama took at the hands of the ‘Pubs in the last 8 yrs. and the Pubs did it by running solid candidates (generally).

Midterms typically don't go well for the party in power. The math makes it likely that the Repubs may still gain seats in the Senate but they'll almost assuredly lose seats in the House. Can the Dems take back the majority? Doubtful, but will be close and interesting.

If the Dems win the house, then Trump will definitely be impeached. The Senate will acquit of course.

800ish votes in it right now.. crazy.

Compared to the alt right whack job he was running against, Lamb was a voice of reason. But the reality is this election was more about Trump than either of the candidates. It's quite clear that the orange hair wonder was rejected in a state that gave him a 20% advantage last time. It's been close but after losing in solid GOP states Alabama and Penn that says something loud and clear.

Ya looking at the two running Lamb was the more centrist for sure. And you are right in that if either party nominates the wack jobs that run on the far right or left, I think this upcoming electorate is going to reject them. Except for in areas where mostly wack jobs live and they can push through a Maxine Waters or some white supremest dude running on the confederate flag..

Wow only about 800+ votes with 99% in and over a lot of absentee ballots to count still. Seems like it should be over, but I don't hear any fat ladies singing as of yet. I think the news is going to milk this to tomorrow morning, I'm going to bed and boycotting this bullshit...'

I hope Lamb wins - Trump needs to feel the weight of the moderates across the country (and so do the Dems for that matter). Just like Alabama - run solid moderate candidates or lose. The moderates on both sides are fine w me. And Lamb rejected Pelosi. He’s a great candidate.

Trump needs to feel the weight of the moderates across the country //

Not really going to matter how much weight he feels from moderates, he is on his on a collision course and he is taking his 35% of always Trumpers with him. He will of corse spin this in his mind as a win somehow, actually he will blame someone else for it and move on. If his guy wins by 1 vote it will all be because of him(disregarding the 20 points he won the district by last year). He really is on a train to no where, only question is how much damage is he going to do to our country and system when he finally crashes it.


I honestly dont think he makes it through this first term, he will be the first ever president to just quit( not counting Nixon who was going to be impeached if he didn't resign.) And of course that will be someone else's fault too, all those Russian banks that forced that money on him to run through his towers and hotels..

It will be interesting to see how Trump tries to spin doctor this into a "win" for himself. He'll probably blame it all on Saccone for "not listening to me" or something similar. Even if Saccone is able to pull it back by a few votes, it's still a loss for Trump no matter how he spins it.

Funny you say he’ll quit - I’ve been telling my wife that for a while. He’ll eventually throw up his hands and walk once he sees the legal troubles hitting hard (it’ll be in his financial dealings). We shall see...

Dems will probably do well if they keep running anti-Pelosi, pro-gun former Marines in conservative districts. I think PA and AL had more to do with the people running than with Trump. Lotta Trump voters couldn't tolerate Roy Moore in AL and I can see why a Trump voter would choose Lamb over the old dude the Repubs ran. I think incumbents will fare better than Repubs did in these 2 open-seat races.

Agreed. Extremists are not the solution.

This seems about right. This one tidbit from Saccone blew my mind.

"I've talked to so many of these on the left," Saccone said. "And they have a hatred for our president. I tell you, many of them have a hatred for our country."
"I'll tell you some more — my wife and I saw it again today, they have a hatred for God," Saccone continued.
WTF?! I mean, seriously, WTF?!
Isn't it just possible that a person can disagree with your party and NOT hate the country and hate God?
If I was on the fence for this guy, those comments would push me right over to the other candidate. How can anybody think this is going to get you votes? The people this resonates with are already with him right? It's not like somebody who agrees with that comment is going to vote for the democrat I'd think.

---

Kevin

http://kevinmetcalfe.dreamhosters.com
My Strava

But Trump is the reason that these wacko candidates have gained traction. Other more moderate candidates lose out to the wackos because the Trump voters prefer the screwballs.

I don’t know anything about Saccone but this is certainly untrue when it comes to Roy Moore. He’s been a figure in Alabama politics forever.

I think we should be prepared to start hearing "Madame Speaker" early next year.

---

Suffer Well.

As long as it's not Pelosi.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

Lamb didn't have to contend a primary which must have helped a centrist get the nomination without making commitments to the left of where he needed to be to win.

It's coming....



The blue tidal wave

---

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's

This is going to be an interesting mid-term, no doubt. It almost makes me enjoy politics again.

Alabama's adoration of Moore should be an embarrassment to them, but they seem fine with it. I don't think you can draw many conclusions from that race.

The PA race should cause a little more worry in Trumplandia. There was nothing especially wrong with Saccone. He was kind of blah, but he wasn't chasing high school cheerleaders through the mall either. And this district went for Trump by 20 points, that's a big swing in 2 years. But one election does not make a trend.

I find it amusing that people don't understand that a lot of liberal don't like Pelosi as the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party, think abortion should be legal but also personally against it, and don't think all guns should be banned. I'm about as far left as you can get and I fit all 3.

538 ran an article in December, https://fivethirtyeight.com/...cratic-wave-in-2018/ I think they make more of special elections than they actually are, but right now it is the only actual thing we can lay our hands on. And the trend is pretty apparent there.

But if I were the Republicans I would ask, has Trump gained supporters or lost them? Has he brought more people into the GOP or turned more people off? Do middle of the road voters want more or less people in Congress supporting Trump? Do you think the news around Trump will trend positive or negative between now and November?

He won by a razor thin margin across a small handful of states. Even if you don't care about the popular vote, a few states that swung it to Trump were very close. FL - 1.3%, MI - 0.3%, PA - 1.2%, WI - 1.0%. It doesn't take much erosion of support to have a very different map.

But we will see. In 7 or 8 months we will have our answer.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I dont think 538 plays too much into special elections. Its just something that is easier to write articles about.

They say in most of their articles reporting about the swings/blue wave that estimates about how things will play out in the fall are based on: 1) historical data, 2) president polling, 3) generic ballots, 4) special elections.

I'm pretty far right and agree with you on all 3 (and you could substitute Trump or Ryan/Repub party for Pelosi/Dem party). Where are the people like us in DC? Imagine what the 2 of us could get done...........

Yep, and current day DC has a way of getting centrists on both sides to step in line with the Party.

I don't know. I'm not a Pelosi fan, and I agree that she's wildly unpopular here among younger, active librals in LiberalHaven CA.

That said the winners of these seem to show a preference for moderates. Even if that's possibly just the dynamics of these particular special elections.

And Pelosi is a moderate. Ryan is a moderate. So maybe people are "over" Pelosi/Ryan, but I think the smart thing to do would be to find substitutes that really aren't that different.

During the Trump election a "moderate" was a horrible thing for a class of GOP voters. Worse than a Democrat. I think that approach may have to be reconsidered unless they want literal Democrats running things. That bluff is being called.

Believe it or not, I also don't think the best answer to problems is to throw money at it, that there are most likely a metric shit ton of government programs that serve little to no purpose and can be eliminated, and public assistance should be tied to the receivers either working or getting education/training. Oh, and welfare should not be in the form of what looks like a tax return.

We probably differ on how we would go about solving problems, but if people would be more pragmatic and less tribal you could actually have a discussion.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Actually Lamb winning shows the opposite. He got votes of Trump voters because he is more moderate. The people that voted for trump don't want the extremist. Trump is different, but he's not Far-Right. In fact he is probably more moderate than the candidate who shall not be named was. Just like on the left, you see pockets where a Maxine Waters can be nominated and win. That is not the Norm in most of the country.

And if both sides put up quality candidates there will be some really good races. It's like has been said before, the reason the Dems lost the president race was they put up a candidate more flawed than Trump. And that is really hard to do.

Trump by no means is a moderate. Most things he has done have been in line with the heavy leaning side of the party. Immigration, Supreme court, tax cuts, health care, etc. He may say things that have a moderate lean to it, but he says a lot.

can i ask you, since you are among the more reasonable thinkers on this board as well as i can tell, what you have against nancy pelosi? because, i don't really have a strong opinion one way or the other. which is, i think, a pretty logical position, because most of us don't really know much about the inner workings of leadership in the house. i never had any problem, really, with john boehner. i thought denny hastert seemed fine, until...

paul ryan seems like a decent guy trying to do a hard job. i don't hate any of these people. but, a lot of people seem to really have a hate on for nancy pelosi. and i don't know why that is. can you help?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I don't have that much (if anything) against Pelosi herself. I'm not sure I know enough about her to dislike her on a personal basis and I doubt our politics are all that far apart.

But she can't be the mouthpiece. She rubs too many people the wrong way. And even if it isn't her fault, she has become a rallying point for the opposition and they use her to turn off the middle.

Yes there is a problem of letting your opponent pick your players. But you have to win elections in order to rule. And I think she hurts more than she helps at this point.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

I don’t think you’re as far left as you think you are ;-)

The tribalism drove me away from the Repub party. I’m simply a concerned citizen, without a party affiliation now.

in other words, the big industry money fueling the messaging on the right - fueling fox news, limbaugh, etc. - has successfully made pelosi an object of extreme hate and vitriol. and because of that, democrats need to pick a new person that has not yet been defined by the right. is this what you're saying? because, if it is, then fine. but then let's all just agree that the voters on the right who have this extreme hate for pelosi have let big commercial money make them into the gimps in the basement. again.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Why do you hate God so much?

I'm not sure I would use those exact words :), but yes, she has become a lightning rod.

I don't think that it helps at all that she is older, a woman, and does not have a pleasing voice. Perception matters. And for the middle of the road voter between the Rockies and the Appalachians she isn't moving the needle. I'm not saying she needs to leave Congress. I'm saying the Democrats need new visible leadership. Clinton, Pelosi and Reid were no longer appealing to people.

Over time people tend to wear out their welcome. For politicians it is especially difficult because you end up taking difficult positions for a variety of reasons.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

Any alt-righter worth his/her tinfoil hat will tell you... it's not Pelosi, its "Peh-loh-ZEE"

so, she needs to be a man. she needs to be a certain age, regardless of her ability. and she needs to have a different timbre. those are her disqualifications.

look, i don't know that i disagree with you, that perhaps there just ought to be a change because of longevity's sake. you oughta be on that job only so long and then someone else perhaps ought to take over. otherwise you perpetuate the view that nothing is going to change.

but let's be honest about what the real reason is. if the problem is the hatred of pelosi - not what you and i are talking about, but the hatred - this needs to be called out for what it is: the willing suspension of fact and reason in support of the natural gravity toward hate that pulls on everyone. the limbaughs and hannitys of the world are traffickers of hate. they are funded by those who traffic in hate. who use hate as a weapon. and the unreasonable, out of any proportion, hatred of pelosi, hillary clinton, and obama is the result of that.

if you hate pelosi, the problem is not pelosi. the problem is your intellectual laziness, your moral compliance. if you hate obama, same. these are decent people, and it's okay to disagree with them. it's okay to vote against them. i disagree with much of what gary johnson, elizabeth warren, bernie sanders, jeb bush, mitt romney, have to say. bill weld is a republican/libertarian. i disagree with him on issues. but how can you hate that guy? he is the least hatable person in politics.

if nancy pelosi gets replaced, okay. but we need to agree that the main reason is because we sat by and said nothing as people were simply harangued to hate her. and how shitty is that?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

What I can tell you about Pelosi is that when she used govt transportation to go home on the weekends she did not find it seemly to have a USAF gulfstream parked on the ramp at her local airport. So she sent it back empty, then had it fly back to CA empty to pick her up for the ride home. Talk about a waste of cash ...

Of course, this goes for politicians on both sides of the aisle. Somehow they forget that they represent us, they do not rule us.

drn92

For me, Pelosi just doesn't seem to have much of a voice in the national political discussion, nor much vision and leadership. I only occasionally see her speak, and those times are mostly short sound bites of her giving a speech somewhere. This means the narrative we hear is what the news organization chooses to show... just a clip. Maybe it's different over on the west coast...

I see and hear much more from Chuck Schumer. I don't always agree with him, but I certainly know what he thinks about many issues.

The Democrats need a communication tool to counter Trump's twitter account. They have allowed him to dominate this means of communication, with little in the way of a response. They should be thankful they have CNN to hold a fire to the feet of the crap Trump does and says, because the Democrats are doing a poor job of doing that themselves IMO.

So I don't think it's a problem Pelosi is a woman, or even a little older. I do think it's a problem that I have no idea what she thinks about most things, and I rarely see her on TV. I would MUCH prefer someone like Cory Booker (I know he's a Senator) be the main voice of the Democrats in the House. Booker is highly articulate, passionate and reasonable, despite many who try to paint him as some kind of radical.

Speaking of Booker, I enjoyed this interview:

https://www.theatlantic.com/...gainst-trump/554072/

I think when people say they "hate" Pelosi they mean they hate her politics, not her personally. You seem to have propped up "hate Pelosi" into something it isn't, at least not to me. How can one hate her personally when they don't know her personally? (side bar, should we apply that to Trump too?) And I think I'm neither a gimp nor intellectually lazy to feel like I disagree with her politics and the direction she would lead this country if she were SOTH again.

I call BS. Can you cite a source for this claim that she sends it back to DC?

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

That's great, and you're probably right about why the right tries to vilify her, but it doesn't change my views or perception about her. Maybe she needs to spend less time fundraising out west and more time in Washington. I honestly don't know.

Snipping because the quote was getting long.

"so, she needs to be a man. she needs to be a certain age, regardless of her ability. and she needs to have a different timbre. "

Well, those don't hurt in politics right now. I think Gavin Newsome and Cory Booker are going to get a better response than Pelosi, using the same script. Kind of like how this Eddie Izzard bit describes



I'm looking at it as straight strategy. Not making a moral judgment. I enjoy the game of politics and figuring out what motivates people. From that perspective it does no good to be righteous and lose.

But I agree, the strategy in how to respond needs to change. When someone uses the tactics of Hannity or Limbaugh you need to respond and use that against them. Too often people shrink from that confrontation. That makes you look weak and makes their attack work even better. I'm a fan of aggressive campaigning. It doesn't have to go low, but it does need to be strong.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

fine. let's remember this. perhaps we'll circle back to see whether i'm just making this up, that the alt republican hate entertainment complex (hannity, limbaugh, laura ingraham, ann coulter) hates pelosi, or whether they hate pelosi.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Amazing talent, Eddie Izzard. He's done stand up in English, French, German and Spanish, and this year is learning Arabic and Russian to do shows in those languages too!

I don't understand your point in this post entirely (you do seem infatuated with conservative talk hacks) but you didn't limit your comments about people who "hated" Pelosi to those guys, at least it didn't seem that way -- basement living gimps and intellectual laziness seemed to apply to anyone who, in your words, "hates" her. Did you not mean it that way?

The right has made Pelosi a campaign target just as the left has Trump. Hannity, Maddow. Tomato, Tom-ah-to.

i am not infatuated with conservative talk hacks. unfortunately, many conservatives are, and this feeds into the public perception of pelosi. there is a terrific hatred - not disagreement with, but abject hatred - of certain personalities on the left by certain of those on the right. and, no, it is not symmetric. so, when i read hillbilly elegy and i try to understand this cohort's point of view, the hatred is one thing that keeps us from talking.

yes, there is anger. we keep hearing about that. anger. frustration. etc. but, if its my responsibility to understand what makes white working class man angry, he has a responsibility too, which is to separate the root reason for his anger apart from the reasons rush limbaugh is feeding him.

the thing is to not willingly become a basement living gimp. the thing is to not let limbaugh and hannity walk you down to the basement. and to recognize that if you react to obama, or pelosi, with visceral hate then do you have a rational reason? if so, fine. what is it? if not, you're in the basement. it's gotten well past any sort of disagreement you and i can talk about as neighbors.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You can't really believe that.

---

War is god

yeah. i do. and it's patently true to anyone with ears to hear. there is one group of people - most recognizable as the trump enthusiast (as opposed to the let's give him a try trump voter), who is also very likely the limbaugh/hannity listener - who is programmed to hate. who has been taught to hate.

this isn't a left-right thing. this is a kind of person who has been programmed to hate both the left and the right. right now mitch mcconnell is getting his dose of the hate machine. the tactic here isn't just to take issue with mcconnell. it's to sneer at him, to make him a derisive figure worthy of hate.

i don't like mcconnell's politics at all, nor am i a fan of his tactics. but he's very likely a decent man.

there is no hate machine at work in normal conservative politics. you don't see george will, david frum, max boot, michael steele, eric erickson, et al, engaging in hate politics. you don't see a hate machine on the left. you only see it from the hate media complex.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

And this is the problem in our politics today ... both sides think it is asymmetric.

I think it's symmetric. But it's not possible to have a conversation with someone who refuses to recognize that or does recognize it but feels the hate from their side is somehow justified. How anyone from the left could talk about hate only coming from the right given all the hate directed at Trump/Pence from the left right now is so beyond my ability to comprehend that I cannot take that person seriously. I guess someone will accuse me of arguing incredulity now, but it's pretty incredible.

//you don't see a hate machine on the left. you only see it from the hate media complex. //


I'm curious - on the topic of politically driven hatred of a political individual...you make the statement there is not 'hate machine' on the left. How do you categorize the strategic effort to categorize any non-lefties of being racist, mysogonistic, pedophiles? Do agree those who are not Dems are of this class of folk? Do don't see this engine as a 'hate machine'?

Not disagreeing with you sentiment on the right...I have friends who still believe Obama literally hated America and was a Muslim plant, etc, etc. Limbaugh. He's an anesthiologist and she's an RN so hardly the 'knuckle draggers' such folks are commonly called.

We are the few. I am not suggesting that it is symmetric at all times but, generally speaking, no side is more or less guilty of bad behavior and a willingness to despise the other side. Maybe this will lead us to a viable third party. Look at this particular race. It is my understanding that Lamb is a Marine who served honorably, he is relatively new to politics, he supports the 2nd Amendment (whatever that means), and he thinks it is time for new House leadership (does not support continued Pelosi leadership). Who would not strongly consider voting for this guy? Now look at this forum. We are generally well-educated, successful, smart, and most likely kind people. But when it comes to politics, we seem to divide as deeply and starkly as any other group of people.

Who would not strongly consider voting for this guy? //

Just about exactly half the people in his district that voted yesterday.. And that half voted for pretty much a right wing fringer. Of course that is the only kind of candidate that can win the primaries in a lot of districts, so perhaps these crushing losses( crushing in that it should have been a slam dunk for any republican as little as a year ago) will help the party work harder on putting up more moderate candidates. Hell, Lamb could have been a republican in any normal election of normal candidates. Guess that is why he won against such odds..


But then again, even Roy Moore got nearly half the vote too, so maybe it is not yet time for that side to go moderate yet?

brother, if i could identify a hate media complex that actually spewed that, i would be just as animated in my condemnation. but i don't see that. what i do see is mob mentality pointed at folks who make statements that don't toe the perfect line (as what happened to matt damon), and that is very worrisome to me. those voices typically emanate from the left.

but that's not apparently what you're talking about. what you suggest is that there is an analog on the left to what i've identified on the right, which is a commercially-driven, industry-funded, left wing hate media complex, driving readers, listeners, viewers to hate those who stand in the way of those business interests, duping left wingers into voting a particular way because of abject hate for particular figures on the right.

i don't see that. but i'm sure interested in seeing who you think that is. because i'm sure you feel you want to stamp that out. just as you want to stamp out the alt-republican hate machine.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

You still have the pull of my side versus the other side when it comes to (1) a national legislative agenda and (2) SCOTUS appointments. It is my position that these two items have become much more important than they ever should have become. Consequently both sides tend to hold their noses and vote based on the impact a Democrat or Republican might have on these items rather than on whether the candidate is a solid representative for their district.

Now, look at your post. Here you are still sniping at voters who went for Trump or, more likely, against Hillary, by 20% but yet somehow managed to vote across party lines for a solid candidate. I don't think you can chalk this up entirely to voter turnout. So here you have a solid candidate persuading solid people to cross party lines. Seems like maybe these Republicans and the ones in Alabama (or at least a good portion of therm) are not who you thought they were.

Those voters wanted something different after 8 years of one party. Hilary was likely to be more of the same. Many people assume a change will be an improvement, though it doesn't always turn out that way. But they're happy to roll the dice. This is why game show contestants often make irrational decisions to gamble.

But now they realise that Trump's promises were empty. They aren't much better off, and they have a mysoginistic buffoon for a president.

How were promises empty?

1. Tax reform
2. Financial boom in the markets
3. Record low unemployment across all demographics (I think)
4. Wages slowly on the rise
5. Conservative SCOTUS appointment
6. Obamacare on the way out
7. Wall in prototype phase
8. North Korea talking to South Korea and potential sit down with POTUS - stamp of approval from Jimmy Carter

I suppose some promises remain unfulfilled and some have been held up in the courts.

What promises are you suggesting were empty?

I'm really starting to think you are just teasing and playing games now. Do you not see MSNBC/CNN as analogous to Fox News? I think the goal of each of those networks is to attract viewers so they can sell advertising. And the formula that works, from both sides, is to spark outrage from the viewer. I don't know why it works because it makes me change the channel, but they all do it. I don't think there's a more hated politician than Trump right now. Surely you see that coming from the left.

What's your opinion of Rachel Maddow?

---

War is god

no you don't.


not close. not even close! MSNBC is designed to give the left a voice. yes. if you watch (let us say) joy reid, you're going to get a view from the left. no doubt. rachel maddow. from the left. obviously so.

but you're not going to get sneering, sarcastic, hate-speak as you'll get from laura ingraham.

and, look, if you want to say that shepard smith or chris wallace is the analog of lawrence o'donnell, fine. two point of view. all gentlemen. all wedded to fact or a close proximity. that's not what i'm talking about.


you bet. but he earned it. obama never earned it. you could disagree with him, as i disagreed often (not always) with mitt romney. but mitt was (and is) civil. a gentleman. same with both bush presidents and john mccain. trump is different, and he's hated by the left and the right for all sorts of righteous reasons. that is another subject, however.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

what rachel maddow is not is a sneering, sarcastic, deliverer of hate. she's a lefty. no doubt you're going to get the lefty perspective. she is likely to avoid talking about themes that don't fit her narrative. but she's not going to flat-out lie to fit her narrative, and if she gets caught reporting something that just is false, she'll typically admit it. same with chis wallace, shep smith, same with megyn kelly when she was there.

but tucker carlson, sean hannity, driving the batshit conspiracy is their stock in trade.

look, even if the left wanted to do it, they couldn't. most of the left wing media just isn't wired that way. most of the professional right wing media - WSJ, dallas morning news, etc. - also isn't wired that way.

but to bring this back to the point, several posts ago, the problem with nancy pelosi isn't nancy pelosi. the problem with nancy pelosi, politically, is that the rush limbaughs of the world decided she's worthy of hate. and so you hate her. but you don't really know why you hate her. all you know is that you hate her and there must be a pretty good reason for it or else you wouldn't hate her (since you're not a hateful person). and that's rush walking you down the basement stairs and sticking an orange ball in your mouth. and no, there is no left wing media analog to that.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I call BS, as I'm reading Dan's point here ~ in that Trump is casting the spotlight on himself in tweet after tweet after tweet, unlike the barrage of hatchet jobs Fox & friends have targeted upon Pelosi. You can try to blame Maddow, MSNBC, et al for anti-Trump sentiment (no doubt they do try), but he's holding by far the biggest bullhorn himself; Pelosi, as others have noted, simply doesn't put anywhere near as much fodder out there herself. Not an apples to apples comparison by a long shot.

Personally, I don't really care for Pelosi in somewhat the same way I didn't like Hillary either, even if I agree w/ their platforms more often than not ~ she just comes across as kinda shrill and shrewish. I realize full well those are loaded terms that sound like I only dislike them for being women, but simply as a point of reference I don't have the same reaction to Feinstein (a very close analog for Pelosi politically and geographically), or several other female senators past & present (either of the 2 from WA; or Snowe & Collins from ME just off the top of my head, other than Collins talks funny).

So basically this// end thread.

1. Tax reform - specifically:

• Filing on a post-card! (obviously hyperbole but the promise was a radical simplification of our tax code - remember him wanting to put H&R block out of business?)
• Closing loop holes, most notably carried interest such that there would be no net tax cut for the upper class - the so called Mnuchin rule. Proposed 44% tax rate on incomes about $5m as a part of that. To stress, carried interest was an absolute cornerstone of his campaign and it got dropped without any public pushback whatsoever. Pure lobbying.
• Massively (and, by inference, permanently) reducing taxes on whatever we're calling the middle class now. That's not the way it's shaken out for me - you?

2. Financial boom in the markets

• Easy to keep a good economy burning when you throw a trillion dollars of new public debt on the fire.

3. Record low unemployment across all demographics (I think)
4. Wages slowly on the rise

• No real argument here

5. Conservative SCOTUS appointment

• I don't understand why he gets "extra" credit for this? Scalia died, McConnell cynically refused to allow hold hearings on the Democratic nominee on the off chance of a miracle and he rolled a pair of sixes. What does this have to do with Trump?

6. Obamacare on the way out

• The pitch was "repeal and replace." They've done neither.

7. Wall in prototype phase

• A wall is in prototoype phase in my backyard. This was a wall from sea to shining sea that Mexico was going to pay for. That wasn't gravy, that was the only political cover for this boondoggle.

8. North Korea talking to South Korea and potential sit down with POTUS - stamp of approval from Jimmy Carter

• The jury is very very far out on how this turns out. Agreeing to meet someone is not an achievement. I have a sinking suspicion he is going to get beclowned by North Korea.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek

The suggestion was “empty promises.” I’m not sure you did much to establish “empty promises.” You don’t have to like his agenda to acknowledge that he has implemented or is in the process implementing enough of it to counter a charge of “empty promises.”

Actually I don't think Brick quite got the point right.

In any case, this is not new. I'm reading some biographies of the hallowed Founding Fathers and JESUS EFFING CHRIST. The Federalist vs. Republican politics back in the day were absolutely every bit as vicious as they are now. In some ways much worse. You had Adams basically firing all the Republican military officers and replacing them with Federalists. Can you imagine, say, Trump, running a political test by every military officer, firing any Democratic sympathizer and stocking the the military with Republicans? Party control of the military is a frightening prospect, and fortunately at a later date the military took on a doctrine of independence from politics that still exists strongly today.

Jefferson showed amazing restraint in his response. He had Meriwether Lewis (of later Lewis and Clark fame) make him a list of officers organized by party affiliation. But he also had them listed by competence. And Jefferson didn't order a complete retaliatory bloodbath. He just rebalanced, and prioritized by competence.

There are other examples like that.

Jefferson was pretty great. But a lot of others were, I hate to say it, pretty much partisan hacks. The pamphleteering that went on was every bit as vicious as today's media CNN/Fox. Even Breitbart.

I think we often view today's politics in the context of mythology about some time when it functioned with some kind of gentlemanly statesmanship. That time never existed in U.S. history. This is sort of comforting to me.

I love the campaign of 1828. Allegations of adultery, prostitution (with a Russian twist mind you), military misconduct, a newspaper said Jackson's mom was literally a prostitute brought over by British soldiers ...

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

A decade ago I concluded that Fox had mastered the art of attaining viewers by riling them up against Obama. And that after some time, MSNBC mimicked them from the opposite political view. I eliminated both extremes. So I see these names and am glad that I hardly know of them.

Joy Reid. Never heard of her. Couldn't pick her out of a lineup.
Rachel Maddow. Haven't seen her program in a decade.
Ingraham. Nope. Can't remember the last time I watched or read one of her pieces.
Shepherd. Always thought he tried to find the fair approach but still haven't seen him in many years.
Wallace. Always thought he was an embarrassment to his dad.
O'Donnell. Never cared for him so never watched him.

Neither program is designed to inform you. Both are designed to rile you up. Neither is worth my time.

One could argue that the left is the biggest hate machine on the planet.
Ever heard of the Jimmy kimmal show? How about steven colbert ? Trevor noah? Huffington post? Have you watched any hollywood awards shows in the past year? How about the view? Did you watch the cnn town hall after parkland?
Chris mathews? Don lemon? Wtf??? How can anyone take you seriously when you say you dont see a hate machine on the left? Have you seen what happens when a non liberal tries to speak at a college campus? Ever heard of antifa ? Did you hear madonna and ashly judd at the pussy march?? How about evey time hillery has opened her mouth since the election?
When was the last time you heard pelosi speak with out insulting old white guys? Thats you!! I could go on and on, havent even gotten into the number of all the organized race hate groups on the left. Heard of La raza? Blm? Come on dude. You have a great website and seem to be a smart business man , hell you youve single handedly turned me from a pathetic swimmer to not so pathetic. How do you not see the massive hate in your party?

Oh , there were kids stomping on American flags and police cars yesterday. Care to guess who they learned that from??

Also , you said Mitt was a nice guy. Can you direct me to your posts where you showed your outrage to the left media hate machine for calling him a murdering , sexist ,bully animal abusing rich white guy racist? Ill wait...

I guess the good folks in Pennsylvania's 18th district didn't get your memo. Nor the people of Alabama. Nor Virginia...

#makethewinningstop

Havnt read this entire thread so idk If this has been covered yet or not but Lamb pretty much ran on trumps platform. We will see if he was just lieing to get elected. Hes only got eight months to prove whT he really beievs before he has to run for office all over again.

If it was so easy why didn't Saccone run on Trumps platform? I mean he had the main man come and stump for him and he still lost. Methinks you're twisting yourself into a pretzel here. Lamb ran against the Trump tax cuts, and the GOP stopped running ads about the tax cuts because they realized it was not helping their campaign.

And because of redistricting Lamb will have to run against an incumbent Repuglican. Doug Jones won't get to run against Roy Moore in Alabama. Neither will be re-elected.

Is a Repuglican a repugnant Republican? ;)

Except he didn't.

The first step is admitting you have a problem. Until then, you will keep having the problem.


ETA -


Health care: Lamb criticized the GOP attempt to repeal Obamacare and called for bipartisan efforts to stabilize its markets. "I'll work with anyone from either party who wants to help people with pre-existing conditions, improve the quality of care, and reduce premiums, out-of-pocket costs, and prescription drug prices," he says on his campaign website.


Taxes: He called the GOP tax bill a "giveaway" to wealthy Americans and said he supports cuts for the middle class. "We didn't need to add a penny to our debt to have the tax cut for our working and middle-class people," Lamb said in a debate.


Gun control: He's called for a stronger system of background checks but no new gun restrictions. "I believe we have a pretty good law on the books and it says on paper that there are a lot of people who should never get guns in their hands," Lamb said.


Tariffs: He supports President Donald Trump's steel and aluminum tariffs, saying at a debate that "we have to take some action to level the playing field."


Abortion: Lamb personally opposes abortion but backs the Supreme Court's decision legalizing it. "Once you make something a right, it's a right. And it's like that for a reason," he told HuffPost. Lamb told the Weekly Standard he doesn't support a ban on abortion at 20 weeks.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

thanks. i hadn't realized trump was against his own tax plan, considering a giveaway to the rich. or that he was in favor of a women's right to choose. or that he was pro union and a defender of the AFL-CIO. or, that he is actually for (not against) obamacare. or that trump was a staunch protector of medicare and social security, and is against "entitlement reform." or that trump wants to reform student loan lifetime debt traps. i didn't know trump was against his own administrations attempts to dismantle regulations that hold companies responsible for endangering workers or polluting the air or water.

if these are really his policies, heck, i'm going to have to take another look at him!

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

It is my understanding that Lamb is a Marine who served honorably

At least in terms of a Presidential race in the last 25 years or so, anyone who served honorably in the armed forces as a zero chance of being elected and would most likely face very bitter attacks.

you bet. but there's no equivalence in terms of vitriol. and there's no left wing versions of gateway pundit or infowars. but you're right, if you want to get frustrated at the other side, you have a TV network to go to.

but you didn't mention CNN, which is thrown under the bus by trump and somebody in this thread. i watched CNN last night and i typically have a hard time with panels that just yell at each other. when the yelling starts, i turn off. but last night i was struck by the congenial discussion between dems and pubs. CNN has found anti-trump conservatives wedded to fact and civility, and it's been trying (with difficulty!) to find pro-trump commentators who are likewise.

if you watch CNN's analysis of the legal issues surrounding trump's presidency, you'll note that alan dershowitz and jonathan turley typically take the conservative view - the pro trump view - while jeffrey toobin takes the alternate view. dershowitz and turley infuriate the left with their legal interpretations, while neither could be called a reliable champion of the right. turley defended - legally defended - boehner's view that the individual mandate was unconstitutional, and he's a defender of the 2nd amendment on constitutional (not personal) grounds. you have to look hard on fox news for a thoughtful, even-handed, fact-based discussion. and there is nothing anywhere on CNN that rivals hannity, carlson, ingraham.

CNN is in a tough spot, because it's losing ground to both MSNBC and fox news because people want to rush to their corners to get the "news" they want to hear. so it's bringing in chris cuomo to take what has been anderson cooper's 2nd prime time hour. cuomo is more confrontational, and will reliably take on trump loyalists.

but CNN, for all it's "breaking news; what we said was breaking news is not breaking news"; is a reliably professional organization that let's events frame the truth rather than deciding in advance what truth is and framing a narrative to support it.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Dan, I respect you and know that you are a very bright man. I am a conservative. I do see hate coming from some on the Right. I see just as much, if not more coming from the Left. Neither is innocent. Does it matter if one side spews more hate than the other? Does it make one tribe better? One worse? Why can't we just denounce any and all hate? I can denounce the Hannitys and Limbaughs. Can you denounce those from the Alt Left, Hollywood(in general)?
I don't hate Pelosi. I do think she's demented and not beneficial to the future of her party.

What on earth are you taking about?

No vitriol from CNN, none at all................. C'mon Dan

https://www.cnn.com/...nt-countries-sot.cnn

I just picked a random short Don Lemon video but I think vitriol is the currency in which he trades. CNN election night videos are a hoot too - they're basically crying about Trump winning, on a "news" network that you're propping up as more legitimate than the others. When you're ready to admit that "your side" is part of the problem, an equal part of the problem, maybe the problem will get solved. Until then, you're part of the partisan tribalism that divides us. But it was a (re-)enlightening discussion and I do than you for that.

to your point about the right and the left. yes, you'll find individual people on the left who are real haters. but professional broadcast news organizations do not give them an hour every day. heck, even msnbc gives several hours per day to scarborough and nicolle wallace, who may well be your kind of conservative, i don't know.

but. your post took me aback. you think pelosi is demented? really? because, i don't agree with either mcconnell or ryan. but i don't think either has dementia. unless you can walk that back for me i think you're a pretty good exhibit for what i'm talking about.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I'm not a physician, but a 20+ year health care provider. I've seen and worked with many of our elderly with various stages of dementia and I think she fits the diagnosis. Have you seen her speak lately? Like I said, I don't hate her. I try not to let myself hate anyone. I don't view her as a threat coming from a conservative point of view either. But, by me calling her demented, I've been judged as a deplorable or knuckle dragger?

Dan, do believe that many universities(or even some) are systematically indoctrinating liberal hatred?

yes. i have seen her speak lately. i also am not a doctor. there is absolutely no evidence she has dementia. susan collins also does not have dementia. have you heard her speak lately? she has spasmodic dysphonia.

can i make a guess, that you're either reading or listening to others who've said that they think she has dementia? so i just googled "nancy pelosi dementia", and what i found is:

from newstarget.com: Some of the Democratic Party’s Marxist stalwarts are getting up there in age and it’s finally beginning to show: In public appearances they are having an increasingly difficult time enunciating their words, remembering key facts and clearly conveying their hatred for [Trump]. Enter House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California. [and so on...]

and i see pages, and pages, of the same. i encourage you to google those 3 words, and see the obvious talking point.

you're teaching me here what's going on in the dark right wing conspiracy web. which i didn't know. thank you for the education. but to the point, and my gentle advice: stop reading this, unless you want to just continue to be infected by wild and base falsehoods designed to teach you to identify your opponent, to hate your opponent, indeed, to hate your opponent so much that anything is better than him or her. and i hope you understand there's big money behind this.

when you ask me whether i've listened to pelosi lately, have you? and i don't mean testing to see if you can find an aha moment in her speech patterns. have you listened to what she has said? and have you found anything like the hate speech that rivals what you're obviously reading? because, if not, then i encourage you to disagree with her. to vote against those who align themselves with her. but to do so on the basis of the words she says, not the hate you read.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

We don't have cable, so I can't really tell you much about the programming on any of them, and I've stopped listening to any news in the car in favor of amazon radio or google play music.

My FIL is a Fox news watcher and Rush listener. He's really good at rehashing Rush or other talking points with no real supporting info. My dad is very part-time in a small town real estate office where Fox is always on in the background. He figured 'anyone would be better than Obama', also with no supporting info.

So, yeah I do think that what Dan said about people being intellectually lazy is really true.

Saw this today, while the news portion of the various sides/stations may be somewhat more balanced, I don't think that the average listener is there for the news. They're there for the opinion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/378631-shepard-smith-fox-news-opinion-hosts-dont-really-have-rules

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

I agree in that Susan Collins doesn't appear to be demented. I have heard the term crazy thrown around in regards to Pelosi, not demented. Just my observation and opinion. Can't recall her using hate speech toward the dark right wing. Speaking about the Dark Right Wing, as far as 'research' goes, I look at Drudge occasionally, but not much else. Hannity drives me crazy. No Limbaugh. RARELY any Fox. Honestly, I get most of my info here. Hopefully you will continue to welcome Right Wingers(dark or not) to your site.

Everybody’s welcome. Just be relatively civil, and you are clearly a gentleman. Lefties are just as likely to be 🔥 throwers.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

"Rachel Maddow. Haven't seen her program in a decade."

She hasn't had a program for a decade.

---

"Are you sure we're going fast enough?" - Emil Zatopek