Jump to content

The Politics Thread


Toups

Recommended Posts

  • Members

It's amazing how the U.S. media is neglecting to report the massive failures of the Trump administration on the international stage. 

The 2018 APEC Conference just concluded and for the first time since 1988, the participants weren't even able to summon enough agreement to craft a joint statement.  The reason-- the U.S. and China and what some are referring to as an increasing Cold War.

 

Ever wonder why there is virtually no news on the so-called U.S./North Korea summit relations?  Because it's not going well.  At all.

 

Not to mention the fact that, according to reports, Trump is refusing to even listen to the evidence that implicates KSA crown prince MbS.  Trump claimed that this arms deal was going to be 'yuge' but to this day, there has not been one completed deal between the U.S. and KSA.  Not. one.

 

Oh and what about that Middle East peace deal?  How's that going? Weren't Jared and MbS supposed to craft some sort of new New World Order of peace and prosperity (namely for their own family's fortunes)?    It seems stalled, at best, to me.

 

Let's not even get into Europe.  Or Canada.  Or...sigh...Latin America.

 

If I didn't read/watch international news, I swear, I'd know nothing of any of this!

 

On the domestic front...

 

There's been a turkey salmonella outbreak going on for about a year now, announced just in time for Thanksgiving...Gobble Gobble!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 45.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Vee

    6819

  • DRW50

    5993

  • DramatistDreamer

    5521

  • Khan

    3466

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Members

 

I've seen some articles about China/US relations and the Saudi stuff, but it does get much less coverage than things like how Trump called Schiff "Schitt" and the latest power struggles in the White House. In the case of North Korea I think it's because the media don't want to admit they also got badly played - by Trump as well as by North Korea (who also played Trump of course).

 

I read that Cuba's leader was recently feted in North Korea. Media darling Marco is all over that I'm sure.

 

It seems fairly obvious things are going to get really bad on multiple fronts soon, and the media won't want to talk about that, because to them it's boring and it won't get ratings. Most of them hate America anyway, aside from the pleasure they get at sneering at the yokels and the liberals. 

 

For all their dogged efforts to stop Democrats from winning the House, they are clearly gleeful about having Pelosi to kick around again, and also to get to obsess over anything and everything with Alexandria Cortez (who seems more than happy to be in the media spotlight anyway). They will make Democrats responsible for any ills in this country over the next 2 years, and idiots will be happy to go along.

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ben McAdams has regained the lead in the UT-04 count, which looks to be winding down. There are still some ballots to look at, but not sure it's enough to help Love. If he wins that will be #39.

 

 

Meanwhile, back in California, GOP Congressman David Valadao's lead has steadily shrunk with each slow update. He's now under 1,000.

 

 

If he wins that will be #40. 


(big IF for either of these men, of course) 

 

I hope they get to 40, as it's a nice round number...all the better for the GOP, the media, and sellouts like James Carville to choke on. 

 

If Cox wins, that is 7 California seats lost in one cycle. That is a decimation. And those seats will be very expensive and very difficult to get back, which means a 7-seat firewall the Democrats did not have before now. 

 

Kevin McCarthy threw his own state delegation to the wolves in his fruitless quest to be speaker. It is just so, so good. 

Edited by DRW50
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

He's so stupid, it is literally beyond belief. I wonder if he ever uses his "google machine"? Yesterday, he was blabbering on about how Finland manages their forests so much better, and have almost no fires... guess what, Einstein?  90% of Finland gets between 24 and 35 inches of rain a year.... how many inches does Malibu get on average? TWELVE. 

Edited by alphanguy74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Sherrod Brown doesn’t represent me and Marceline can likely share a lot more about him, but an interesting topic the last few days about comments Brown made about the Abrams race in Georgia. I have to say he didn’t let weasel Chuck Todd get away with his usual finger wagging at democrats for using the word “stolen”.

 

Please register in order to view this content

 

I bring this up because there was a battle on social media the past couple of days at why and why not the term #stolenelection may or may not be appropriate when referring to the election. A debate between Richard Hasen and Charles Pierce.  Me, Brown is right and Abrams is right.

 

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/georgia-stacey-abrams-brian-kemp-election-not-stolen.html

 

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a25224334/sherrod-brown-stolen-election-georgia-brian-kemp-chuck-todd/

Edited by JaneAusten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Were Chuck Todd and the usual pretentious types at Slate out there saying this about media darling Marco? 

 

Oh wait, they only care when a Democrat says it. 

 

Sherrod Brown is right. They don't want to admit it because it upsets their narrative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Every once in awhile some twitter famous nerd espouses the idea that we are living in a computer simulation.  Usually I roll my eyes at that kind of self indulgence. Then things like this happen and I think they must be right. This reality is a simulation designed to see how much idiocy we can take before we breakdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

 

Yesterday, I very nearly posted a tweet by Maggie Haberman where she was trying to amplify that very same concept by retweeting some ridiculous opinion piece from Slate.

 

Why do these people only lecture Democrats and/or liberals to shrink from using language that is direct and bracing, while merely mentioning the abrasive, often insulting tones of Republican/Trumpists in the most matter-of-fact tone possible?  Why no lecture for the Trumpists? 

 

I thought better of posting anything that Haberman tweets because by now, we all know what she's all about and frankly, I'm tired of her 'access journalism'.

Edited by DramatistDreamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



  • Recent Posts

    • Well, Claire did rig Rick's test results, but it was to flunk. They actually managed to get his correct results back after they were thrown into Cedar's furnace...I think? Everyone knew Claire changed them and Rick passed so that rewrite never made sense.   I agree. Pratt always seems "edgy" on screen (and her Locker Room interview prooved that it came from her personality.) I liked Claire causeing trouble and love Meta ringing her beads. Its just too bad that Abby left and they kinda just forgot Claire existed. 
    • Oh so they did sleep together. The retcon was just the medical boards? That makes sense. I think Susan Pratt, while a good actress, was just an unlikeable presence onscreen and soaps wrote to that most of the time. There was some potential for more with her when she returned in that stint, as Pratt was at least interesting to watch and caused some conflict for the stifled Bauers. Instead of pairing her with Alan and then disappearing I might have had her hook up with Danny. I think there was a lot of flirtation with Bolger's Philip, but they never crossed the line.
    • I haven't seen Melchior in the role, but it would be astounding if she's worse than Linn. Her rivalry with Stephanie was sidelined IMO because Linn was one of the few actors who didn't have chemistry with, nor raise her game, when paired with Susan Flannery. To be fair, she did show some signs of life in scenes opposite Darlene Connelly, but way too little too late. It feels like Bell finally woke up after the Thorne switchover and sidelined the Kristin character with Mick to 1 or 2 appearances a week. As a result, the show improved by leaps and bounds after she was inexplicably at the center of the show for most of 1989. Margo is so much more enjoyable when not tied to that albatross. Even Clarke is watchable with less Kristin interaction. She can't exit stage left soon enough. As for the new Thorne, I agree that Norcross feels like a Forrester a lot more than Thrachta, even if the latter is a better actor.
    • The cast said that scenes were filmed over a few weeks, with a preplanned hiatus in the middle, and it was all out of order.  I would *guess* that they used Chandler when they could get him? They also had to work around Leo Howard getting married around the time these episodes were filmed, but I guess they worked it out since Tate appeared.
    • Maybe there was a scheduling conflict or something. He still has the full time 9-5 in Atlanta, right? Julie was there. Idk if Maggie’s gonna be a part of it though 
    • At this point, the best nonpaywall coverage of Los Angeles (and anything political)  is in...the Tennessee Holler https://bsky.app/profile/thetnholler.bsky.social And as always, emptywheel continues to be consistent https://bsky.app/profile/emptywheel.bsky.social
    • Today Monday was the start of people arriving at the funeral, but the service hasn't started yet.  I know this is the nonspoiler thread but I think it's okay to say (in nonspecific terms) that the funeral episodes span a few days.  I won't detail it more here. Just sayin' keep watching.
    • Why am I only now hearing about what happened in L.A., lol?
    • While I agree that Reeves is Jennifer, I honestly do prefer Cady McClain in the role, as I feel she had/has a wider range of acting capabilities than I feel Reeves has. It's the strength of an actor, ultimately, for me, regardless of how I feel about Reeves' political/social views (which I widely disagree with). Plus, not to mention, they costumed Reeves like an old-fashioned frumpy farm/Moron wife, while McClain had some fashion-forward moments.
    • Wait - so no Will, Jack, or Jen at John's funeral? That’s just weird. What was the point of bringing them back then? Did Julie and Maggie even show up? I mean, seriously.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy