Welcome to Dem Land

[aj3647]

Recalculating, that means the 31 yes votes and 20 nays from this bunch in 2012 works out to 61% not 66% as I previously wrote. My point still stands that Democrats voted much more for extending FISA in 2012 [[61%) than in 2018 [[44.7%)

31/53 = 58%, not 61%. That's twice now you messed up basic math, the first being when you claimed there were 59 Democrats instead of 53. It's OK, math is hard, much like how the English language is hard for Richard.

But hey, there you go, the percentage of House Democrats opposing FICA remains largely unchanged and the percentage of Senate Democrats supporting it dropped from 58% to 44%. So clearly that's proof of a HUGE anti-Trump effect. 14 whole percentage points in one chamber of Congress! WOW! I would point out that many of the Democrats who voted for it in 2012 were "Blue Dogs" or red state Democrats who are no longer in Congress. Just to name a few: Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Kent Conrad, Kay Hagan, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson, Jim Webb, Jay Rockefeller, etc. So, just consider this strange possibility, do you think that 14% point swing in the Senate might have something to do with the fact that the composition of Senate Democrats in 2018 is different than it was in 2012 and maybe not just reflexive hatred of Trump? If it was all about Trump, shouldn't there have been almost no Democratic votes at all? We've seen plenty of party line votes already, such as the tax bill, so pointing to a 14% drop in support among Democrats in one chamber isn't really indicative of anything since if they voted based on hatred of Trump, there would have been 0 votes in support.

Also, if Obama signing the FISA reauthorization in 2012 makes him a "dictator" according to you, what does that make Trump? You know he also signed the FISA reauthorization last week. I mean, surely you will apply your political standards equally and not judge Obama and Trump differently for doing quite literally the exact same thing.

What do you think they do? Go there with a #2 pencil with an ereaser and just write over something.Before you can change or reform anything you have to remove what is already written or repeal it.

All the word semantics in the world will not change that.

Amending a bill and repealing it are NOT the same thing, even if they are in your head.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/repeal

: to rescind or annul by authoritative act; especially : to revoke or abrogate by legislative enactment

That's why last year the Republicans made it a point to distinguish between REPEALING Obamacare or REPEALING and REPLACING Obamacare, whereas the Democrats wanted to AMEND it. See the difference? Some Republicans just wanted it to go away entirely and not replace it with anything [[repeal). Some wanted it to go away entirely and then replace it with something brand new and completely different [[repeal and replace). Democrats wanted to keep it and make changes to it so it would function better [[amend). I literally can't dumb this down any further for you so your brain can comprehend it. Changing a law is not "repealing" it, nor do you have to "repeal" a law in order to change it. Don't get mad at me because you don't understand the English language, that's on you.

[oladub]

31/53 = 58%, not 61%. That's twice now you messed up basic math, the first being when you claimed there were 59 Democrats instead of 53. It's OK, math is hard, much like how the English language is hard for Richard.

But hey, there you go, the percentage of House Democrats opposing FICA remains largely unchanged and the percentage of Senate Democrats supporting it dropped from 58% to 44%. So clearly that's proof of a HUGE anti-Trump effect. 14 whole percentage points in one chamber of Congress! WOW! I would point out that many of the Democrats who voted for it in 2012 were "Blue Dogs" or red state Democrats who are no longer in Congress. Just to name a few: Joe Lieberman, Mary Landrieu, Kent Conrad, Kay Hagan, Mark Pryor, Ben Nelson, Tim Johnson, Jim Webb, Jay Rockefeller, etc. So, just consider this strange possibility, do you think that 14% point swing in the Senate might have something to do with the fact that the composition of Senate Democrats in 2018 is different than it was in 2012 and maybe not just reflexive hatred of Trump? If it was all about Trump, shouldn't there have been almost no Democratic votes at all? We've seen plenty of party line votes already, such as the tax bill, so pointing to a 14% drop in support among Democrats in one chamber isn't really indicative of anything since if they voted based on hatred of Trump, there would have been 0 votes in support.

Also, if Obama signing the FISA reauthorization in 2012 makes him a "dictator" according to you, what does that make Trump? You know he also signed the FISA reauthorization last week. I mean, surely you will apply your political standards equally and not judge Obama and Trump differently for doing quite literally the exact same thing.

aj, There were 31 Democratic yes votes and 20 Democratic nays. Two Democrats sat it out just like McCain isn't presently voting. 31 plus 20 equals 51, not 53. 31/51=60.78 which rounds off to 61%. But even 58% if you want to include two Senators who abstained or weren't there is still a bigger number than the 44.7% Democratic senate vote in 2012 and still makes my point. 61% is 13 percent larger that 48%. 61 is also 27% larger than 48 which is probably a more useful way of comparing the two percentages. It's a 27% ratio increase from one election to the next.

There is a big difference in Obama writing an unconstitutional executive order in violation of Article 1, Section 1 and Article 1, Section 8 which delegates naturalization legislation to Congress, not the President, "To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization" after saying he had no authority to do so at least 22 times before he did it. Trump instead used an executive order to clean up Obama's unconstitutional order; sort of like emptying the trash. I previously wrote that I sent my Democratic representative a thank you note for voting against the FISA extension. However, unlike Obama's DACA unconstitutional executive order, FISA was passed by Congress and extended twice by Congress. Bush, Obama, and Trump all seem to have violated the Fourth Amendment in their support of spying on Americans.

[Richard]

^ because people are so obsessed with DACA which was scheduled for a vote February 8 or so anyways,Russian collusion and everything else,the real issues are flying under the wire and little by little we are being chipped away at.

Some would view that as mission accomplished.

[Pam]

Jimmy Dore show:
"Democrats Already Fighting Progressives In Primaries"


https://youtu.be/ynug4CLOTp0

[Richard]

If you are following California politics,the democrats are eating each other for breakfast,with the party trying to force those candidates that they choose.

This is crazy it does not matter who you are or what party you support,everybody has the right to run and let the voters decide the outcome,they are killing the whole multi party aspect and trying to force candidates on people.

They are going to end up pissing everybody off and go to a one party system,then we are all screwed,it will not matter what side of the fence we lean,the decision will be made for us.

[Pam]

If you are following California politics,the democrats are eating each other for breakfast,with the party trying to force those candidates that they choose.

This is crazy it does not matter who you are or what party you support,everybody has the right to run and let the voters decide the outcome,they are killing the whole multi party aspect and trying to force candidates on people.

They are going to end up pissing everybody off and go to a one party system,then we are all screwed,it will not matter what side of the fence we lean,the decision will be made for us.

I guess you are referring to the California state Democratic convention where Diane Feinstein didn't get endorsed by the delegates? That's a good thing. Progressive Democrats are making inroads there.
A couple of videos from the convention.

https://youtu.be/sLOw368tsHU

https://youtu.be/N-WBWOuChMo

[Zacha341]

Dems eating each other for breakfast, conventions and what not? Hah. You best watch where you step, step into, or step over. Trust and believe Gov. Brown, Pelosi and Feinstein never walk the major cities of Calli.

They're part of the grand royal enclosure poli-tricking and pandering.

In the meantime California is starting to come apart. Not sure what they are progressing to -- umm, Los Angeles is not.

How can a place with 58,000 homeless people continue to function?

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...htmlstory.html

[rb336]

Homelessness has surged in the US under supply side economics because of numerous reasons, primarily the neocon/neoliberal penchant for privatizing everything and the giant transfer of wealth from the working classes to the wealthy [[the reverse of the Lincoln Republican ethic that made labor primary to capital). And yes, most sitting Democrats are in that camp as well, which is why Progressives are actively trying to win back the party from the corporatists that rule it.

[coracle]

[Pam]

Jimmy dore show -

Obama’s lack-luster response to torture helped make Trump’s appointment possible

https://youtu.be/qy90KsMAdfE

[Pam]

Jimmy Dore show:

HIllary Trashes American Voters While In India

https://youtu.be/k2hXRrGORdk

[Zacha341]

She's coming off more and more pressed and bitter in serving, summing up Americans NOT supporting her run so poorly.

Not surprised - just lets many further know why they did not/ could not cast a vote her way.

[Pam]

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/04...duran-caravan/

It was the second time in seven-and-a-half years that Hillary had helped install an authoritarian, racist, oligarchic and right-wing government in the Americas. In the spring of 2009, she had used her position as Barack Obama’s first Secretary of State to help the right-wing Honduran military and business class overthrow the democratically elected government of Honduras’s then president Manuel Zelaya.

[Zacha341]

^^^ Hilarious link! She also carelessly called Putin Hitler! And to think she assumed the vote of all women? Why not? After all women all think alike unless their men are brainwashing them into deplorable status!

[Honky Tonk]

^^^ Hilarious link! She also carelessly called Putin Hitler! And to think she assumed the vote of all women? Why not? After all women all think alike unless their men are brainwashing them into deplorable status!

Hell Hath No Fury...

[bust]

And some of the ones who say 'she lost, get over it' are still the ones who keep bringing her up. Again, and again, and...

I was over the Clintons way before she lost. [[But understanding the alternative, I still voted for her in the general, of course.)

Caring is much better than not caring. And we must know and learn from history. But in the context of our present and future which require our attention more. Can we move on?

Congratulations: Clinton lost. Are you happy with what we have now instead? What should happen next?

[Zacha341]

^^^ Not happy; but then again my happiness ain't rooted in politicians per se. Too bad that our choices had/ have devolved to such.

Practically speaking though, it's hard to find the pefect candidate to represent all 300+ML US POP. Even more fun to castigate whole segments of voters names or ascribing them certain status.

Most vote/ voted in an attempt to get some of what they wanted and avoid what they do/ did not want.

Still this last election put forth ghastly options.

[Maof]

And some of the ones who say 'she lost, get over it' are still the ones who keep bringing her up. Again, and again, and...

I was over the Clintons way before she lost. [[But understanding the alternative, I still voted for her in the general, of course.)

Caring is much better than not caring. And we must know and learn from history. But in the context of our present and future which require our attention more. Can we move on?

Congratulations: Clinton lost. Are you happy with what we have now instead? What should happen next?

Absolutely agree.

[Pam]

And some of the ones who say 'she lost, get over it' are still the ones who keep bringing her up. Again, and again, and...

I was over the Clintons way before she lost. [[But understanding the alternative, I still voted for her in the general, of course.)

Caring is much better than not caring. And we must know and learn from history. But in the context of our present and future which require our attention more. Can we move on?

Congratulations: Clinton lost. Are you happy with what we have now instead? What should happen next?

I bring her up because there are still people who refuse to believe anything bad about her and are trying to rewrite history. And she is still out there blaming everyone but herself for her loss. I don't like Trump but Hillary was not better. What should happen next is I hope we can get some better people in Congress this year. After that I don't know. I would like Bernie to run again but since the real election crimes of 2016
still haven't been investigated, [[The DNC not Russia)I fear they will just cheat him again.

We can't move on until the Dems. clean house and root out corruption and they haven't shown they are interested in that. New parties might be the future.

[coracle]

I don't like Trump but Hillary was not better. What should happen next is I hope we can get some better people in Congress this year. After that I don't know. I would like Bernie to run again but since the real election crimes of 2016 still haven't been investigated, [[The DNC not Russia)I fear they will just cheat him again.

I know you don't like Trump, Pam, and there's nothing wrong with that, but Trump ultimately SUCCEEDS when the whole world is pitted against him, whereas Bernie stumbled and failed before he got to first base. Leaders don't allow themselves to be "cheated".[[he should have colluded with the Russians).

It's the difference between a Leader and a "manager". We've had 30 years of Clintons, Bushes and obamas giving away our advantages to UN. We don't need a Bernie to accelerate it and shuffle us into the third world of Socialism.

[Pam]

I don't think I posted this yet. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard introduced a bill to improve election integrity:

https://youtu.be/oOV4QWz7BIw

[Pam]

I saw this headline earlier today and I thought it was from the Onion:

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/dnc...an-government/

The Democratic National Committee on Friday filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit accusing the Trump campaign of colluding with WikiLeaks and the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Hasn't enough time been wasted investigating this nonsense?
Where's the investigation of the real fraud from the 2016 Dem primaries?

[Richard]

I think the upper echelon of the DNC has resumed the role of the American Socialist Party and is a clear and present danger to this country and should be treated as such.

They are the last ones to be referring to democracy even though we are a republic.

The kicker is the conservative democrats have support of the country and have been winning,but even if they win they are still beholden to the DNC so unless there is a purge they will stay throttled,which in turn stifles the very democracy that they claim to support.

The republicans have been on the defensive at a great cost to the taxpayer with the DNC chasing porn stars for salvation,they called Clintons mistress a whore but now have no problem embracing a porn star.

I also think it is time to take the gloves off and go on the offensive but the thing is that the DNC has nothing else to do,but what they are doing,while the currant administration has a country to run.They should be dealt with no different then any other group that interferes with the running of the country.

[oladub]

Hasn't enough time been wasted investigating this nonsense?
Where's the investigation of the real fraud from the 2016 Dem primaries?

Al Gore pioneered the idea of trying to litigate a victory by cherry picking a few Democratic counties to recount in Florida. This is nothing new. The day before the DNC announced its suit, Rosenstein said that Trump was not a target in the Mueller probe. Maybe this lawsuit is designed to pick up where Mueller leaves off and dump it on the laps of a deep blue Manhattan jury. Although it seems like these Dems are being petulant poor losers, the strategy of incessant investigations and litigation keeps Trump off balance and less able to govern. Maybe that is all there is to the strategy. The part I most dislike is attacking Wikileaks for the audacity of telling the truth. It puts a chill on freedom of speech and punishes Wikileaks with legal expenses. No one expected the DNC to be responsible for computer security or consider that Russia and other entities might hack its computers.

[Pam]

I think the upper echelon of the DNC has resumed the role of the American Socialist Party and is a clear and present danger to this country and should be treated as such.

I stopped reading after this sentence. These people are most definitely NOT socialists. Remember Hillary and Obama getting the big bucks for speeches to Goldman Sachs etc.?