Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
IIRC 538's prediction was around 37 or 38. Anything more than that is a bonus, and if I'm not mistaken 40+ is the majority the Dems had in 2006.
We've said this multiple times already but on the whole the midterms were quite good for the Dems (historically so, even), and even the Senate losses, while bad, were predictable with a map this terrible.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Nov 23rd 2018 at 11:44:41 AM
I really want to know what drug the Trump family's lawyers were having that let them convince themselves that a POTUS cannot be sued while s/he's in office.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Well, the ''Office'' of the President cannot be sued, IIRC, due to the concept of Sovereign Immunity. The person holding it is a different matter entirely, and even if they can't be sued while in Office, they're wide open to face legal action once they leave Office.
I hold the secrets of the machine.Trump? It's been frequently said (I believe ~Wyldchyld said so earlier in this thread) that Trump is a difficult client to work with so maybe all the good lawyers shun him and he is left with the bad ones. Seeing as Clinton v. Jones
was decided only 21 years ago, unanimously.
While the distractor-in-chief is working up to that reputation, the northern Mariana Islands are struggling under the effects of Typhoon Yutu
.
For some reason, the second strongest tropical cyclone to impact the US in recorded history is getting little or no attention by anyone (and not just not by Trump).
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanClimate change is going to happen, costing lives and billions of dollars if things aren't addressed right now.
Of course, Trump gleefully denies that there's any form of global warming. Especially when he believes the California fires could have been prevented by just raking leaves.
Eeyup. I'll admit it, I was wrong. This was a wave after all.
My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.Meanwhile the Republicans and Trump are like "Yeah,that's nice dear but it's not the senate" and they'll keep saying that until 2020 comes around,and while victory is not guaranteed it does mean the Democrats can take advantage of their complacency as all their wins add up
have a listen and have a link to my discord serverMy interpretation only:
The reason he is so obsessed with the issue is because someone told him 'no'.
It's as simple as that.
When he's told he can't do something, he takes it personally — both the people who told him he can't do it (the courts), and even the subject itself (transgender rights), become personal enemies to him. He becomes obsessed with getting it done just so he can have bragging rights afterwards (someone told him it couldn't be done, he did it, isn't he amazing!).
By the way, I think this is the same reason why he's so obsessed with his wall.
It's like telling a child they're not allowed to touch the hot stove. The child will then touch the hot stove simply because they were told not to do it.
Yes:
The first quote is from a June 2017 article, the second quote is from the Guardian in March 2018.
Four top law firms turned down requests to represent Trump
The lawyers and their firms cited a variety of factors in choosing not to take on the president as a client. Some, like Brendan Sullivan, said they had upcoming trials or existing commitments that would make it impossible for them to devote the necessary time and resources to Trump’s defense.
Others mentioned potential conflicts with clients of their firms, such as financial institutions that have already received subpoenas relating to potential money-laundering issues that are part of the investigation.
But a consistent theme, the sources said, was the concern about whether the president would accept the advice of his lawyers and refrain from public statements and tweets that have consistently undercut his position.
“The concerns were, ‘The guy won’t pay and he won’t listen,’” said one lawyer close to the White House who is familiar with some of the discussions between the firms and the administration, as well as deliberations within the firms themselves.
Other factors, the lawyer said, were that it would “kill recruitment” for the firms to be publicly associated with representing the polarizing president and jeopardize the firms’ relationships with other clients.
Another lawyer briefed on some of the discussions agreed that the firms were worried about the reputational risk of representing the president. One issue that arose, this lawyer said, was “Do I want to be associated with this president and his policies?” In addition, the lawyer said, there were concerns that if they took on the case, “Who’s in charge?” and “Would he listen?”
Lawyers, lawyers everywhere. And none to represent Trump
Lawyers, lawyers everywhere but none who jump for Trump.
He will, of course, eventually find someone willing to serve as lead counsel alongside his existing, threadbare team. Unsurprisingly, he seems in utter denial that there is any problem with his legal representation.
On Sunday, peeved by news reports that he cannot find a willing lawyer, the President tweeted: “Many lawyers and top law firms want to represent me in the Russia case...don’t believe the Fake News narrative that it is hard to find a lawyer who wants to take this on. Fame & fortune will NEVER be turned down by a lawyer…”
The problem for the white-collar defense bar’s crème de la crème is that Donald Trump is so blatantly the client from hell. He won’t listen. He won’t obey instructions. He is headstrong. He is a bully. Sometimes, he doesn’t pay his bills. Most of all, it’s possible that he isn’t capable of discerning fact from fiction. This last foible could get any lawyer who represents him into very deep legal hot water. No one wants to get disbarred for the fame and fortune of representing President Trump.
Edited by Wyldchyld on Nov 24th 2018 at 2:25:03 PM
If my post doesn't mention a giant flying sperm whale with oversized teeth and lionfish fins for flippers, it just isn't worth reading.Depends on the Big Bad of US politics and on what can be done on the state level. It's not just laws, after all.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard FeynmanCouple standouts with the First Amendment discussion that went on for a few pages.
Most of those kinds of Frivolous Lawsuits get thrown out of court rather quickly, allowing the ones that are that bad (e.g. the infamous McDonald's Coffee case
, in which the 72-year-old woman received third-degree burns from nigh-boiling coffee) are allowed to proceed.
And with the First Amendment change, keep this in mind - if we had a setup like England has, a lot of Trump's Frivolous Lawsuits would likely have been won because of how libel laws there are structured.
And @MarqJFA, you might get a kick out of this story - a 21-year-old Sovereign Citizen tried bringing a camera into a courtroom
, something even news organizations generally aren't allowed to do, and became belligerent when told he couldn't. He wound up getting tased for it.
Edited by ironballs16 on Nov 24th 2018 at 10:08:07 AM
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"Shifting House committee leadership out of GOP hands alone is a huge coup, since policy generally begins in the House. Democratic governorships are essential for local policy making and districting. We have a census coming up, and we need Democrats to have a bigger stake when the maps get redrawn.
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."

I don't think this was mentioned, but it seems like those two hold out districts in New York were called for the Democrats. So that's two more pickups.