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
Well, Jon Tester did win reelection in 2018 despite this being a very Trumpy state - more so than say Florida. It's possible that Montana might display less partisanship than most other states.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman![]()
![]()
The mistake there is assuming that the Republicans give a shit about precedent or hypocracy. They do not.
Was it a bad call to protect Holder? Possibly. I don't recall the specifics of that situation, but I do know that the whole "fast and furious" thing was way overblown by Republicans in a bad-faith attempt to undercut the Obama administration (like basically everything else they did for eight years), so I'm absolutely not willing to give them the benefit of the doubt over it.
Even assuming it was a bad call to protect Holder, does that make it a bad call to prosecute Barr? Absolutely not. If prosecuting Barr is the right thing to do, then it's the right thing to do, even if the wrong thing was done in similar circumstances in the past.
If protecting Holder was bad, then it was bad for its own reasons, not because it has knock-on effects years later. If the Democrats did something bad, that doesn't mean the Republicans get a pass for doing the same bad thing later. It just means that both are bad and neither should happen.
Edited by NativeJovian on May 11th 2019 at 4:04:06 AM
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.I agree that Dems doing the wrong thing in the past doesn’t excuse republicans doing the wrong thing now, but we should admit to our mistakes, if there is some way to now punish Holder for what he did that we should do that alongside prosecuting Barr.
And yes I’m aware that Republicans would be opposing punishing Barr regardless of if things had gone differently with Holder, but that doesn’t excuse Holder and doesn’t mean we shouldn’t admit to our mistakes with Holder. Republican hypocrisy doesn’t excuse our own.
A precedent is more than the impact it has upon Republicans, we could be making a lot more political hay out of the Barr situation if there wasn’t the spectre of Holder hanging over us. If we could turn to Republicans and say “we held our own accountable, now it’s your turn” they wouldn’t do it, but we could use their obvious inaction to turn the public against them more.
It’s the dam Fraken situation all over again, except we let Holder off instead of doing what we were smart enough to do with Fraken and kick his arse to the curb.
Edited by Silasw on May 11th 2019 at 8:25:54 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranTrevor Noah has a bunch of past Bernie Sanders footage that is interesting as it actually discusses how important racial issues were to him (and how badly he handled them) but did put his concerns into a different perspective for me.
Re: Senate candidates dropping out to run for president: so just to clarify (again), if they run for the democratic nomination and fail, does that automatically disqualify them from just running for senate anyway? Or does that only apply if they weren't already incumbents? Like, if O'Rourke loses the presidential nomination - which is looking quite likely - is it guaranteed he'll just throw his hands in the air and say 'welp, I tried' and that's the end of that?
Those sell-by-dates won't stop me because I can't read!The fact he understands that racism is a thing makes his choices to criticize 'identity politics' and argue that white people may not be racist if they're uncomfortable voting for a black person even worse.
He should know better but he doesn't. Sanders may not be awful when it comes to race but that's hardly a ringing endorsement, someone who wants to be President needs to be much better.
Hillary Clinton was Obama's secretary of state.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 11th 2019 at 3:53:08 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
X6 None of the incumbent senatorial candidates are a problem, they're from blue states and would be replaced with another democrat.
I think only Booker is even up, and because of New Jersey law he can run for both senate and president at the same time.
It's people who are running for president and not for senate that are the problem. Specifically that with Beto and Castro there isn't much in the way of good candidates for Texas, with Abrams having ruled out a senate run there now isn't a serious chance of taking the Georgia seat, Hickenlooper has ruled out running for the Colarado seat so that's a strong candidate out of what's going to be a close race.
As for if they could change their mind, it depends, once the primary for the senate is underway I don't think they can, so they'd have to drop out before the primary voting starts.
Edited by Silasw on May 11th 2019 at 10:55:49 AM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranAfter seeing that bit with Sanders and the car, I should hope this was long after he repudiated that one article he made about sex with minors. I'm not surprised he mentioned race, it's known that he did things like get arrested for participating in sit-ins and march with MLK. So it's clear he doesn't not care about race at all, it's more that he's Fair for Its Day.
As for Jewish people and strange sexual habits, the only time I've ever heard about that was the old chestnut of a myth about Orthodox Jews having sex through a bedsheet, but it was always clear it just referred to Orthodox Jews and not Jews in general.
Edited by AlleyOop on May 11th 2019 at 7:01:03 AM
Abrams ruling out a Senate run was really frustrating, she is quite likely the only person right now who has a chance at getting the Democrat's one of Georgia's Senate seats. And yet she chose not to for whatever reason.
If she announces a Presidential run I'm going to scream.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 11th 2019 at 4:01:35 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangThey were only able to engage in so much fraud because the guy running was also counting the votes, with a race where there isn't that overlap the fraud would have been harder, plus she could have tapped into the anger at the 2018 fraud. There's a limit to how much that type of fraud can impact an election and with enough numbers one can still win.
She could have put the Republicans in a bind where they had to either watch her win or reinstate Jim Crow and have federal troops sent down.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran"Specifically that with Beto and Castro there isn't much in the way of good candidates for Texas, with Abrams having ruled out a senate run there now isn't a serious chance of taking the Georgia seat,"
Its not that there aren't any good candidates, it's that the isn't any one obvious candidate. Nobody was paying attention to Beto or Abrams until after they started running for senate and governor, respectively.
Sure they'd bring name recognition, but they were household names in 2018 and that didn't get them victories. Star power only goes so far.
If they're not on board, we'll just have to do this the old fashion way: Vigorous primaries so new blood can make their case for the candidacy and then go all in for the winner who actually wants the job.
As a Georgian, I really appreciate the sentiment.
The entire reason they cheated was that they were in danger of losing, and Kemp still barely won. Georgia isn't a purple state yet but it could definitely move in that direction and Dems should work on laying down the infrastructure to make it a reality.
Edited by Fourthspartan56 on May 11th 2019 at 5:46:03 AM
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang

Montana isn’t looking like a winnable senate seat, I did a big list on who winnable all the senate seats are a few pages back, the ones that hurt are Texas, Georgia and Colorado, as far as I know we’ve not had big names in Iowa, North Carolina or Maine decline to run because they want to run for President.
Holder wasn’t subject to fines of any kind, House Democrats protected him.
We’d have a dam easier time today making the case against Barr if we hadn’t protected Holder when he committed the same crime.
Holder and Pelosi set the precedent that the AG can hide documents from congress for political reasons and not be punished for it, look where that precedent has gotten us.
We should have jailed Holder when he decided to hide documents from congress, not protected him. That moral failing in the past is bitting us in the arse right now and Pelosi did it to us.
Edited by Silasw on May 11th 2019 at 7:50:12 PM
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran