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
It's hard to imagine a scenario in which Democrats win the House and Senate in 2020 but lose the Presidency. That would be strange. It's all or nothing, and if we replace Trump, none of the rest of this matters. He can be prosecuted once he's a private citizen again, and I really hope that he is.
I wouldn't say that's true. In 2018, more Democratic seats were up for votes than Republican. The converse is true in 2020. We always have a chance.
Edited by Fighteer on May 29th 2019 at 11:57:09 AM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"I want a source for this claim.
Five Thirty Eight doesn't have any predictions up, I think it's extremely preemptive to state that a Senate map where many Republicans are up for election has no chance of a Democratic victory.
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangFrankly, the Democrats have needed to focus more on the House and Senate than they have for like... decades. It seems like they've focused a lot on the Presidency in recent decades to the detriment of their representation in the Congress. It doesn't matter how many seats are up for grabs; you're not going to gain anything if you don't focus your efforts there.
Edited by AceofSpades on May 29th 2019 at 11:09:01 AM
On this topic:
Lindsey Graham draws a Democratic challenger who mocks his ties to Trump – Jaime Harrison, the former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party, formally kicked off his campaign Wednesday for a U.S. Senate seat.
Also, impeachment is officially impossible as things stand, given yesterday's WTF feed:
Republican senators vowed to quash impeachment against Trump if the House passes articles. Mitch McConnell is required to act on articles of impeachment, but has broad authority to set the parameters of a trial.
Edited by sgamer82 on May 29th 2019 at 10:17:28 AM
While he’s no McConnel, Graham is definitely one of the senators I’d be happiest to see go.
My musician pageNever thought I'd agree with Trump on something... although for different reasons. Trump wants somebody else (presumably someone with less baggage) so that they can get a Republican in Doug Jones's seat, while I just plain want Roy Moore to go away and never enter politics again.
Edited by speedyboris on May 29th 2019 at 11:40:29 AM
Fourthspartan, actually, 538 did have an article about the Senate elections that stated they are leaning Republican majority, mainly because you need to win some pretty dicey states.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Probably, though that said I'm unclear on whether or not the story referenced
means the House won't be getting the documents it's asking for
A link to the actual story: https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/25/politics/trump-house-committee-agreement-stay-subpoena/
Edited by sgamer82 on May 29th 2019 at 11:34:53 AM
Thanks for the information, even if that turns out to be completely accurate that's rather different from "slim to none odds".
"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji YangWhile I'm here, what does everyone think of the theory that Biden being the Democratic nominee will help elect Trump a 2nd time?
The theory goes that people who don't like Biden, think he's too Republican-like, or just refuse to do the "lesser of two evils" thing will just abstain from voting, thus handing Trump the win
Alright, I concede I may have exaggerated a bit. Still doesn't seem all that likely though
Edited by MrHellboy on May 29th 2019 at 1:38:34 PM
The hardest thing in this world is to live in it.Speaking of the turtle more evil than Bowser, he quickly agreed that, were a Supreme Court seat open up in 2020, the Senate would confirm a nominee
. To deny Hypocrite allegations, he tried narrowing the scope by saying that "The Leader has noted on multiple occasions that not since the 1880s has a 'vacancy created in a presidential year' been 'confirmed by the party opposite the occupant of the White House.' His comments in Paducah yesterday simply repeated this. If there is a vacancy next year, because the White House and the Senate are the same party, we would vote to fill the slot."
Yeah, so it's straight-up a party thing. Thanks, McConnell, for being honest. For once.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
Not to mention the intensity of the weasel words at play there - "not since the 1880s" only means that no party has confirmed a Supreme Court Justice for the opposing party during an election year. The why of it isn't even obliquely referenced, as the odds of requiring such a replacement during an election year is slim to nil.
Edited by ironballs16 on May 29th 2019 at 3:18:22 PM
"Why would I inflict myself on somebody else?"

Yeah I thought what Mueller said in the interview basically amounted to "something is fishy, but we can't prove anything definitive"? All they said is that Donald Trump personally had no dealings with the Russians, but that didn't say anything about anyone in his employ or involved in his campaign for example.