TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

The General US Politics Thread

Go To

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

Euodiachloris Since: Oct, 2010
#192751: Jun 11th 2017 at 9:30:24 AM

[up]There is a man who has found the part he never knew was missing. Wow. Talk about growth.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#192752: Jun 11th 2017 at 9:32:50 AM

[up]Seriously, in a way it's really heartwarming. He was ignorant and now he has risen above his ignorance. I wish that the GOP could collectively follow him.

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
DeMarquis (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#192753: Jun 11th 2017 at 9:45:12 AM

How many people have to be impeached before he becomes president?

I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.
CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#192754: Jun 11th 2017 at 9:49:44 AM

A ridiculous amount, and you'd have to go through Trump's entire foreign policy team as well, which is generally regarded as the most mainstream part of his cabinet after Flynn's departure. Not that such a scenario is remotely likely; even Trump has a reasonably good chance of avoiding impeachment.

edited 11th Jun '17 9:52:11 AM by CaptainCapsase

M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#192755: Jun 11th 2017 at 9:51:20 AM

[up][up]Rick Perry for President!

...That is not something I expected to hear...ever.

Disgusted, but not surprised
TotemicHero No longer a forum herald from the next level Since: Dec, 2009
No longer a forum herald
#192756: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:00:53 AM

I doubt Perry will want the job after Trump is done with it.

However, it may end up that the best move for the next Democrat president will be to make sure Perry keeps said job - it's a win-win because having an opposite party member on the Cabinet looks good to "undecided" voters as a form of coalition building, and the man's clearly good at the job (a rarity in the Trump administration).

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)
TobiasDrake (•̀⤙•́) (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Arm chopping is not a love language!
(•̀⤙•́)
#192757: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:01:28 AM

This is more progression of Perry's journey since being put in charge of it, and it's nice to see. He did a 180 on the Department of Energy back in January or February when he was first put in charge of it and discovered that his job was not negotiating oil purchases with Saudi Arabia but maintaining America's nuclear stockpile.

Which is a very important job and quickly made him reconsider all the negative remarks he'd made about the Department of Energy in the past.

Perry sort of became the Token Good Teammate for the Trump cabinet by way of being as much of a rotten bastard as everyone else long enough to get his foot in the door, but then sobering up really quick when the weight of responsibility fell on his shoulders and he realized he couldn't afford to be a rotten bastard anymore.

edited 11th Jun '17 10:02:40 AM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently side-by-side liveblogging Digimon Adventure, sub vs dub.
AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#192758: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:05:08 AM

I'm surprised to hear he still exists. At least he seems interested in doing his job halfway competently. (I'm still mad he wanted to shut the department down without actually knowing what said department was in charge of. Fuck's sake.)

I have my doubts about whether or not he'll be able to get through to Trump on anything, given Trump's general bullheadedness and genuine lack of giving a shit.

CaptainCapsase from Orbiting Sagittarius A* Since: Jan, 2015
#192759: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:10:36 AM

For me Perry now falls in the same general category as Secretaries Mattis, Tillerson, and Kelly along with National Security Adviser McMasters; faces you could plausibly have seen in the hypothetical cabinet of Jeb Bush, who can be regarded as normal Republicans in terms of their policies to the extent that they are allowed to take the initiative. Not the people we want running these agencies, but not as much of a concern as people like Muchin, Sessions, and DeVos who have genuinely radical agendas.

edited 11th Jun '17 10:44:27 AM by CaptainCapsase

Rationalinsanity from Halifax, Canada Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
#192760: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:24:33 AM

Hell, Mcmaster wouldn't be out of place in a Democratic West Wing. He's pretty nonpartisan IIRC.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.
megaeliz Since: Mar, 2017
#192761: Jun 11th 2017 at 10:45:15 AM

The ones I'm worried about are the Departments of Interior, EPA, and education. The interior guy especially makes me mad, since he is defending Trump's budget cuts while also trying to make himself out to be Theodore Roosevelt or something. TR would probably be ashamed. And most shameful of all the EPA guy is a climate Change Denier.

edited 11th Jun '17 10:48:50 AM by megaeliz

CenturyEye Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign? from I don't know where the Yith sent me this time... Since: Jan, 2017 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
#192762: Jun 11th 2017 at 11:07:47 AM

The ones I'm worried about are the Departments of Interior, EPA, and education. The interior guy especially makes me mad, since he is defending Trump's budget cuts while also trying to make himself out to be Theodore Roosevelt or something. TR would probably be ashamed. And most shameful of all the EPA guy is a climate Change Denier.
I would add "state" since it seems to be window-dressing at the moment and who knows what information is being missed that'll have drastic consequences 20MinutesIntoTheFuture. And that kind of leadership is common to every department you mentioned. De Vos hates public education and Tillerson didn't so much defend the state department being gutted as flapped his gums like a ventriloquist dummy. His actual job in DC is probably to get Kushner coffee.

Nonetheless, it's better to look at that group as being millstones rather than leaders. The departments probably won't be able to expand any great programs (like Obama's Indian initiatives in DOI) and will lose alot through cuts. But I'd assume it'd be hard to find a supporter of those types in the entire civil service but for in ICE. (An article that came out less than a month after inauguration quoted civil servants discussing strategies to slowwalk Trumpian programs). In essence. De Vos and Pruitt more than likely won't be able to force their visions onto the departments saddled with them. (I'd be surprised if EPA and DOE aren't "accidentally" leaving those two out of the loop on alot). Their actual jobs are to cripple the departments, and I've no doubt they'll try, but De Vos didn't know basic school terms (recall "growth and proficiency"). There main points of damage will probably be depriving the departments of fundsnote  and access to the political levers, which are hostile anyway. And the cuts may be slow to materialize as even the GOP-dominated government had to pass a continuing resolution to stay operational.

edited 11th Jun '17 11:08:38 AM by CenturyEye

Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our lives
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#192763: Jun 11th 2017 at 11:36:55 AM

Not really, I don't see oversight mentioned there at all. What they're saying is that with proper money and troop numbers they could win, in the end that's true, one of the best ways to run counterinsurgency is to flood the areas with troops so as to provide stabilisation.

Maybe I'm being just slightly ungenerous with how I characterized the military's statement, and absolutely, flooding an area with troops is one of the key counterinsurgency tactics. It's by no means a proper strategy, however, and especially not with a country as war weary as the US. (We'll whip out our dicks... er, I mean, fire off some quick salvos readily enough, but a major commitment, especially if it consists of more than "Let the air force turn the whole area to glass!" is going to be difficult to get people to sign up for.) Whether the military saying "We'll stay here a hundred years if we have to!" is a good idea is debatable, at best.

At this point, with the level of US commitment being what it is, it's starting to bring to mind the people who are sure that the US could have won Vietnam if only they'd been allowed to really fight, and throw all the traitorous press or politicians who tried to say otherwise in jail. Or that German would have won WWI if only they hadn't been stabbed in the back by their own government, or...

(I'm still mad he wanted to shut the department down without actually knowing what said department was in charge of. Fuck's sake.)

Sadly, this not out of place for the anti-New Deal/Ayn Rand worshippers in the Republican party. A lot are so fervently devoted to small government that they will cut or undermine anything just because it's part of the Federal Government, and never mind any natural consequences of doing so.

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
Wyldchyld (Old as dirt)
#192764: Jun 11th 2017 at 12:09:40 PM

Just want to fact-check something about the Paris Accords that was posted in another thread.

See, I myself do not like the Paris Accord, the gist of it is America pays for 80% of the cost for nations to stop polluting while the EU provides 20%. But here is the rub, China actually is allowed to continue to pollute until 2032, not only are they allowed to polute, they can actually increase their pollution without having to keep it under control untill aroudn 2032 when they will be forced to start... this is because China is considered a "developing nation".

Is this true, or a misunderstanding of the facts?

It's a misunderstanding of the facts.

China's Paris Agreement plan can be read on the NDRC site (go here for China's) which logs all the major international pledges (including the EU and US).

As someone else pointed out, each country set its own goals, and the requirements are non-binding anyway. This is one of the reasons why Nicaragua has not signed up; the Agreement does not go far enough for them. They want something much stronger.

Just pulling out some of China's pledged targets from the document I've linked to above:

  1. Peaking carbon dioxide emissions by around 2030 and making best efforts to peak earlier.
  2. Lowering carbon dioxide emissions per unit of gross domestic product (GDP) by 60 to 65 percent from the 2005 level.
  3. Increasing the share of non-fossil (renewable and nuclear) energy sources in the energy mix to around 20 percent.
  4. Increasing forest stock volume by around 4.5 billion cubic meters from 2005 levels.

No-one can ignore these pledges for years on end only to then turn on a magic valve at the last second and slide in at the target level to a dramatic music score with moments to spare. And if that sounds like a bad film script it's because Trump's reaction to the content of the Paris Agreement comes across as him thinking real life plays out like a bad film script. note 

China's already working to try and meet these targets. They're seeking to implement a national carbon cap-and-trade programme by 2017, a green dispatch policy, and a cap on coal consumption for its 2016-2020 plan. The five-year plan is an attempt to reduce carbon intensity by 15-18% by 2020.

China pledged $3.1bn to helping developing countries mitigate the impact of climate change, which is a similar amount to the US pledge ($3bn). They're also hoping their 20% target for non-fossil energy will reduce their carbon emissions by 70% (although economic experts have since said they expect China's GDP to be much reduced, so the emissions estimate has been revised to 7.5% on the basis of lower GDP).

edited 11th Jun '17 12:59:36 PM by Wyldchyld

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.
Elle Since: Jan, 2001
#192765: Jun 11th 2017 at 12:35:28 PM

i feel the need to point out that Perry was a governor in the fundamentalist vein and is probably in much the same category as Pence in "people who would be terrible as President but look good compared to Trump". If he's discovered a niche in which he's actually competent and helpfull and has changed his thinking based on experience, good for him but let him stay there.

AceofSpades Since: Apr, 2009 Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
#192766: Jun 11th 2017 at 12:39:52 PM

Somehow I don't really see another presidential run in Perry's future anyway. I mean, he's run in primaries twice and it's not many people who make a career out of running more than that and continually failing to get to the general.

Fourthspartan56 from Georgia, US Since: Oct, 2016 Relationship Status: THIS CONCEPT OF 'WUV' CONFUSES AND INFURIATES US!
#192767: Jun 11th 2017 at 12:40:09 PM

[up][up]Well yeah, I don't think anyone was seriously advocating for him too do anything other than what he's doing.

[up] That too, it's not an issue.

edited 11th Jun '17 12:40:32 PM by Fourthspartan56

"Einstein would turn over in his grave. Not only does God play dice, the dice are loaded." -Chairman Sheng-Ji Yang
TheWanderer Student of Story from Somewhere in New England (Time Abyss) Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Student of Story
#192768: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:04:31 PM

[up][up][up] Thanks for the little reminder, I was thinking about whether throw cold water on the forum but I feel like I've been doing that a bit too much lately.

A former Breitbart writer speculates that Katie McHugh, who was fired from Breitbart due to making anti-Muslim comments that she'd a thousand times before may have been fired simply so as not to be a political distraction for Bannon and Trump.

It might seem strange that Katie Mc Hugh was fired over comments about Muslims she has made frequently in the past. But I think it’s all about Bannon.

Had Breitbart not taken this action, reporters would have been asking the White House and Bannon to comment. Questions like, "Do you agree or disagree," with Katie's tweet, and, "Do you think she should be fired or not, and why?" The media would certainly ask Bannon about how he would handle this situation with someone he hired directly. In short, it would be a distraction and a nuisance at a time when Steve has just clawed himself out of the doghouse.

In a week when the focus is on former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Katie is a distraction no one in the White House needs. I am convinced that if Steve Bannon weren’t in the White House, Katie would still be at Breitbart. After all, Breitbart, as Steve was fond of saying, is the “Fight Club” and no one makes them do anything they don’t want to do.

During the presidential race, Bannon took a “temporary leave of absence” from running Breitbart to become the CEO of Trump’s campaign. That “temporary” leave became permanent once Trump won the election and appointed Bannon chief White House strategist.

If you ask the leadership at Breitbart, they would say, “Steve has not had any control over Breitbart’s editorial since he left Breitbart.” And yet it was reported last week that the White House granted Bannon a special ethics waiver that allows him to interact with his former employer.

This waiver suggests what I’ve suspected for a long time, that there is no line of separation between Bannon and Breitbart. There is no question that we’ve entered unchartered territory. It’s clear to me that Breitbart is an extension of Bannon and now there's a documented trail to prove it.

Reports have shown that Breitbart has faced an exodus from advertisers and a drop in traffic in recent months as the Trump administration has dealt with a rash of investigations, internal staff turmoil, and self-inflicted wounds. That doesn’t mean we should ignore it, though — because for better or worse, this is a platform that has great reach and access within the White House. In many ways, they are at their most dangerous when they are at their most vulnerable.

This is as close to having a state-controlled media organization as we've ever had in this country. Every day, those who read Breitbart are spoon-fed propaganda designed to paint an alternate reality that ignores fact and truth. This audience is conditioned to think the worst of any dissenting opinion and will never abandon Trump — at least as long as Steve Bannon doesn’t.

There's also an interesting insider's view/tracing of Breitbart's rise in right wing media circles, including how it appears that Bannon used it purely as a vehicle to grab power and influence politicians.

There was so much congestion among center-right platforms — Breitbart, National Review, Weekly Standard, Washington Examiner, Daily Caller, IJ Review, Washington Free Beacon, Red State — and no one rose to distinguish themselves as the go-to outlet for Republicans the way the Huffington Post was for liberals.

Breitbart's addition of former Daily Caller, National Review, and Roll Call reporter Jonathan Strong to lead its political unit signaled to me that Breitbart was serious about building an outlet that could play a substantial role in shaping the political conversation of Washington. Breitbart would embark on a series of new hires, including Daily Caller alums Caroline May and Jeff Poor, former Washington Examiner reporter Charlie Spiering, etc.

These additions revealed how serious Steve was in making good on his vision to expand Breitbart's reach, influence, and credibility.

As this was happening, a civil war within the Republican Party was breaking out into open view. Establishment leaders like then-House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, and Senate Leader Mitch Mc Connell were facing an uprising from the Tea Party wing of the GOP led by figures like Sens. Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, and Rand Paul. This also paved the way for the formation of the Republican Freedom Caucus led by Rep. Jim Jordan.

On the surface, it was easy to cast this as an ideological battle between conservative purists and their more moderate counterparts. What Steve realized, very astutely, was that this was a confrontation between the status quo in Washington and everyone else in America who felt like they were getting screwed by a broken system.

In Breitbart, he was building a platform that for the first time could become the central hub for these disgruntled Americans to congregate around daily. Breitbart would be the place where readers could channel their anger and frustration while also being told who was responsible for all their problems.

I could see that Steve had built an incubator for rage and was ready to weaponize it by unleashing these disenchanted Americans on the political establishment. Steve had one problem. The anger was there. The mob was there. But there was no figurehead to lead this movement.

In the 2014 midterm elections, Bannon and Breitbart threw their weight behind a number of anti-establishment candidates who were challenging incumbent Republican senators in the primary, like Matt Bevin, Joe Carr, and Dave Brat.

While Brat shocked the nation by upsetting Cantor, all the other challengers fell short. Internal politics muted the effectiveness of organizations like Tea Party Patriots, Heritage, Club for Growth, Senate Conservatives Fund, etc. Absent a unifying public face to represent and lead the anti-establishment crusade, there was no hope of electoral success.

Before Steve Bannon aligned himself with Donald Trump, he auditioned several other political figures. Initially, it seemed as if he was positioning Sarah Palin to be his public puppet. A number of “exclusive” columns from Palin began appearing on the homepage of Breitbart. The flirtation with Palin didn’t last long, as it was very clear she had no future as a political candidate in 2016 or beyond.

Next, Bannon courted Sen. Rand Paul. You might recall Breitbart touting itself as the exclusive destination for his weekly columns. As the 2016 GOP primary began, Bannon and Breitbart would become friendly to Sen. Cruz and Dr. Ben Carson. I remember Steve talking about being Carson's chief of staff if Carson were to win.

That’s when I realized Steve was definitively using Breitbart to pave his way to the West Wing. For him, it seemed that Breitbart was a means to an end. He could ingratiate himself with campaigns and candidates by providing them access to a platform that reached millions of Republican primary voters.

It wasn't until the first GOP debate, when Donald Trump stole the show and destroyed Jeb Bush, that Bannon and Breitbart went all in for Trump.

This part in particular:

What Steve realized, very astutely, was that this was a confrontation between the status quo in Washington and everyone else in America who felt like they were getting screwed by a broken system

is something I think liberals/progressives need to always remember. Dysfunction in America isn't a bug as far as some people are concerned, it's a useful tool, a deliberate strategy. The worse government/the country functions, the more people you get who feel like they are screwed by a broken system, and to a greater degree. The more that happens, the more desperate people become, and they become more willing to take drastic action and turn to any demagogue for help. The more that happens, the more people like Bannon and the Kochs are able to work to try to remold the country to their interests and visions. After all, a fully functional system would invalidate a lot of their argument from the start and only result in people tuning them out.

Just something to keep in mind every time a blatantly bad policy with only a fig leaf of a defense is given by the truly regressive part of the right.

| Wandering, but not lost. | If people bring so much courage to this world...◊ |
M84 Oh, bother. from Our little blue planet Since: Jun, 2010 Relationship Status: Chocolate!
Oh, bother.
#192769: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:06:39 PM

[up] Guess Hanlon's Razor doesn't always apply.

Disgusted, but not surprised
CenturyEye Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign? from I don't know where the Yith sent me this time... Since: Jan, 2017 Relationship Status: Having tea with Cthulhu
Tell Me, Have You Seen the Yellow Sign?
#192770: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:10:25 PM

Six Stories from the the Sixth in GA
Judge dismisses paper-ballot lawsuit in Georgia’s 6th District
(More or less, Exactly What It Says on the Tin).

AJC poll: Trump still unpopular in Ga. 6th, but many say he won’t impact their vote

Among the respondents who did say they made their selection based on Trump, 39 percent said they were aiming to express their opposition to the president, while 14 percent said they wanted to register support. More than three-quarters of Democrats, 37 percent of independents and 43 percent of voters under 40 said they fell into the former category.

The majority of Republicans surveyed, about 55 percent, said expressing their opinion on Trump wasn’t a factor in their decision-making.

“Unfortunately, the Democrats are trying to make it a mandate on Trump and his policies. But I think for a lot of people locally it’s not that way,” said Patti Kastens, a Handel supporter from north Fulton County.

Meanwhile, slightly more than one in three Republicans said their decision was made in part to register support for the president.

Only 35 percent of likely voters viewed him favorably when surveyed last week. That’s only slightly better than how House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi polled but significantly worse than Trump himself did statewide back in January before he was sworn into office.


Bikers for Trump dip toe into local politics with Handel-Ossoff contest
It wasn’t exactly your typical Saturday afternoon sight in this sleepy Sandy Plains neighborhood: almost a dozen barrel-chested, leather-clad bikers — led by a quartet of clean-cut high school students, no less — going door to door asking if these 6th District voters plan to support Republican Karen Handel.

“We’re here to put Karen Handel where she needs to be,” one of the bikers told a voter at his front door, “in D.C. supporting President Trump.”

Since Trump’s inauguration, Cox said he noticed voters weren’t giving the president the respect he deserved. So he began channeling the energy of the group’s roughly 260,000 Facebook members into local races.

“Bikers for Trump is going to support any candidates, Senate, (House), local, that supports President Trump,” said Brian Strzalkowski, a power company lineman based in Winston who’s one of the group’s more than 700 members in Georgia. “Our goal is to see the state stay red and go all the way through and support President Trump.”

Handel’s bid to succeed Tom Price in Georgia’s 6th congressional District is seen as the first such effort.

“It was terribly hard for me to turn bikers out to the polls for the presidential elections,” Cox said. “So this is more of a political science experiment here, if I’m going to be able to rally the bikers behind Karen.”

So members of the group – some from as far as Florida – dropped in on a Handel campaign event Saturday at Williamson Bros. Bar-B-Q in Marietta. The contrast in style was striking: Handel, sporting boat shoes and a white collared shirt, shaking hands with the bikers, clad in leather vests with patches stating “all my ammo is dipped in pig’s blood.”

“This is not about Karen Handel. It’s about the Republican Party,” said Strzalkowski. “We support Karen Handel because she supports President Trump.”


Handel dismisses Ossoff’s record-setting fundraising: ‘It means nothing’
Handel said 6th District voters can see through Ossoff’s $15 million fundraising haul, which was collected in a staggering six-week period.

“It means nothing,” Handel said following a morning meet-and-greet with about 200 supporters at a barbecue restaurant in Marietta. “It means that an ultra-liberal, backed by Nancy Pelosi, is trying to steal this seat and we’re not going to let it happen.”

She said voters here “are not interested in people from California, Massachusetts and New York buying this seat.”

Handel reported pulling in $3.8 million worth of donations over the same period. That’s a more than respectable sum for an ordinary congressional race, but this nationally-watched contest has rapidly become the most expensive ever run.

The former secretary of state also indicated she wasn’t dwelling on a recent Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll that had her running behind Ossoff.

“It wouldn’t matter if a poll had either one of us up by 20 today. It’s irrelevant,” Handel told reporters. “It is about who is coming to the polls, and we can see with the numbers coming in early voting that it is most certainly trending my way.”

“We just really have to keep the momentum going,” she added.


Trump robocall slams ‘tax-raising’ Ossoff in Georgia 6th race
President Donald Trump called Democrat Jon Ossoff a “tax-raising pro-illegal immigration Democrat” who will work to thwart him in a robocall released Friday supporting Republican Karen Handel in Georgia’s 6th District race.

In Friday’s call, paid for by the National Republican Congressional Committee, Trump calls Handel “a small government tax-cutting conservative” and said she’s a “terrific woman.”

“We’ve done great things so far, but all of our progress creating jobs, growing our economy and cracking down on illegal immigration will be stopped if Nancy Pelosi wins and puts her guy in your congressional seat,” Trump said. “He’ll raise your taxes and crime will surge.”

“Vote now. Do it. Vote now,” he said, adding: “Karen Handel will stop the liberal Democrats radical, really, radical agenda. And I want to tell you, when you look at it, it’s not even believable what they want to do. Most importantly she’ll help me make America great again.”

Georgia 6th: Pence gives Handel some backup in heated runoff

Pence appeared with Handel at a fundraiser at Cobb Energy Centre after a stop at Dobbins Air Reserve Base, telling guests at a $1,500-a-head luncheon that the Republican would help repeal the Affordable Care Act and pass one of the “largest tax cuts in American history” if she defeats Democrat Jon Ossoff.

The June 20 runoff is about “whether we turn back to the policies and leadership the American people just turned out,” Pence said, a reference to former President Barack Obama and other Democrats. He urged conservatives to vote and then “bow the head and bend the knee” to pray for a Handel win.

The event was a private gathering, but our AJC colleague Kyle Wingfield tweeted a string of developments as a pool reporter with Pence. Check out his feed here.

edited 11th Jun '17 1:14:33 PM by CenturyEye

Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our lives
BearyScary Since: Sep, 2010 Relationship Status: You spin me right round, baby
#192771: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:21:32 PM

Supporting Handel is a travesty.

Do not obey in advance.
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#192772: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:26:27 PM

“It means nothing,” Handel said following a morning meet-and-greet with about 200 supporters at a barbecue restaurant in Marietta. “It means that an ultra-liberal, backed by Nancy Pelosi, is trying to steal this seat and we’re not going to let it happen.” She said voters here “are not interested in people from California, Massachusetts and New York buying this seat.”

What is with these people and Nancy Pelosi? Also, the language of "trying to steal/buy the seat" makes me wonder if she's already gearing up to contest the results if she happens to lose.

SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#192773: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:29:19 PM

Nancy Pelosi is the scarecrow Republican aspiring congresspeople use to drive their voters to the ballot box.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
LSBK Since: Sep, 2014
#192774: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:33:22 PM

Yeah, but how did that happen?

Krieger22 Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018 from Malaysia Since: Mar, 2014 Relationship Status: I'm in love with my car
Causing freakouts over sourcing since 2018
#192775: Jun 11th 2017 at 1:35:29 PM

1) Woman

2) "Establishment"

3)"Establishment" woman

I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiot

Total posts: 417,856
Top