Is this the same democratic party who approved the nuclear option for executive and judicial nominees, and then screamed foul play when the republicans expanded it to include the supreme court? The same ones who cheated in the election to stop an outsider from getting the nomination? The same party who instead of just blocking documents destroyed them, and then tried to pretend it wasn't them who destroyed it? Hmmm... let me think. Yes, they would. Not being the party of Trump is better than being the party of Trump, but when it comes to dirty the tactics they're not the good guys by any stretch.
If you’ve read things I’ve written here in the past, I’m pretty critical of shitty things I see liberals and dems doing. If the dems were about to get shellacked in the midterms and a high court seat was in play, I can definitely see them pulling shitty tactics. But that’s not what’s happening right now.
Yeah, 538 is barely analyzing it. The Republicans deserve to lose the House based on their bungling of an Obamacare replacement alone. They had 8 years to come up with something better. Then they get into power and they have nothing other than a handful of symbolic votes to overturn it.
I’ve been trying to find articles but why don’t people feel the senate is in play? Are highly unlikely seats in play?
Basically. Theres a few, but most of the seats in play are ones that are in pretty safe blue or red states. Like in my state, no one is ousting Elizabeth Warren in a million years. 2020 will be the big Senate fight. If the Senate turns over this year, it will be a pretty big upset.
Senate terms are six years, so every two years only a third of the Senate is up for reelection. In this particular election a lot of Democrats are up for reelection and very few Republicans, so the Democrats have to play a lot of defense to hold the seats they have with few opportunities to take Republican seats.
By the way, if you haven't checked out the excerpts being dropped from Woodward's new book, good lord they're doozies. His lawyer told Mueller that if the President sat for an interview, that interview would ultimately be leaked and foreign leaders would see that the President is a moron. Said lawyer also set up a mock interview with the President where he couldn't get the President to avoid perjuring himself. His chief economic advisor literally stole an unsigned order (The order was to withdraw from a trade agreement with South Korea) off the President's desk in order to prevent him from signing it. He did this knowing that the President wouldn't remember he was planning on signing it and wouldn't ask for another copy. He did the same thing again to prevent a withdrawal from NAFTA. He called his Secretary of Defense and told him to assassinate Bashir Al Assad. Mattis said he'd get right on that, then immediately told his aides "we're not doing any of that." He called his Attorney General a traitor, mentally retarded, and a "dumb Southerner" while mocking his Southern accent.
If it were any president other than Trump, this would blow up a lot more skirts. This behaviour is practically expected, given his general aura for the past three and a half decades. But people also can’t accept the fact that he’s a real, actual stupid person until books like this come out.
No, this book will just fire up his base. "See how the mean librul media trying to make trump look bad. This is why it's all fake news. FAKE NEWS!!!"
Naturally. And Woodward is a bias libtard reporter. Just look at how he and his dirty Jew partner took down Nixon: constantly calling and asking his staff questions, sometimes not even during regular office hours. Guy is a fucking monster.
You just know trump is gonna spout off about how they're trying to do the same thing to him they did to nixon. Why yes.... yes we are. Funny you should say that, actually.
You just know trump is gonna spout off about how they're trying to do the same thing to him they did to nixon. Why yes.... yes we are. Funny you should say that, actually.
Marco Rubio threatening Alex Jones with “I’ll take care of you myself” was the coolest thing he’ll ever do.
I take this about as seriously as I take the various "Rogue" twitter accounts, which is to say, I don't. If you feel he's so bad for the country that you need to thwart him, better to air the laundry and leave GOP no choice but impeach?
Take what part seriously? That the author is a Senior White House Official? The New York Times says they know his or her identity and are staking their reputation on him or her being the author. As for the content, it's almost less important what they wrote than that they wrote it.
Is your gut feeling based on thinking it takes the same level of verification to get something published in the Times as starting a Twitter account, or thinking that the Times would knowingly publish something claiming to be written by someone in the administration when it's actually just some random shmo?
So I understand what the article is saying; an unelected career bureaucrat is actively thwarting and countermanding the agenda of an elected sitting President? Is that not proof of the deep state in action? Is this not going to be spun into a talking point by Trump immediately? Why would they publish this?