The Armageddon Election 2024 Or Apocalypse 2024

Dejecty-hatch wrote:


Welp at least we didn’t get rid of the filibuster… as we may need it

hutch wrote:

Dejecty-hatch wrote:


Welp at least we didn’t get rid of the filibuster… as we may need it

We should have gotten rid of it cause it’s unconstitutional and un democratic. Imagine if UK had a filibuster? It’s just asinine. Why shouldn’t a government be able to do things with a majority?

Too many people walk around not questioning the obvious.

Dejecty-hatch wrote:
That little sliver of hope… dashed


Republicans win House, delivering Trump a trifecta

Dejecty-hatch wrote:

hutch wrote:
Ughhh Rubio as Secretary of State? No way to sugarcoat this one…. He is horrible on foreign policy….am surprised Trump would go for him

Don’t think this is good for Ukraine… although Congress controls the purse


Rubio, has said in recent interviews that Ukraine needs to seek a negotiated settlement with Russia rather than focus on regaining all territory that Russia has taken in the last decade. He was also one of 15 Republican senators to vote against a $95 billion military aid package for Ukraine, passed in April.


Should Dems get a false hope they can fill his vacancy….HA

hutch wrote:
MAGA is a stupid term. What does it even mean? We need to just call them republicans.

sweetcell wrote:
federal government is currently funded via a continuing resolution that expires on Dec 20.

unfounded conspiracy theory that has been keeping me up at night: under trump's instructions, house GOP deliberately doesn't pass a new budget.  gov't shuts down, which suits the drain-the-swampers just fine.  shutdown drags on.  federal employees are furloughed.  closure goes on long enough that they find work elsewhere, so can't go back to how it was.  public becomes desperate for some form of government to re-open.  GOP steps in to completely re-write the rules of how the gov't works as part of a new budget - a la project 2025. 

elon said that cost-cutting will be painful in the short-term.  above scenario happens to fit.

sweetcell wrote:

Dejecty-hatch wrote:

hutch wrote:
Ughhh Rubio as Secretary of State? No way to sugarcoat this one…. He is horrible on foreign policy….am surprised Trump would go for him

Don’t think this is good for Ukraine… although Congress controls the purse


Rubio, has said in recent interviews that Ukraine needs to seek a negotiated settlement with Russia rather than focus on regaining all territory that Russia has taken in the last decade. He was also one of 15 Republican senators to vote against a $95 billion military aid package for Ukraine, passed in April.


Should Dems get a false hope they can fill his vacancy….HA

rubio isn't great for ukraine, however: trump has picked michael waltz as his future national security advisor, and that role has greater sway.  waltz has been very pro-Ukraine, has recently said that russia only responds to force so more support is needed, etc. so there is a little hope there.  TBD how much leash he'll be given, but between having a supportive SoS or supportive NSA, i'll take the NSA.  the SoS will be a glorified spokesperson under trump (more so than usual).

and since i'm on the topic again, addenda to my last meandering post on UA: another pressure on trump to not cut funding will come from the US arms industry.  reminder: those billions aren't being sent as cash to UA, they are being spent here in the US to replace the old weapons sent to UA.  arms manufacturers have ramped up production and won't be happy to see their long-term contracts cut.  lobbyists will be deployed in full force.

Dejecty-hatch wrote:
I’ll be happy if disgraced former general Mike Flynn is not is the cabinet… that guy is full Q and is cuckoo-for cocoa puffs

hutch wrote:

sweetcell wrote:

Dejecty-hatch wrote:

hutch wrote:
Ughhh Rubio as Secretary of State? No way to sugarcoat this one…. He is horrible on foreign policy….am surprised Trump would go for him

Don’t think this is good for Ukraine… although Congress controls the purse

Rubio, has said in recent interviews that Ukraine needs to seek a negotiated settlement with Russia rather than focus on regaining all territory that Russia has taken in the last decade. He was also one of 15 Republican senators to vote against a $95 billion military aid package for Ukraine, passed in April.


Should Dems get a false hope they can fill his vacancy….HA

rubio isn't great for ukraine, however: trump has picked michael waltz as his future national security advisor, and that role has greater sway.  waltz has been very pro-Ukraine, has recently said that russia only responds to force so more support is needed, etc. so there is a little hope there.  TBD how much leash he'll be given, but between having a supportive SoS or supportive NSA, i'll take the NSA.  the SoS will be a glorified spokesperson under trump (more so than usual).

and since i'm on the topic again, addenda to my last meandering post on UA: another pressure on trump to not cut funding will come from the US arms industry.  reminder: those billions aren't being sent as cash to UA, they are being spent here in the US to replace the old weapons sent to UA.  arms manufacturers have ramped up production and won't be happy to see their long-term contracts cut.  lobbyists will be deployed in full force.

Are you trying to make the case for not continuing to support the Ukraine?

hutch wrote:
Kill me


https://www.cnbc.com/2024/11/13/trump-taps-rep-matt-gaetz-as-attorney-general.html

nkotb wrote:
Getting a slim majority in the House and then maybe immediately losing it because you put so many reps in your cabinet rocks.