>... that the electorate shares your opinions.
>
>>Even if it is a "long game" of chicken, the timing is
>terrible
>>man.
>>
>>Nancy is sharing tic tacs with Mr Obstruction? Oh and
>leaving
>>it up to the "committees"? Cmon.
>>
>>
>>Its also funny/frustrating that the GOP does shit like what
>I
>>said all the time and come out on top.
>
>We've had this discussion before. The rules are different for
>them, because their voter base is different. The very fact
>that so many Democrats are suspicious of even our own leaders
>means the only choice is to play defense.

Yeah we have. And we disagree on why its like this.

You think Dems act spineless because their voters are less reliable, essentially.

I think Dem voters are less reliable precisely because the party is spineless.

>
>
>>In fact, the GOP stonewalling Obama is often cited whenever
>>even a slight criticism of Obama is brought up. He's
>>basically immune to any accountability for a lot of
>Democrats.
>>
>>
>>But when someone suggests the Dems fight like the GOP, its a
>>"terrible strategy" and partisan.
>
>Yes, because conservatism (even as defined today) does not
>work the same way as progressivism (even as defined today).
>You're relying on the same kind of false equivalence that
>feeds right-wing rants about "reverse racism" or "reverse
>sexism." "It applies to that group, so why doesn't it apply to
>this group!?"

Nah, I'm not.

I'm saying the GOP have played dirty since at least the 90's and it has worked for them.

The Dems need to start playing dirty. Or at the very least, stop pretending the other side isn't playing dirty.



>
>
>>A terrible strategy that consistently works for the other
>>side? A terrible strategy that stopped Obama's agenda in its
>>tracks?
>
>Yup.
>
>And for the record, Trump's agenda has been "stopped" just as
>effectively as Obama's was, in the sense that no laws have
>been passed to make any of his agenda permanent (other than
>the tax cut, which happened before we were had any power).

Thats fair but now his new agenda is to obstruct at every turn. At some point, the Dems need to stop getting publicly punked, man.

Eating a bucket of day-old chicken aint the look.

>
>>I know- "Dems can't/shouldn't act like the GOP"
>>
>>That's kind of my point, though. Dem leaders and some
>voters
>>want to keep pretending that there is some form of normalcy
>>going on. There really isn't.
>
>There is definitely normalcy going on. It's just a normalcy
>that isn't conducive to progressive change.

? Things are most definitely not normal. Well, not in any way the party who supposedly is for the people should accept.


>
>So what's your reaction to that? I assume you're not calling
>for an armed rebellion, an overthrow of the entire
>Constitutional system. But that's the only thing that would
>upend the basic mathematics of the Democratic leadership's
>strategy.

I'm not even sure what your point is here. I'm calling for Dems to stop acting like that there is common ground to find with the other side. To follow through on these investigations. To stop giving Trumpito photo ops. To stop eating chicken. To stop sending me emails begging me to sign some petition to wag the finger at the GOP. Etc.

>
>Instead you seem to be hell bent on calling them out for not
>doing things that would make matters even worse.
>
>
? In your opinion. Having some confidence in your high ground, your investigations, you legislative power, etc...and actually ACTING on it would not make things worse.

Impeachment hearings would bring even more shit to light, I'm sure.


On the other hand, you seem hell bent to blindly support Dems no matter what (even here- where no one is going to stay home in 2020. Its okay to think critically of Nancy occasionally.)



>>So the Dems keep acting like everything is normal, and a lot
>>of people get fucked. And they look silly.
>
>And you're letting your emotions take over.
>
>

Uh, okay. Thats not it. It is possible I just disagree with you.

>>And if Trump really is as awful as we all say (including
>Dems
>>in their hearings), why this urge to work with him on
>"common
>>ground"? How do the Dems have "common ground" with this
>guy?
>
>The voters expect them to pretend there's one. And
>infrastructure is a leading example.

Again, this is where the typical Democrat blind supporter logic doesn't add up. One day Trump is horribly unpopular president who is so terrible the Dems don't even need a message to beat him. The next day, voters are expecting Dems to work with Trump.

One Day Trump is clearly a lawless incompetent Russian plant who could only beat Hillary with help from an adversary, the next day Dems everywhere are itching to see a bipartisan infrastructure plan.

I'll even meet you 75% of the way though, and say the Dems need to at least pretend to be trying. I STILL think the timing of that little tic tac meeting was terrible. In my opinion.

You have everyone from Barr to Trump JR telling Dems (publicly, no less) to fuck themselves with a copy of the constitution. And Nancy and Chuck are giving Trump a news story.


>
>
>>And maybe it is a long-game of chicken where the Dems are
>>going to be able to say "see, we even tried to work with him
>>and the GOP voted against their own Pres" or
>>whatever...fucking wait Chuck and Nancy. Wait at least a
>>month or so and shine more light on the fact that individual
>1
>>is basically refusing to cooperate with congress, and
>ordering
>>others not to cooperate.
>>
>>Shine light on Trump trying to dismantle Obamacare in the
>>courts. Etc.
>>
>>
>>And to your impeachment point, I (unsurprisingly to you, I'm
>>sure) blame the Dem leaders. Either impeach or don't.
>>
>>Either hold Barr in contempt, or stop investigating.
>>
>>Either make every meeting/press even about Trump/Barr, or
>move
>>the fuck on.
>>
>>
>>This trying to half-way investigate Trump, but with no real
>>plan to hold him accountable is muddling the message and
>will
>>ultimately piss off everyone.
>>
>>So, if the Dems are going to impeach...do it.
>>
>>
>>If not, stop the charade because all it is doing is making
>>them look indecisive and like they are just holding
>>hearings/investigations to ... well harass and put on a
>show.
>>Which is exactly what they are being accused of. Make it
>>count or stop.
>>
>>I know, impeachment takes time. Okay. Then stop giving him
>>white house photo ops and cute stories about sharing tic
>tacs.
>
>If it has to be "impeach now or stop," then you're making the
>case for doing nothing. You know as well as I do that the
>Democrats don't have ANY power to remove the President from
>office.

Again, no one here is saying Trump would be removed. You created that strawman to defend the Dems.

My point is the Dems should act like they actually believe in their case, believe in their power, and believe they are right.


By not ACTING on the constant "fuck yous" from the other side, it really does look like they are just engaging in harassment.

In my opinion.


>
>But what they can do is feed the narrative of a lawless
>administration. The public is ON OUR SIDE on that point. They
>are NOT on our side with regard to impeachment.

Impeachment hearings, contempt, big press conferences talking about the "constitution" and the "wise founding fathers" etc- all that bullshit- would be a good play. In my opinion.

If there really are independent voters that Dems are trying to get, then protecting the constitution and stopping a lawless Pres should speak to them. Show the difference between the parties. The Dems are in a position to even reclaim Patriotism and the love of the constitution here. But won't work at all if they don't act like they believe they have the power to at least start hearings.

Or, if the argument is keep with these hearing that go nowhere (and look like harassment at that point) and run a "look, we are a little better than them but not different they are good people" candidate for Pres....then I guess we can keep this board active thanks to another 4 years of Trump.


>
>The world does not behave the way we want it to behave.
>

Of course. Or we wouldn't be here. But don't mistake what I'm saying is what I want to see only. I honestly think the Democrats are making a mistake by using these hearings only to eat a bucket of day old chicken and give Trump good coverage on infrastructure.

Or introduce the idea of "self-impeachment" lol


If you believe (as you've said) that getting Trump out is the priority, it may cost some blue dog seats. But we need to get him the fuck out. And I don't think harassing through investigations with no plans for follow through and/or giving him good press on deals is the way to do it.


At some point, if nothing at all is done, Trump (and every talking head on all networks) is going to say "so why didn't you impeach?"

And in 2020 its going to look even more like the Dems were just harassing him. Or were too cowardly/indecisive to act.