"farcical" and "puerile". love when Lou Dobbs uses big words to try and conceal the worms in his brain.
The mindset of worrying about what Republicans want and don’t want is so aggravating. It’s so ingrained that I’m not sure people realize they’re doing it.
Sure they will, but I’ve grown tired of this leadership and so have a lot of others. Pelosi, Stenny Hoyer, and Jim Clyburn will all be in their 80’s when 2020 rolls around. They have held the three top positions in the D House leadership for over a decade. There needs to be a change in leadership. The 2018 midterm backlash created a huge opportunity. The House D’s seem content to roll out the same re-tread. The Democrats might as well just nominate Hillary Clinton in 2020 again and take the loss.
My comment was directed at the GOP quote, as if they don’t want Pelosi because she is so skillfull. That’s nonsense. They want her as a foil.
he's had #MAGA in his twitter profile for like 3 years actually went and looked, he took it out, hmmm
The 2018 backlash occurred because of Trump. I’ll use 1994 as an example. Midterm backlash and the minority leadership Gingrich articulated a clear vision and platform with the Contract With America. He caught the red wave and defined a clear agenda. What did Pelosi do in 2018? The path forward has to be about more than preserving Obamacare and hating Trump. I just don’t see her being aggressive and forcing the Senate into tough votes. The Democrats May hold the House, but they are an opposition party and she hasn’t been a great opposition leader. I fear we’re going to find ourselves in 2020 with nothing of substance put forward and nothing but two years of scandal investigations.
Yeah, I’m not saying she should be the speaker. I’m saying that using what Republicans might want and what they might do to make the decision is shitty.
Yeah, what is Pelosi's vision forward? Plaudits for what she's done in the past, sure, but what's the vision going forward, working WITH scumbags that will crabs-in-a-bucket any progress? Screw that.
Maybe I misunderstood, but it sounded like the judge's ruling was a short term win for the media, but the grounds he used to justify it will allow the White House to develop a formal process and then exclude Acosta.
Yes, the status quo will be preserved while the move to a formal decision later, unless the administration abandons the issue.
This temporary 'win' seems like a double edged sword for the WH press corp. So leyman's read on this is the Judge gave the WH an opening to make arbitrary ground rules where they can boot someone for a line of questioning or whatever.
this just reminds me of TV shows where the attorney comes in and says to the suspect “don’t say a word.” The suspect says “no I can explain this” before promptly admitting he is guilty and is arrested.
Well that’s always been the case They can’t be arbitrary. They’ll be strict and Acosta is going to have no leeway. But you cannot be arbitrary and cannot be viewpoint discrimination
He’s been the most over the top and all-in suck up since day one. Tells you something about Trump’s level of paranoia and stupidity if he doesn’t see Mike Pence as loyal. Going to be great watching Mike Pence grovel.
If there is one thing that Trump and I would agree on, it’s probably that we would both fucking hate Pence around us.
He’s definitely the biggest suck up around: But if I were Trump I would be concerned not because of Pence himself but because of others can utilize Pence to bring stability if Trump is removed. There are plenty of GOP mega donors who may have issues with Trump and may find it more attractive to work with Pence.