Recent Posts

Show posts from buddies only

Up next, bringing back fox hunting and death penalty.

How about bringing back the cane?

Perhaps burning suspected witches at the stake would get those voters back!

Naw, that's more something the "Nick Fuentes" crowd in the US would advocate.

As for caning, I suppose it'd be Cuthbert Cringeworthy Rees-Mogg's attempt to secure the vote of all those Bash Street Teachers out there ;-)

What's the American equivalent of withdrawing the whip? Is there one? It's been well over a decade since I've bothered with Congressional procedure, so I've forgotten a lot of the little technicalities. In most countries there would be no need to ask, but Americans are so odd about anything to do with parties and groups.

It’s simply not available as congressional nominees are determined by primaries .

That's a candidate selection issue which is different. I meant expelling or suspending from the caucus, as this would definitely cross the threshold for that literally anywhere else.

The closest thing would be stripping her of her committee spots which would only be possible with Republican support to get a majority of the House. She could be barred from them next session however. There was a push to do this to Joe Lieberman after 2006 but the Senate caucus voted it down.

It pretty much as impossible to do it for Lieberman as well given if he switched over to the GOP it would have given the Republicans the Majority from 2007-09 and denied the democrats the filibuster proof majority from 2009-2011

This is the same reason that there were no options on the table to rein in Manchin and Sinema.

What's the American equivalent of withdrawing the whip? Is there one? It's been well over a decade since I've bothered with Congressional procedure, so I've forgotten a lot of the little technicalities. In most countries there would be no need to ask, but Americans are so odd about anything to do with parties and groups.

It’s simply not available as congressional nominees are determined by primaries .

That's a candidate selection issue which is different. I meant expelling or suspending from the caucus, as this would definitely cross the threshold for that literally anywhere else.

The closest thing would be stripping her of her committee spots which would only be possible with Republican support to get a majority of the House. She could be barred from them next session however. There was a push to do this to Joe Lieberman after 2006 but the Senate caucus voted it down.

It pretty much as impossible to do it for Lieberman as well given if he switched over to the GOP it would have given the Republicans the Majority from 2007-09 and denied the democrats the filibuster proof majority from 2009-2011

Or like a thing at all? Is this one of those US only things?

Pretty much all of the gas stations within a three mile radius from me have this now...as did every one I entered in Chicago.

The debates, if they actually happen, will matter very very little.

Would it be fair to say that if you had been around in 1948, you would have been constantly declaring that Thomas Dewey was all but certain to be elected President that year?

Fun fact: the guy who played the Dean has an Oscar for best adapted screenplay.

What potential events could lock up the election for either candidate?

Trump doing terribly at the second or last debate.

Trump saying something absolutely insane next to election day

a right wing attack of some sort in October turns the election blue.

The economy suddenly heating up in September - Oct and prices falling would lock it for Biden.

we all know since 2016 that whatever crazy things Trunp says doesn’t sway the voters.

Obama is X’er

Gen X doesn't start until 1964 by all qualified definition. He is either a late stage Boomer, or if you agree with the idea of Generation Jones (1954-1964), a Joneser

https://twitter.com/academic_la/status/1794838600041001106?t=sgI2X4pydY7wJ1AVkCp...

That’s horrible, no ifs, ands, or buts.  It’s objectively not genocide, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a horrific act.  And you can’t even argue that Israel was targeting such high-ranking Hamas officials that it was worth the risk or whatever.  These were not top guys.  This strike never should’ve been launched.

According to the Palestine Red Crescent Society, the area hit is a designated "safe zone".

This isn't the first time that Israel has hit a "safe zone" either.

Time to reconsider the "objectively not genocide" part.

That’s not genocide.  A war crime?  Quite possibly, but not genocide.  Words have meaning.

Maybe you think that I looked up "genocide" in a dictionary and using the term willy-nilly.

That is not the case.

When I talking about "genocide", I am using the term as defined in the Genocide Convention.