2020 Senate & House

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Joe Fan, May 5, 2019.

  1. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  2. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  3. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Liz Cheney will probably run, and she'll win. Easy GOP hold.

    He figured out that Beta was an aberration. He might get as much media ball-licking as Beta got, but Cornyn is far less vulnerable and polarizing than Cruz, even if his actual voting record is about as conservative.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. mchammer

    mchammer 2,500+ Posts

    Tried to improve on this but came up empty
     
  5. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Not to mention the most punchable face in the known universe
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Beta's was pretty bad too.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. Horns11

    Horns11 5,000+ Posts

    The math just won't work out for Senate Democrats again. Even though there are far more red seats up for the grabs, they're pretty solid. I think there are shakier close elections in store for 2022, but that's so far away.

    I don't know how the Alabama GOP works, but there will be a national movement among the money people to make sure Jones doesn't keep that seat. It won't be Roy, but it'll be someone established to take it back. I think McSally will lose McCain's spot, especially if Arizona continues to go more blue in the next year. Cory Gardner is as good as done in Colorado. Even Republicans hate him there, but they'll be splintered come next November. Tillis' seat in North Carolina is the only other one that Democrats would have a shot at, but I think it stays red.

    For some reason or another, Mainers love Susan Collins even though she rubs the rest of the nation the wrong way. I think that's why they love her.

    If anything, the Democrats will lose the NH and Virginia seats. That's more likely than Democrats flipping any other red states. Unless there's more revelations about Trump and that brings out another blue wave in 2020. It also depends on who's running for President from the Democrat side. Any of the particular candidates could either dispel rumors about increased turnout (Biden, Klobuchar), or work in favor of Republicans to get out their side of the vote (Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, O'Rourke, Harris).
     
  8. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Officially passing the torch to Marco Rubio

     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    You may have noticed the name Justin Amash pop up. He is a 4-term House RINO from Michigan who the media has been pimping lately because he took some anti-Trump positions, which they love.
    One of his recent townhalls got some social media run this week because of a confrontation with a constituent. It wasnt easy but I finally found the woman's full statement/question here, in case anyone else is interested what she actually said to him


     
  10. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    You are way off on Amash. He is not a RINO. He is a true conservative. He criticizes Trump when Trump wanders too far into statism.

    Except with this whole impeachment thing. I think his assessment of the Mueller report is off. But he is no progressive. He is a very principled libertarian in the Republican party.
     
  11. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Amash isn't a RINO. He's a Ron Paul idiot, but he's not a RINO.
     
  12. Chop

    Chop 500+ Posts

    GOP keeps the Senate easily.
    Dems keep the House easily.

    If Trump wins--more of the status quo plus likely one or more new SCOTUS Justices vetted and effectively chosen by the Federalist Society put on the Court.

    If Biden (or some other Dem) wins--small, moderate, legislation passed--nothing Earth-shattering. Possible multi-year holdout by Senate for any SCOTUS nominees (Merritt Garland situation repeated, possibly for years). Or the Senate simply rejects the nominee(s). Biden, or other moderate Dem maybe gets a moderate centrist justice appointed--or maybe not.
     
  13. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    Ron Paul is great.
     
  14. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    On domestic and fiscal policy, he's great. On other things, he's nuttier than the Left.
     
  15. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I think that depends heavily on how the next 18 months go. If Pelosi isn't able to tame the wingnut side of her caucus (people like AOC, Omar, and Tlaib) and they become the face of the Democratic Party, they will lose the House. If not, then I agree that they will hold the House. Of course, how Trump behaves will have a big impact as it did in 2018.

    If Biden wins and a vacancy opens up, I don't think Cocaine Mitch can hold it up forever. He'll probably tolerate a Garland type, but that won't appease the GOP base, because the parties have different approaches about what constitutes a "moderate." When the GOP appoints a moderate, it's usually moderate to liberal on social issues (Kennedy, O'Connor) but pro-cop and pro-business. When a Democrat appoints a moderate, it's usually moderate to conservative on crime and business but solidly liberal on social issues. That's why the social conservatives polarize so hard on judicial nominations.
     
  16. mchammer

    mchammer 2,500+ Posts

    GOP lost the house by losing 20 races in the suburbs by 1-4% points. In other words it was very close. Nancy is hoping the election season in 2020 will keep her party from imploding.
     
  17. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It was close in most of their losses (though they lost 16 seats by more than five points, including both Texas races). If the freaks become the face of the Party, they can probably take back some of those. Redistricting could also make a difference. I could see the Dallas and Houston seats reworked some, though some of the neighboring districts ended up being closer than expected, which makes that harder to do. It also wouldn't surprise me if California "gives" back a seat or two to turn the other five that the Democrats picked up into safe blue districts. However, none of that will be a factor until 2222.
     
  18. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I guess you mean on foreign policy, but pretty much everyone agrees with his view of the Iraq War now. He was against it before it ever began. He is right on Syria and Afghanistan too. He may go too far on reducing military, but we absolutely need to do less right now.
     
  19. 4th_floor

    4th_floor 1,000+ Posts

    Amash is not a conservative. He has called himself a libertarian, and he typically votes as a libertarian. Most Libertarians were against Trump, as I was. Some, like Amash, have never accepted that Trump is the most Libertarian president we have had since Reagan. Amash is in the never Trump camp.
     
  20. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I was using conservative and libertarian equally. I know they aren't, but there is a lot of overlap with Amash. He isn't a left libertarian. He is right libertarian.

    I agree with Amash. Trump is not the most libertarian President since Reagan. That would probably have been Bush I. They both have approved more military intervention. But Trump is adding tariffs and following them up with farm subsidies, one of the most unlibertarian things ever.
     
  21. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Of course, Amash was 23 at the time the US invaded Iraq and was a first-year law student. Did he go on the record back then? Perhaps, but if he did, I'm not aware of it.

    Either way, Libertarians like to point to the Iraq War as if it proves their point on foreign policy. It doesn't. It's an anecdote in which some of them guessed right. It's like watching Troy Aikman throw an interception and claiming it means he sucks as a quarterback.

    Trump isn't a libertarian President on any front, because he opposes entitlement reform and basically supports spending money like a drunken sailor. He doesn't even pretend like previous Republican presidents did.

    Having said that, I think a libertarian argument could be made for tariffs IF (and only if) the government was imposing them as the primary means for raising revenue, because tariffs are ultimately voluntary. For example, I would trade the federal income tax and FICA for a system of tariffs. That would mean far more economic liberty.
     
  22. 4th_floor

    4th_floor 1,000+ Posts

    You have a point about trade. Trump trade policies are not Libertarian. But Trump has cut regulations more than even Reagan. I am hopeful to see a reduction in the regulatory state size, but that's probably a pipe dream. I'm surprised Trump has been able to reel in regulations despite the resistance movement.
     
  23. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I was talking about Ron Paul's views on Iraq.

    I don't know what you refer to when you mention Libertarians point on foreign policy. Based on what you mean exactly I could agree or disagree.

    I think the point where they are undoubtedly right is that the US military is way too quick to intervene in situations and it has cost the US and the other countries many $s and much blood. Look at Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and Libya. They are right disagree with US military action there. Their stance on countries like Iran, Russia, and China is to find as much common ground as possible to build onto, then don't escalate. I don't think there is much to disagree with their either.

    The US general who got us into Vietnam has admitted that the Gulf of Tonkin was a ruse. Much like the USS Maine and the Lusitania. Libertarians are suspicious of the justification the US military has used for over 100 years to convince the American people to support war. They are right their too.

    There was no reason to participate in WW1, and the way it ended lead us directly into WW2 and the rise of the USSR. I don't blame US politicians for the bad things other countries did, but I can also recognize when politicians lie to people to get their way. I don't claim to know what the correct foreign policy move in every case, but I think where we sit in 2019, the US military projects power globally. That is scary to the rest of the world and should be to US citizens. We have become the thing we hate in many regards.
     
  24. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    Yes. I agree with you there. The tariffs also wouldn't target certain countries over others. We would play fair, like everybody says they want the other guy to do.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  25. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    4th_floor, I forgot about the regulations. He has also been against pushing the renewable energy movement, even though he hasn't scaled back subsidies for them.

    There are parts of Trumps policy that I do like. Trump the Candidate was much more libertarian than Trump the President, but he isn't responsible for that in many ways.
     
  26. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    If they had their way, this would not be limited to SF, it would be the entire country
    Dont let it happen - it's up to you

     
  27. Monahorns

    Monahorns 1,000+ Posts

    I say we fight a war before we let the US turn into SF.
     
  28. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Mona
    Yes to not letting libs turn us into SF or Calif
    What kind of war would stop it?
     
  29. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    Maybe we could just expel California from the union...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  30. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    is there a way to expel the libs only?
    Keep the good conservatives that live there AND keep all the land.
    Clean up the crapholes and keep the great weather

    AND of course wine country
     

Share This Page