Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

This election has created situations where lines have been redrawn and can make things incredibly difficult to figure out. I am unaccustomed to being on the side of Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham and opposing the current and former Governors of Texas.

Here's an example: Paul Ryan is facing a primary challenge from Paul Nehlen. While I voted Romney/Ryan, and generally liked Paul Ryan significantly more than Mitt Romney and I find him to be less offensive than Boehner, he is also the sort against whom I would generally support a more conservative primary challenger, as I don't really see him doing much to advance conservative positions as Speaker. However, in his favor, as the highest ranking Republican, and in line for the Presidency, he has declined to endorse Trump, and called Trump out on lies characterizing his relationship. OTOH, Ryan is likely merely giving cover to other GOP House members in Not Trump districts, and personally hails from a state and district where Ted Cruz strongly outperformed Trump. Nehlen has been endorsed by some conservatives I have respected in the past. However, Nehlen has also been endorsed by Palin in her typically cartoonish fashion, pretty much solely because Ryan has refused to kiss Trump's ring.

The calculation of the enemy of my enemy is my friend has gotten very difficult. I suppose I am Team Ryan, but it feels very odd to be so.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Once upon a time, in my youth, in the first election cycle in which I voted, I dedicated myself wholeheartedly to supporting Ted Kennedy, who was pretty close to me ideologically, against Jimmy Carter, who shared some of my views on the world but to a much lesser degree.

Looking back with hindsight, that was the biggest mistake I made in politics. Carter was a man of great personal character, and that should have rendered petty disagreements over ideological niceties unimportant. And undermining him was a stupid thing to do.

But I still have some "Kennedy for President" stationary and other stuff, which can make for the fun occasional letter to some of my friends from those old political foxholes.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Nah. They're all super sincere and just don't like here on accounta how she lies all the time, is shrill, screams, is about to get indicted, and, man, can you imagine her halving the nuke codes during her "time of the month."

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

It's also Trump's biggest problem. And I'm pretty confident the the people who hate him for fanning it far outnumber the people who care about Hillary's sex.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

She's 68.

I'm not suggesting the average rabid Trump fan has Biology 101 under his belt. But he has seen commercials for hormone replacement therapy that discuss hot flashes, and heard his Aunt Betty yell at the TV, "They didn't have that when I was goin' through the change!" He knows something's keeping the old folk from birthing more youngins.

ETA: She should, however, be insulted for her fashion choices. It's too bad Johnny from Airplane is gone. E! needs a weekly bit where he could critique her endless wardrobe failures. "Where did you get that awful suit? Kim Jon Il's estate sale? And that hideous 'Mom Hair!' Is that styled after a barn owl?"

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Carter and Kennedy were similarly flawed. Recall, Jimmy "lusted after other women in his heart." Similarly, Ted drunkenly shirtcocked in front of the woman William Kennedy Smith was alleged to have raped on the night of the incident.

And neither could swim very well.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

So Ryan's challenger is now doubling down on the Palinesque Breitbart attack that Ryan refused to exclude refugees of Muslim faith from entering the US, but sends his children to a private school that screens out Muslims. Otherwise known as BREAKING NEWS: Catholic sends his kids to Catholic school!!!!

Team Ryan it is.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Check your sarcasm meter.

Yup, no misogyny here...

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Don't be a tool.

Trump gets the same. I'd do it myself, but PJ O'Rourke did it better:

"Also typical of modern Americans is Trump’s bad taste. True, he doesn’t dress the way the rest of us do—like a nine-year-old in twee T-shirt, bulbous shorts, boob shoes, and league-skunked sports team cap. And Trump doesn’t weigh 300 pounds or have multiple piercings or visible ink. He puts his own individual stamp on gaucherie. And we like it. We’re a country that cherishes being individuals as much as we cherish being gauche.

Trump’s suits have a cut and sheen as if they came from the trunk sale of a visiting Bombay tailor staying in a cheap hotel in Trump’s native Queens and taking a nip between fittings. Trump wears neckties in Outer Borough colors. And, Donald, the end of your necktie belongs up around your belt buckle, not between your knees and your nuts. Trump’s haircut makes Kim Jong Un laugh."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...s-america.html

I'm going to insult hers and Trump's appearance, demeanor, etc., as are a whole lot of people here, during this cycle. They choose to look and act the way they do and run for President. It's all fair game.

Similarly, you can choose whether to be an officious commentary policeman for potential cultural slights. Or, you can choose not to be insipid.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I choose uninsipidity! BOOM!!! #winning #alreadywon #notanofficiouscommentarypolicemanforpotentialculturalinsights

http://15130-presscdn-0-89.pagely.ne...a-mic-drop.jpg

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Truth.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Serious question- I see more and more actual non-insane media stories about testimony on the email moving closer and closer to her. I know a lot of you dismissed this as smoke but is it looking like something more now?

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

I guess I'm not aware that her defense ever turned on whether she was personally involved in the decision making.

What have you heard that you thinks changes anything? As far as I can tell, the story is still over-classification in retrospect of things that were not marked or considered classified at the time.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Yeah, right. That's why you missed the obvious sarcasm.

Re: Not Bob's new politics thread
 

Right. I've burned about 100,000 characters insulting Ted Cruz and Trump. But it's clear my insulting of Hillary is misogyny.

You're being a cultural Timmy here, and a Trump enabler. You know I'm neither sexist nor xenophobic nor racist. We've known each other here quite long enough to establish that. And I know you're not really a "hall monitor" type on these sorts of issues. Yet you flagged me here, and I think the reason you did so is twofold:

1. Score points. It was an easy shot. Fair enough.
2. Because you've fallen a bit into the silly use of all the new "victim language" being thrown around in recent years.

The second thing's important because a good bit of it is causing the nauseating backlash we see embodied in Trump. The more people see misogyny in everything, discrimination everywhere, and rail against things like "microaggressions," the more Trumpkins return the fire with truly offensive responses.

Look, I get that we're at one of these "inflection points" where everybody's a victim, and everybody else has "privilege," etc. These cycles come around every now and again. But throwing around accusations of misogyny, racism, xenophobia too frequently has a "boy who cried wolf" effect. Things like Ferguson and criminal justice reform - serious shit that needs to be addressed - are forgotten, or attacked by the Right (and Middle) as part of a childish "left wing agenda."

Not every nasty comment is sexist, or racist, or xenophobic. And the funniest shit usually walks a fine line with being offensive, or truly stinging the target. Lighten up, and train your fire on the targets worthy of it.