I get that. I am just also painfully aware of what would happen if HRC had been facing a hostile Congress and Senate.
This is a shitshow. The only saving grace is that it is a wholly Republican shitshow for which they can blame nobody at all but themselves. (Though they certainly are trying).
They are tainting themselves beyond repair by attaching themselves to that hideous fool.
Yes, they are doing horrible damage. They would be doing the same anyway, they’d just be blaming HRC for everything bad in the process. Or was nobody else paying attention during Obama’s presidency? And as much as I liked her I’m not sure she could have successfully fended them off.
Sheesh, Obama was a damned charismatic and intelligent person, and he barely survived- mostly by being impeccable in the context of US politics (Infidelity bad, killing foreigners meh).
Trump’s only upside is his utter incompetence, and that of his inner circle.
Partisan deadlock on major legislation and an imperfect but relatively stable approach to international diplomacy, like the last few years of the Obama administration?
Yeah, that sounds WAY worse than what we have now.
Definitely head and shoulders above Trump, but even at the beginning he was kind of loopy. The leader of the free world shouldn’t need to consult an astrologer before making key decisions.
Business before pleasure. Lets kill the republican party first, then kill the democratic party. It was a mistake to have parties to begin with, I’m with George Washington on that one. It’s gotten so bad that many people mistakenly believe that parties are actually part of the government rather than private clubs designed to manipulate politics.
I don’t disagree. I just think we might have different ideas about the long term outcomes of the two scenarios. This one definitely sucks.
Trump may damage the GOP enough to cause a collapse of their power. I certainly hope so, and I hope it happens in time for action on climate change to make a genuine difference.
To be fair, the parties are all but written into the constitution by this point. The FEC commissioners are set by party by law. In practice, party is written into the supreme court as well (the tradition translate to 4 republicans, 4 democrats, 1 depending on whoever was in power when the swing retired pretty much) unless you’re packing it; tradition is pretty important in republics.
While I share the distaste for America’s current political parties, do you get that a “no parties allowed” system is functionally indistinguishable from a one-party state?
