Octopus Overlords

May as well start the betting pool.

You need an option for "before Jan 1 2020" (i.e. during 2019).

I think the GOP will ride Trump as far as they can regardless of his behavior, so no removal for any cause will come before the 2018 elections.

Why would anyone select the first option when it's included in the second option?

I would probably go for "Before Jan 20 2021". I think he'll be impeached or resign, but I don't know when.

Defiant wrote:I think he'll be impeached or resign, but I don't know when.

Yeah, no idea of the timing, but I suspect at some point he will do something so beyond the pale, or the weight of all his foolishness will get to be too much to defend, and Republicans will turn on him.

Sepiche wrote:

Defiant wrote:I think he'll be impeached or resign, but I don't know when.

Yeah, no idea of the timing, but I suspect at some point he will do something so beyond the pale, or the weight of all his foolishness will get to be too much to defend, and Republicans will turn on him.

If the Democrats start their propaganda war now and start painting all politicians supporting Trump as the toadying fools that they are to the point where such pervasive ridicule begins to pose a threat to their re-election, then maybe they will turn. As long as they still stand to be re-elected by doing nothing, they will do exactly that.

Defiant wrote:Why would anyone select the first option when it's included in the second option?

The "but after Jan 1 2018" is implied.

It's an either-or. Very short or long.

First scenario, he crosses a line and gets booted in the first year. He's burning hot, and it won't take long. Alternatively, his staff has shown that they despise and hate him. They feel no loyalty, and see him as a trainwreck for thier own party. You can see that disloyalty in the sheer number of white house leaks. I'm not talking about cabinet or congress here, but his up-and-coming, idealistic staff. I wouldn't be shocked to wake up and see on the news that one of his mid-level staffers "impeached" him. The Ides of March is approaching, after all.

Second scenario, Congress runs him like a puppet. They pass what benefits them, they derail what does not, and they keep him in place to keep peoples attention on nonsense while they set up the nation that they want. Once they get what they want done, they replace him with Pence or with their 2020 candidate.

At the rate the crap is flying in, he's going to have a heart attack or a stroke or something.

Sepiche wrote:

Defiant wrote:I think he'll be impeached or resign, but I don't know when.

Yeah, no idea of the timing, but I suspect at some point he will do something so beyond the pale, or the weight of all his foolishness will get to be too much to defend, and Republicans will turn on him.

He's already blatantly lied multiple times while in office, and the only ppl I see upset are liberals. I guess if it's your guy doing the lying, completely ok.

If you've supported this douche this far, I don't see anything changing your mind, no matter how stupid or misguided his future words or actions. I predict a doubling down in some form of "ok, it's extreme, but that's what we needed to get back on track! Gotta break a few eggs..."

I think some of the red-staters break ranks when things continue to get worse, especially if they're without medical insurance all of a sudden. Of course, they'll extend that to their Congresscritters.

Blackhawk wrote:Second scenario, Congress runs him like a puppet. They pass what benefits them, they derail what does not, and they keep him in place to keep peoples attention on nonsense while they set up the nation that they want. Once they get what they want done, they replace him with Pence or with their 2020 candidate.

I'm still waiting for signs that the GOP backbone has not completely decalcified.

He finishes the first term but loses in 4 years.

NickAragua wrote:At the rate the crap is flying in, he's going to have a heart attack or a stroke or something.

His behavior seems to be getting worse - whether it is power or pressure - I think he cracks. I can't imagine it going more than 2 years. If he does, he'll go 4 and then we see how much damage has been done. No prediction for 2020 is safe.

I can see him getting re-elected. If they reheld the election today, I still think he'd win. I don't see his base defecting unless he starts compromising.

stessier wrote:I can see him getting re-elected. If they reheld the election today, I still think he'd win. I don't see his base defecting unless he starts compromising.

I actually disagree with this. I think his getting elected in the first place was a massive wake up call for a lot of people that thought he had no chance of winning and sat the election out, and his dismal transition and first few days has made some of the people who held their nose and voted for him waver.

Sure his core supporters are loud and will not desert him easily, but they are a much smaller part of the population than most people think... about 25% by most guesses and I think that's probably a bit high.

Keeping in mind of course I didn't even think the Republicans would be dumb enough to nominate him for president, so what the fuck do I know.

Sepiche wrote:Keeping in mind of course I didn't even think the Republicans would be dumb enough to nominate him for president, so what the fuck do I know.

That is where problem is.

I agree with the premise - I think more people would vote. I disagree that it would change the outcome. The people who disagree with him aren't in the right places. Clinton would probably have larger margins in the states she already won, but she I doubt she'd get more than 1 or 2 more states from those she lost. Maybe it's just because I live in a red state and am biased by what I hear every day.

NickAragua wrote:At the rate the crap is flying in, he's going to have a heart attack or a stroke or something.

There's hoping.

I heard he is the healthiest man of his age and weight in recorded history.

Sepiche wrote:

stessier wrote:I can see him getting re-elected. If they reheld the election today, I still think he'd win. I don't see his base defecting unless he starts compromising.

I actually disagree with this. I think his getting elected in the first place was a massive wake up call for a lot of people that thought he had no chance of winning and sat the election out, and his dismal transition and first few days has made some of the people who held their nose and voted for him waver.

I agree that I don't think he would win if the election was held again today, but mainly because I think many of the people that voted 3rd party wouldn't do so again. If my Facebook feed is any indication, there are plenty of 3rd party voters who previously stated there wasn't much of a difference between Clinton and Trump but are now in full freak out mode.

There should be an option for "When we are nuked from orbit"

Loathe him or hate him, I'm pretty sure we're stuck with him until 2020.

coopasonic wrote:

Defiant wrote:Why would anyone select the first option when it's included in the second option?

The "but after Jan 1 2018" is implied.

Yeah, thought that was clear. *shrug*

The more I think about where Trump won the election, I can only conclude that if Bernie had been the candidate, we'd be calling him President Sanders. Those blue collar blue voters that went for Trump. I think they would have gone Bernie. Socially what they believe, but enough of an outsider that he would have been their choice.

All this makes me cringe even more when I think about it.

Here is some of the opposition research against Bernie.

Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.”

Isgrimnur wrote:Here is some of the opposition research against Bernie.

Also on the list: Sanders violated campaign finance laws, criticized Clinton for supporting the 1994 crime bill that he voted for, and he voted against the Amber Alert system. His pitch for universal health care would have been used against him too, since it was tried in his home state of Vermont and collapsed due to excessive costs. Worst of all, the Republicans also had video of Sanders at a 1985 rally thrown by the leftist Sandinista government in Nicaragua where half a million people chanted, “Here, there, everywhere/the Yankee will die,’’ while President Daniel Ortega condemned “state terrorism” by America. Sanders said, on camera, supporting the Sandinistas was “patriotic.”

Yes but outsider. Did he grab Ortega by the pussy?

Ralph-Wiggum wrote:If my Facebook feed is any indication, there are plenty of 3rd party voters who previously stated there wasn't much of a difference between Clinton and Trump but are now in full freak out mode.

And what fools they were.

Probably wishful thinking...but I'm going with impeachment in the first half of '18. Republicans are more likely to protect their congressional majorities under Pence.

stessier wrote:I agree with the premise - I think more people would vote. I disagree that it would change the outcome. The people who disagree with him aren't in the right places. Clinton would probably have larger margins in the states she already won, but she I doubt she'd get more than 1 or 2 more states from those she lost. Maybe it's just because I live in a red state and am biased by what I hear every day.

My dartboard says you are correct. Numbers go up. Results stay the same. People haven't felt results of this office to make them resist inertia other than some cashing in on wallstreet speculation. I suspect this will change before the end of the year but if we had a Clinton/Trump do over right now, I don't see a different president sitting the White House.

I have no idea on if he makes it through the first term. My crystal ball says "no" but it's not confident in its prediction.

Blackhawk wrote:Once they get what they want done, they replace him with Pence or with their 2020 candidate.

The Trump base would abandon the party, it would be political suicide. That's the problem with the Republican Party now, they've created, fed and nurtured this know nothing, distrust of govt, distrust of media, monster and it's turned on them. They are riding the tiger and have now way of getting off. Nothing short of a clear criminal action by Trump (and even then I wonder for many) will get his base to abandon him.

stessier wrote:I disagree that it would change the outcome.

I think it would change the outcome for this reason: Trump's voters were already energized and turned out... if you liked Trump in any way, you probably turned out to vote for him. If more people turned out I think they would disproportionately turn out for Democrats because the Republicans had basically already maxed out their vote share or close to it.

It only would have taken a few thousand votes in a few key areas to completely turn things around.

Grifman wrote: Nothing short of a clear criminal action by Trump (and even then I wonder for many) will get his base to abandon him.

If you believe the most common interpretations of the Emoluments Clause he already violated the constitution the moment he took office. His core supporters are so primed to believe anything he says and not trust the media though that they will likely never be convinced.

We've lost 5 contestants...

LordMortis wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:01 pm I have no idea on if he makes it through the first term. My crystal ball says "no" but it's not confident in its prediction.

After a year, I'm fairly confident he makes it through, but I'm hopeful that the republic is not collapsed and Democrats have swept the presidency and both houses of Congress 2020 and can begin a long journey of damage control.

LordMortis wrote: ↑Mon Jan 08, 2018 12:34 pm

LordMortis wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2017 2:01 pm I have no idea on if he makes it through the first term. My crystal ball says "no" but it's not confident in its prediction.

After a year, I'm fairly confident he makes it through, but I'm hopeful that the republic is not collapsed and Democrats have swept the presidency and both houses of Congress 2020 and can begin a long journey of damage control.

For which the Republican base and a portion of the group that voted them in will credit the Republican party and vote them back into power in 2024 allowing further damage to our nation and the world.

And so the yo-yo of American policy perpetuates.

Save the poor, f&#% the poor, save the poor, f&#% the poor.
Tax the rich, love the rich, tax the rich, love the rich.
Save the world, burn the world, save the world, burn the world.

Stupid Republicans accidentally let loose a flamethrower when they needed a blowtorch. The cycle has been damaged, but has it been crippled beyond repair?

Wheee!

'Merica!

13 people look to have won this...

Totally.

Some fascinating prognostications though.

As (sort of) great as Twitter is, I find it much too cumbersome to go back and find old tweets; probably a combination of old man syndrome and information overload, but I just dont remember old threads so I dont get to go back in time like we can here. I like that about this place.

Kraken wrote: ↑Thu Jan 26, 2017 1:57 pm Probably wishful thinking...but I'm going with impeachment in the first half of '18. Republicans are more likely to protect their congressional majorities under Pence.

Heh. Oops. Off by almost 2 years and it didn't matter anyway.