Oh shit, what are we gonna do now?

[hngkong]

Well, humanity had a nice run, guess it's time to let the cockroaches have their turn.

[Brantly B.]

Military getting agitated about this because they've received none of the usual orders to mobilize defenses in the and couldn't possibly defend against a full-scale attack right now. Apparently this guy can even turn "I'm ready to bomb the shit out of you" into a bald-faced lie.

[beatbandito]

NK is calling Trump's bluffs better than anyone else, and something about that is magical.

[Yoji]

We live in weird times. But when the going gets weird, the weird go pro.

[Mongrel]

...

. . . . . . . .


!

[Mongrel]

[Mongrel]

Bannon's out.

[McDohl]

Bannondorf Dragmire

[Grath]

I knew I should've bet that Bannon would be the next Confederate monument to be taken down.

[Mongrel]

I knew I should've bet that Bannon would be the next Confederate monument to be taken down.

lol xD

[Mothra]

Best slap that gem on a tweet, partner.

[Büge]

Read the thread.

[Thad]

Taibbi had a relevant article just yesterday titled Fire Steve Bannon.

In particular, the insight into his call to the American Prospect is interesting. It's easier to buy Bannon's apparent candor in that call as actual candor if he was already out of a job. Taibbi argues that Bannon's condemnation of the Charlottesville protesters was genuine -- because nobody hates vulgar nazis more than a nazi who thinks he's high-class.

Well, no, that's not really accurate; most people do in fact hate vulgar nazis more than Steve Bannon does. But I buy the premise that he does hate them. I think he looks at them much the same way Karl Rove looked at "Jesus freaks": a target to pander to during elections, who become an embarrassing nuisance once the election is over. (The big difference being that Karl Rove didn't really share common cause with the Jesus freaks. Bannon absolutely shares common cause with the Illinois Nazis; he just finds them uncouth.)

Taibbi also argues that Bannon clearly had no role in Trump's clumsy Nazi support this past week, because if he had been, it wouldn't have been so fucking clumsy. Bannon's strength was making Trump's racism palatable to enough voters to get him across the finish line.

I can't bring myself to link to the Weekly Standard, but AV Club quotes an interview he gave there:

I think they’re going to try to moderate him,” he said of “West Wing Democrats” and establishment Republicans. “I think he’ll sign a clean debt ceiling, I think you’ll see all this stuff. His natural tendency—and I think you saw it this week on Charlottesville—his actual default position is the position of his base, the position that got him elected. I think you’re going to see a lot of constraints on that. I think it’ll be much more conventional.”

[Büge]

David Hill makes a compelling argument in this thread.

[Spooky Skeleton]

[François]

Tomorrow, watch for Trump tweeting that The Star-Spangled Banner is no longer the national anthem, because due to "various recent events outside of his control" he feels personally insulted by the first line.

[Brantly B.]

David Hill makes a compelling argument in this thread.

His compelling argument is that the Democrats will lose to just about any Republican who actually tries, which is probably true.

Romney himself as a threat, though? It's really hard to read that whole post and not think, "Gee why did I think this guy was so bad before OH YEAH HE STRAIGHT OUT SAID HE DOESN'T ACTUALLY CARE ABOUT THOSE POOR LITTLE MINORITY CHILDREN HE'S PUBLICLY RENDING HIS GARMENTS OVER."

I mean I guess "Those fuckers are on their own" IS to the left of "Let's drive a car into those fuckers." That counts as progress?

[Blossom]

A paternalistic, matter-of-fact "Let's get back to doing things the way we did when things made sense" approach from a solid-seeming corporate man, who can claim (ethically and factually or no) a record of financial success and working governance? That's going to completely destroy some mealymouthed piece of shit like Harris who can't take a position other than "not a republican". Nobody's going to care what he said in 2012 because that was Madness Times.

[Brantly B.]

Again, saying he could win against a Democratic candidate proves nothing about Mitt Romney. The Dems could lose to Kim Jong-Un at this point.

[Blossom]

The biggest thing the Democrats have in their pocket, the thing the Republicans will have been railing against futilely for eleven years by the next election, is Obamacare. Like it says in the thread, Romney - and specifically only Romney - can completely steal any impact that has. That in and of itself sets him in a class apart from any other quote-unquote "sensible" Republican candidate.