please.. don't make Jeff Flake like he's some sort of choir boy. He definitely sold his soul, it wasn't to his constituency or to Trump, but to the swamp that is in washington d.c.
Jeff got out played, he didn't like it and that showed.
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
I've lightened up on Trump because I realize what's at stake if there's a Democratic sweep in November. But damn Dilbert, you make it hard, real hard.
Flake's worse than a choirboy. He was a Mormon missionary, one of those people who dress up in ties and short sleeve white shirts and bicycle around town to talk to people about golden tablets and ancient Jews in central America.
Flake made his name taking up for the taxpayer, trying to stamp out foolish spending. He came up with the Wastebook" and "Jurassic Pork" reports. A couple of examples,
https://ktar.com/story/1999214/sen-j...spending-bill/
https://www.cortezmasto.senate.gov/n...nment-spending
You say Flake sold out his constituency and President Trump, at the same time you accuse him of being a swamp creature. There's irony in that. He voted with Trump most of the time. Maybe he didn't bring as much pork home to Arizona because he was trying to get rid of the pork. He's the antithesis of a swamp creature. Trump on the other hand spent his business career buying off Democrats and Republicans and spends like a drunken sailor with no consideration of the national debt. He said last week he wants a bigger stimulus bill than what Nancy Pelosi proposed.
Trump didn't like Flake because Flake, unlike Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham, wouldn't kiss his ass. Flake IS a choirboy, and so he was particularly critical of Trump's womanizing. But who cares, Flake was on our side, and doing a lot better job than his colleagues.
Trump's pride and ego and narcissism are a plague on the Republican Party, and were on full display when he forced Flake out of the primaries. Again, while Flake was a Trump critic, he voted with him most of the time. Flake would have beaten the Democratic nominee, Christine Sinema, hands down in the general election. Instead we lost a seat in the Senate.
I question the value of the filibuster. it doesn't add stability to the system you seem to think. Hamilton's idea backfired.
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
I'm not masochistic like WTF and Budman and others in another thread who are trying to get each other to leave the board depending on who wins the election. So instead of a wager I'll make a simple statement. If we ever meet up in some strip club or some cathouse with LBFM's, I'll buy you a beer if by then you don't think the filibuster was a good idea. There's a greater than 50% chance Democrats are going to sweep the election and they'll be looking for blood. They'll need to end the filibuster to pack the Supreme Court and to allow the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico to become states. And there's a pretty good chance they'll do that. Maybe less than 50%, but pretty good.