The Truman Tavern of Simple Truths and Smart One-Liners 33 1/3: The Final Insult

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Icespear said Bevin was inevitable,  ha. He who laughs have the last laugh

He who laughs indeed have the last laugh

I want to print out this post, frame it, and put it above my computer at my desk at work. The only motivation I'll ever need.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

How much longer are people going to have the “electability” argument and why their candidate is the most electable? Electability isn’t a set characteristic like some sort of video game trait. It’s a process and depends partially on the ability of a candidate to understand the environment and electorate and partially blind luck.

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Filed under: posts that are correct but not in the way the poster intended

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/31/politics/mitch-mcconnell-health/index.html

Following a recent concussion after falling and hitting his head in March, coupled with his two public frozen moments, Republican senators and aides told CNN they are doubtful he will try to run for the job again – potentially opening up the GOP leadership role for the first time since McConnell took the reins in 2007.

According to this CNN quote, McConnell is unlikely to run again for leader next term.
However it also appears like McConnell intends to also finish out his term in office.

The leadership race will probably become Cornyn vs Thune vs Barrasso, which could be anyone's race.

And nothing of value was lost!

McConnell prevented Reid from able to run all over over the gop in 2009-10 and basically turned Obama’s presidency into a more liberal version of Bill Clinton rather than being a transformative progressive leader . It was really thanks to McConnell then that the democrats in 2009-10 had their agenda watered down

[This user has not been convicted of 34 felonies]

Also slightly more extended than a one-liner, but given the context of the thread, this is a really great point:

Good grief.

Of all places on the internet, this forum should be the one place that doesn’t take this BS.

We know what bad and bad-faith methodology looks like, what results are so inconceivable that they call the whole poll into question, what a decent subsamble size looks like, the dangers of casting moral judgements on “don’t know”s, how wonky polls can get with low name-rec figures, etc., etc.

We know better. Come on.