Meta Notes: "Hick4Senate" Our Biggest Tweet Ever

[TexasTowelie]

Link to tweet

We don’t normally draw attention to our own social media content, but the Tweet you can see above from Friday pointing to our post on new domains registered by Curtis Hubbard, a close political ally of Democratic presidential candidate John Hickenlooper, apparently getting ready for Hickenlooper to make the long-desired switch from the presidential race to taking on Sen. Cory Gardner in Colorado’s 2020 marquee U.S. Senate race obliges us to make an exception.

Hubbard was quick to note when asked that he registered the domains “of his own accord,” but that didn’t stop the potential word that Hickenlooper would change races from rapidly going viral–in our case resulting in the above tweet being Retweeted over 1,700 times and liked by a record (for us) over 7,700 Twitter users. In addition almost 800 replies to our Tweet overwhelmingly express joy at Hickenlooper making such a move, many offering to donate money to Hick’s Senate campaign as soon as there’s a place to do it.

With so many across the nation watching to see what Hickenlooper’s next move will be, we figured news of these domains would provoke some interest. The explosion of positive support we saw on Friday tells us that Hickenlooper made enough of a positive impression in his longshot presidential run to remain a viable, even more desirable Senate contender for Colorado. If Hickenlooper hadn’t run for president, would there be thousands of people nationwide lining up to cheer him on to run for Senate?

One door closes, another opens.

https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/125441/meta-notes-hick4senate-our-biggest-tweet-ever
(no more at link)

[Cha]

1. Hallelujah.. I hope

it's true and he Wins as Senator in my home state, Colorado!

[SunSeeker]

2. Yes!!

[oasis]

3. Inspiring. nt

[Celerity]

4. Now Bullock in MT, Stacey Abrams in GA, Tim McGraw in TN, Vilsack in IA, and Foxx and/or Stein in NC

need to get in.

I am not going to get into Beto in TX and Susan Rice in Maine as we still do not know about VP for either. Cornyn in TX is going to be really hard to beat (vastly more popular than Cruz) regardless of the opponent (even Beto or Castro), and I think Sara Gideon can take out Susan Collins.

In Iowa, Abby Finkenauer and J.D. Scholten also might have good shots at taking out Joni Ernst.

I Kentucky, IMHO, Andy Beshear would have had the best shot to take out McTurtle, but he is running for governor. Hopefully Amy McGrath can pull off a huge upset. Ashely Judd is a wild card there.

[NewJeffCT]

5. That would be great news

thank you Hick

[JI7]

6. go on to the Senate and be a great Senator like McCain , Ted Kennedy, Barbara Mikulski

and so many more .

one doesn't need to be President to be a great figure in US politics .

[Celerity]

8. McCain was not a great Senator, he was a murderous warmonger

Jimmy Carter: McCain a 'warmonger'

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/225007-jimmy-carter-mccain-is-a-warmonger

Former President Jimmy Carter says he welcomes criticism of his foreign policy from Sen. John McCain (R), blasting the veteran Arizona lawmaker as a “warmonger.”

"That's a compliment to be coming from a warmonger," Carter told MSNBC host Ronan Farrow Thursday in an interview at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Boston. "I was lucky enough, when I was president, to keep our country at peace and provide peace for others,” he continued after applause from the audience. “I was lucky enough to go through my four years — we never dropped a bomb, never fired a missile, we never shot a bullet."

Early this year, McCain said President Obama's handling of the civil war in Syria made him a worse president than Carter.

"I have never seen anything like this in my life. I thought Jimmy Carter was bad, but he pales in comparison to this president in my view," McCain told a Phoenix radio station.

snip

[JI7]

9. he is still considered a great senator

[Celerity]

10. not by me, and not by tens of millions, if you think he was, then we're just at absolute loggerheads

Nothing I can do about that.

I think he was a POS RW neocon with the blood of millions on his hands.

[JI7]

11. he was wrong in thinking military action was the solution for everything

but oppressed people would go to him asking him for help.

[usaf-vet]

13. He saved the ACA aka Obamacare with one simple jester. Saved it with his vote.

Saving many a life because they were covered by Obamacare.

McCain has passed on he no longer needs to be on our radar to attack.

The Senate is full of traitors who support the lunatic traitor in chief in the WH.

Let's focus on them.

[Celerity]

14. he actually did not, that is a revisionist take that vastly oversimplifies what happened

It is actually a RW talking point repeatedly used by Trump to try and cast blame on others

long article that shows this to be the case

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/11/21/recurring-gop-myth-about-john-mccains-no-obamacare-repeal/?utm_term=.c5f80e134422

snip

The Facts

As anyone who has taken basic civics knows, the House of Representatives and the Senate must pass the same law before it is presented to the president for his signature. If the two bodies pass different versions of a similar law — as is often the case — negotiators must meet to hammer out an agreement, known as a conference report.

Then, both houses must vote on the final deal. There are many occasions when a lawmaker might vote for a bill initially, if only to advance it for further tinkering, but then vote against the final conference report.

In other words, there are no guarantees.

So where was Obamacare repeal in this process? Barely out of the starting gate.

The House narrowly passed the American Health Care Act (AHCA), 217 to 213. An earlier version had failed, but amendments were added that brought along conservatives who had previously balked. The Senate, however, was not happy with the AHCA and crafted its own version of the law, the Better Care Reconciliation Act (BCRA).

There were significant differences between the two versions, though both sought to reduce projected Medicaid spending by instituting a per capita cap on spending. (Scalise called it a block grant in the interview, but that was only an option for states.)

Currently, states and the federal government share in the cost of Medicaid, but the proposed laws would have capped federal funding per enrollee. There were differences in how each body would have calculated the caps, but the net result is that federal spending on Medicaid would have dropped significantly — $772 billion over 10 years in the BCRA and $834 billion in the AHCA.

That was too much for many senators, and Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) introduced an amendment that would have restored $100 billion of Medicaid funding. But even after that was added, the BCRA was rejected by the Senate by a vote of 43 to 57, including “no” votes from nine Republicans.

McCain actually voted for this version of the bill, which needed 60 votes for passage because the Senate parliamentarian determined that certain provisions violated rules that otherwise would have allowed passage with 51 votes (50 votes plus the vice president casting the tiebreaker).

So that’s not one vote short. It’s 17 votes short.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) offered a plan to repeal Obamacare and then delay implementation for two years while lawmakers worked out the details. That would have only needed 51 votes for passage, but it was rejected, 45 to 55, with seven Republicans (including McCain) voting against it.

Finally, there was a vote on “skinny repeal.” This would have repealed the individual and employer mandates but it would have left much of the rest of the law intact, including Medicaid expansion. In other words, this would not have put any cap on Medicaid spending. This is the bill that McCain, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) voted against, along with all Democrats, so it only had 49 votes.

Even if it had passed, the differences between the AHCA and the skinny repeal would have been stark and perhaps insurmountable. Given the votes on the floor, Senate negotiators would not have been empowered to accept a major cap on Medicaid spending — and if the bill included that, it probably would have gone down in defeat in the Senate. (Similarly, a bill without a cap on Medicaid spending might have lost conservative votes in the House.) McCain had said he voted against the skinny repeal because he wanted the legislation to go through a regular committee process, so a jammed-together conference process might not have won him over.

“One reality about conference committees is that, technical restrictions aside, they can accept or reject almost any provision. So it is at least possible that if the bill had gone to conference, they might’ve been able to add that provision,” said Norman Ornstein, congressional expert at the American Enterprise Institute. “I would be dubious that the Senate conferees, knowing the unpopularity of the provision, would have gone along.”

Lauren Fine, a spokeswoman for Scalise, insisted that it was possible that the Medicaid provision could have survived if the bill had gone to conference. “The Medicaid provision was in the House-passed AHCA bill,” she said. “The McCain ‘no’ vote ended the possibility of going to conference, where that provision would have been part of the negotiations on melding the House and Senate versions.”

When we expressed doubt on that outcome, she responded: “You have no idea how a conference committee would have absolutely turned out, and that Whip Scalise is certainly as informed as anyone else to speculate what would or would not be decided in conference committee.”

The Pinocchio Test

Even if McCain had supported the skinny repeal, lawmakers still would have had to negotiate a compromise agreement. Then passage would have been needed in both chambers, which was not assured, given the narrow margin for passage of the House bill.

So at a minimum, it is misleading to say that the Obamacare repeal was just one vote short, as Trump often does. But in the case of the specific Medicaid provision touted by Scalise, it was 17 votes short even with a $100 billion sweetener. There’s a slim possibility some sort of Medicaid funding reduction would have emerged if there had been a conference agreement, but nothing of the size — $800 billion — claimed by Scalise.

Bartiromo was certainly fooled by Scalise’s language, which is why it is important for politicians to be precise about what took place.

snip

[usaf-vet]

15. Actually I watch it live on TV. When it happened. His thumb down stopped process the was being.....

voted on that day. Grant you that move alone was not the crowning touch. But it extended the fight for yet another round of attempts. Who knows for sure how pivotal the jester was in the long run.

The GOP still would like to kill it if they can.

Trump would kill it if only to reverse an Obama success.

So in the weeds of political maneuvers, I can only be sure that it stopped the movement on the floor at the time. And some citizens managed to keep their insurance for another day, week, month or year.

Again he is dead why belittle him now. It won't change anything.

Here is a target, one of many, worth going after. Senator Lindsey Graham SC.

Or as he might be called #LenigradLindsey

He is #moscowmitch and tRump's a$$ kisser.

[Celerity]

16. I detest all Republicans, McCain included, and yes Graham is an unbelievably ass-kissing worm

Moscow Mitch is a clear and present danger, as well as a traitor.

[usaf-vet]

17. Now we are on the same page.

Let's stay focused on live targets. And let history handle the rest.

You, I and others have to believe the fight is worth the effort. And we will be on the right side of history in the end.

Later!

[Celerity]

18. I think we always were on the same page, I just singled out McCain as he was mentioned

I absolutely did not mean to infer I am not against all Rethugs.

[sharedvalues]

7. Yay!

If this happens I would do a complete 180 on Hickenlooper. I disliked him in the pres debates but would love him as a Senate candidate!

[brooklynite]

12. Update: not Hickenlooper's plan (yet)

Curtis Hubbard, a principle at OnSight Public Affairs — a Colorado firm that has played key roles in Hickenlooper’s two successful runs for governor — told Colorado Politics he secured the domain names after Hickenlooper failed to make a splash on the first night of the second round of the debates.

Hubbard stresses that although he wants Hickenlooper to switch races, he took the step without any encouragement from Hickenlooper or his presidential campaign…

“I did it entirely of my own accord, but I continue to believe that the best thing John can do for Colorado and the country is to turn his attention to defeating Trump-enabling Cory Gardner and ‘Moscow’ Mitch McConnell,” he said, referring to the GOP Senate Majority leader who could lose his position if Democrats take control of the Senate in 2020.

https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/125384/hick4senate-new-domains-signal-big-moves-in-senate-race