Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Paranoid Android]

Well thanks Sinema and Manchin for no legislation next 2 years and loss of Senate and likely House in 2022.

Honestly the spineless Dems wanted it this way so now they don't have to work at anything. Im just tired of it.

@cubby. With your reply to me a few pages back and now, I don't see why you are carrying the water for Joe Manchin. This is not even some uber left bill. This makes it sure the Dems can pass crap.

You kept saying it was smart of Manchin to get what he wants. Actually by killing the Filibuster he would have the utmost power. A bill comes up that we must all wear pink knitted caps, Manchin has the power. Yes, if he wants to an ass he could get something for West Virginia in order so we all wear pink, knitted hats.

[Elegiac]

Well thanks Sinema and Manchin for no legislation next 2 years and loss of Senate and likely House in 2022.

I bet voters in Georgia are feeling pretty betrayed right about now since Manchin and Sinema basically stole their victory.

But hey as we all know it's not a red flag if the first thing you do when you come into power when you were elected on a platform of action is make assurances that nothing will fundamentally change. /s

[Themius]

Look, I'm sorry, but I'm literally not following your point here. Call it brain fart at the end of a long work day for me - but can you, like, spell it out for me like I was six years old. What does the Bernie issue have to do with the filibuster issue, specifically. How is that the "Bernie" problem?
(I swear I'm not being anything more than unintentionally dense here - it's just not clicking at all for me atm)

- - - Updated - - -

(I mean, for christ's sake, I'm not even using "literally" correct - help!)

Bernie has been speaking publically about getting rid of the filibuster and about passing through what they want using reconciliation. While moderates democrats speak with other senators about how they aren't backing either of those solutions to the current issue. In essence... Democratic senators speaking about how they do not support the actions that the chair of the senate budget committee wants to take. Hence their Bernie issue. Vowing to not do this and that, that Bernie has said he wanted to do.

Instead, they want to focus on speeding up vaccines. I guess when everyone is vaccinated they can try to struggle to find work and pay off debt over 20 years?

- - - Updated - - -

I bet voters in Georgia are feeling pretty betrayed right about now since Manchin and Sinema basically stole their victory.

But hey as we all know it's not a red flag if the first thing you do when you come into power when you were elected on a platform of action is make assurances that nothing will fundamentally change. /s

Speaking of that quote. Sure seems to be the case.

Vote to expand judges due to stolen seats and seats held up and filled by the hundreds? Nah because "we can't do that then the republicans will do it too!" As if they already haven't.

[Elegiac]

Speaking of that quote. Sure seems to be the case.

Vote to expand judges due to stolen seats and seats held up and filled by the hundreds? Nah because "we can't do that then the republicans will do it too!" As if they already haven't.

"No guys but if we don't let Manchin and McConnell hold everything up for 2 years then Manchin and McConnell will hold everything up for two years" being the best argument these people can muster is telling as to how indefensible their position actually is.

Mark my words: 2022 is going to be a repeat of 2010, and we'll have people like Cubby telling us there was no way we could have seen this happen and lamenting the lack of warning signs.

[Themius]

These are the people who just don't know what to do... Do they try to get shit done or... do they just let Mitch get another term as de facto Senate majority leader? What tough choices.

Senator Tester (D)

Senator Coons (D)

Senator Manchin (D)

Senator Sinema (D)

Senator Feinstein (D)

Senator King (I)

- - - Updated - - -

"No guys but if we don't let Manchin and McConnell hold everything up for 2 years then Manchin and McConnell will hold everything up for two years" being the best argument these people can muster is telling as to how indefensible their position actually is.

Mark my words: 2022 is going to be a repeat of 2010, and we'll have people like Cubby telling us there was no way we could have seen this happen and lamenting the lack of warning signs.

Kind of why after the election I pretty much just do not see a future for me here...

I mean... i do not see 2022 being great. Nothing has fundamentally changed. The ripest time for a change IS NOW not fucking a year and a half later or a year later.

What happens then "we can't do that, i have an election!" When the immediate reaction by senate democrats is to act against the very fucking people who voted in this trifecta, is to act as if it is fucking 2008 the outcome will be 2010. It's like how Obama didn't roll back Bush tax cuts or you know... did a bill to protect people because blah blah "together, compromise, change" blah blah.

[Elegiac]

Aind of why after the election I pretty much just do not see a future for me here...

I mean... i do not see 2022 being great. Nothing has fundamentally changed. The ripest time for a change IS NOW not fucking a year and a half later or a year later.

What happens then "we can't do that, i have an election!" When the immediate reaction by senate democrats is to act against the very fucking people who voted in this trifecta, is to act as if it is fucking 2008 the outcome will be 2010. It's like how Obama didn't roll back Bush tax cuts or you know... did a bill to protect people because blah blah "together, compromise, change" blah blah.

Yep.

"It's day five" is going to turn in to "they're still working things out, you know how difficult McConnell is" will turn into "we can't vote on that/do that, it's too close to an election for vulnerable seats in Congress" and finally "oh wow we got cleaned up in the election! now we need to scramble to prevent a fascist takeover of the country yet again".

And then we'll get gaslit and told this was unavoidable and unforeseeable while the people who actually did the legwork getting the Democrats into power have to explain to all the first time voters they signed up why their money and effort wasn't wasted despite it having bought them fuck all besides keeping the GOP out of power.

I really don't think the people defending the Democrats here grasp just how tenuous people's trust in them actually is.

[cubby]

Manchin is being Manchin. *agrees with cubby* Schumer knows the game and Manchin is expected...and the line that Schumer will look at to see anything unexpected. Like say, if any of the "squad" agreeing with Manchin.

Other lines getting scrutiny; the fractures in the GOP. And Manchin knows if he's a single voice in the dems playing hardball over something they don't want to budge on, Schumer might find that one vote on the other side.

And I agree with you - we have to consider GOP fractures, especially if/when The Donald starts seeing a real collapse of his empire and hold on the GOP purse strings.

[Themius]

And I agree with you - we have to consider GOP fractures, especially if/when The Donald starts seeing a real collapse of his empire and hold on the GOP purse strings.

Trump is not the problem... he is a symptom of the problem. You are making a mistake if you are banking on Trump being less popular to somehow collapse the GOP.

[cubby]

Fucking. Prove it. Show actionable evidence over the past ten years that they've learned from their mistakes. And if the response is "wait and see" you're going on ignore.

(EDIT)

You're saying that if I continue to make the same point I've been making, you're going to ignore me? And that proves you've been paying attention and understanding my position how again?

Since you've asked for specifics just so I can keep on watching you beat your head against the wall, the example so far is Schumer isn't backing down on the filibuster issue.

Also, I'm still waiting for your suggestions on what the Democrats could/should do differently right now. Please provide those now, since I honored your request. Otherwise...

- - - Updated - - -

Well thanks Sinema and Manchin for no legislation next 2 years and loss of Senate and likely House in 2022.

Honestly the spineless Dems wanted it this way so now they don't have to work at anything. Im just tired of it.

@cubby. With your reply to me a few pages back and now, I don't see why you are carrying the water for Joe Manchin. This is not even some uber left bill. This makes it sure the Dems can pass crap.

You kept saying it was smart of Manchin to get what he wants. Actually by killing the Filibuster he would have the utmost power. A bill comes up that we must all wear pink knitted caps, Manchin has the power. Yes, if he wants to an ass he could get something for West Virginia in order so we all wear pink, knitted hats.

Did they pass the Operating Agreement yet? I'm still seeing it in negotiations.

Agreed about killing the filibuster - I'm not sure why he isn't seeing the broader picture. I'm not trying to carry water for Manchin, and I agree with your point overall.

- - - Updated - - -

Bernie has been speaking publically about getting rid of the filibuster and about passing through what they want using reconciliation. While moderates democrats speak with other senators about how they aren't backing either of those solutions to the current issue. In essence... Democratic senators speaking about how they do not support the actions that the chair of the senate budget committee wants to take. Hence their Bernie issue. Vowing to not do this and that, that Bernie has said he wanted to do.

Instead, they want to focus on speeding up vaccines. I guess when everyone is vaccinated they can try to struggle to find work and pay off debt over 20 years?

Gotcha - and thank you. I was just not connecting those dots.

It will be interesting to see how the Operating Agreement plays out. Putting the filibuster out of play for two years is dangerous. Bernie openly saying to use it along with reconciliation is good, but short sighted in my opinion. Bernie has always had a problem playing a longish game in these negotiations - for better or worse. You can see how Biden played it cool in other areas and showed him to be the better politician.

One larger issue, regarding in a broader sense, speeding up the vaccines, is that the country will recover faster. Faster recovery means a better economic outlook, and that imo will largely help the Democrats in 2022. Obviously we'll have to see.

- - - Updated - - -

Trump is not the problem... he is a symptom of the problem. You are making a mistake if you are banking on Trump being less popular to somehow collapse the GOP.

I agree he's a symptom, but he is causing a number of problems on his own. I'm not banking on anything, but Trump collapsing won't help the GOP.

[Themius]

One larger issue, regarding in a broader sense, speeding up the vaccines, is that the country will recover faster. Faster recovery means a better economic outlook, and that imo will largely help the Democrats in 2022. Obviously we'll have to see.

- - - Updated - - -

People haven't recovered from the 2008 collapse... what makes you think opening up the economy will really help?

[cubby]

People haven't recovered from the 2008 collapse... what makes you think opening up the economy will really help?

Because it will seem better economically, and it will literally be better regarding COVID-19. Everything being on the upswing could be helpful for the Dems in the 2022 election.

I guess my point is that it will a little bit of reality and a lot of perception.

[Milchshake]

Well thanks Sinema and Manchin for no legislation next 2 years and loss of Senate and likely House in 2022.

Honestly the spineless Dems wanted it this way so now they don't have to work at anything. Im just tired of it.

@cubby. With your reply to me a few pages back and now, I don't see why you are carrying the water for Joe Manchin. This is not even some uber left bill. This makes it sure the Dems can pass crap.

You kept saying it was smart of Manchin to get what he wants. Actually by killing the Filibuster he would have the utmost power. A bill comes up that we must all wear pink knitted caps, Manchin has the power. Yes, if he wants to an ass he could get something for West Virginia in order so we all wear pink, knitted hats.

It's probably a good time to just look at cute animals for awhile.

Very Online People don't do political theater well. The Senate took a couple of days to start operating and some politicians repeated things they’ve said before.
Overwrought day-to-day point scoring? How normal.

[Cthulhu 2020]

"Why do progressives want credit for progressive policies that our non-progressive candidate may possibly be thinking about considering enacting 60 years late?" is an interesting spin.

If it actually went through without a veto, while the progressives are a very minor and weak faction of the Democratic party, why would they thus then take full credit for something that would largely take the efforts of non progressives to happen? Yes, that IS an interesting "spin".

[cubby]

It's probably a good time to just look at cute animals for awhile.

Very Online People don't do political theater well. The Senate took a couple of days to start operating and some politicians repeated things they’ve said before.
Overwrought day-to-day point scoring? How normal.

And that's the point I was trying to make. Can't declare defeat on Day 7 out of 731 when the battle hasn't even started.

[Themius]

And that's the point I was trying to make. Can't declare defeat on Day 7 out of 731 when the battle hasn't even started.

If you begin a fight by allowing your opponent to punch you in the face first.....

[Paranoid Android]

@cubby

Did they pass the Operating Agreement yet? I'm still seeing it in negotiations.

Agreed about killing the filibuster - I'm not sure why he isn't seeing the broader picture. I'm not trying to carry water for Manchin, and I agree with your point

I will say, not knowing my Senate procedures, they can ask to eliminate the filibuster anytime. Yet, if they m, talking bout the Dems saying 'no' atm, in the first 100 days, then it's springing it in next 2 years does not give me hope.

[cubby]

I will say, not knowing my Senate procedures, they can ask to eliminate the filibuster anytime. Yet, if they m, talking bout the Dems saying 'no' atm, in the first 100 days, then it's springing it in next 2 years does not give me hope.

Interesting. I would approve of any negotiation that still allows, at some point in time, the filibuster to be yanked. Keeping it for the first 100 days but then opening it up to later seems like a win, because the next 100 days is going to be COVID relief/vaccination and Trump's Impeachment.

Are they talking about doing it that way? Or something similar?

[CostinR]

For a modern example of incrementalism in failure, look at the ACA something that the democrats passed specifically to appease Republicans when they could have done more. As they felt they would incrementally expand it. Instead...we just see attacks attacks and weakening. Even when their own constituents want it. are we close or further away from M4A? If we are closer is it thanks to incrementalism? Or because the public is more vested in this issue and due to pressure from the outside we are closer? If we take any larger steps forward (which is seems we may) what made that possible wasn't incrementalism. Looking at that example we have gone backwards from progressing towards M4A yet... it seems closer and more feasible now, not because we are incrementally moving towards it, but because it is on the forefront of many people's minds.

ACA was incremental? A law that literally rewrote the entire healthcare system of the United States overnight is nothing less then a radical change, that it wasn't M4A ( which likely would have never gotten even 20 votes in the Senate let alone 60 ) doesn't change that reality. In point of fact this is what almost damned it, and Democrats should feel very happy Roberts didn't strike the entire law down as he apparently wanted to initially before changing his mind.

What saved ACA is the fact that Republicans tried to do their own radical change to dismantle it and people were furious over it. If M4A ever happens it certainly will not be because of your thinking, it will be in spite of it. You want universal healthcare? Great, how about convincing California for starters: The richest state in the country with a massive budget surplus completely controlled by Democrats on every level. If you can't pass it there to start and then work on convincing other states to do it then it will never happen on federal level.

The most significant movements in more recent history succeeded because of incremental change: The Civil Rights movement took close to a decade and a half with a slew of decisions made on an executive, judicial and legislative level to achieve success, including no less then four Civil Rights Acts and the Voting Rights Act. The LGBT movement has achieved great strides including legalization of Gay Marriage not because of some federal decision but because of incremental changes on a state level and legislative and judicial battles that resulted in almost two thirds of the country having it legalized by the time the Supreme Court made it's final ruling. Then we have the movement the legalize weed which is succeeding again because of incremental changes especially on a state by state level.

Well thanks Sinema and Manchin for no legislation next 2 years and loss of Senate and likely House in 2022.

Honestly the spineless Dems wanted it this way so now they don't have to work at anything. Im just tired of it.

Sinema and Manchin are skilled political operators from red states, deep red in the case of WV, that are not interested in whatever agenda you think the dems should adopt. They are taking a stance that will maximize their own power as individual senators and get them to have a far more significant say.

Why do you think Susan Collins flat out told Trump and McConnell she was not going to rid of the filibuster? Also because they are moderates/centrists who don't enjoy the partisan street-fighting that ( quite literally ) has taken over Congress.

As for 2022. The Senate is a toss-up because of Georgia and Arizona, but the House? Yeah the House is quite likely going red. People didn't enjoy the way Pelosi has run it since 2018 which is why she has the weakest working majority the Democrats have had in a while and next election she won't have the idiot orange guy on the ballot, though voters didn't enjoy the first impeachment battle at all it seems.

[cubby]

If you begin a fight by allowing your opponent to punch you in the face first.....

But there's no punch. There is no "red flag" (I'm looking at you Elegiac). Nothing has happened yet, literally. They are still talking about the rules.

I get what you're saying, and losing end the chance at the filibuster would be an initial loss out of the gates. We'll have to see how it plays out (uh-oh, I think I chimed someone's ignore list ).

[Milchshake]

And that's the point I was trying to make. Can't declare defeat on Day 7 out of 731 when the battle hasn't even started.

Very Online People are used to just handing over their money to Blizzard or Comcast. What's happening in the Senate is not one of those transactions.

McConnell was playing for a jailbreak and didn’t get it. Manchin and Sinema said the same thing they’ve said before. McConnell picked this fight, lost and is now doing a little CYA.

The important thing is that the caucus held. Bringing them around to reform is and was always going to be a process that likely requires repeated GOP obstruction.