Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

I've seen too many "GRR STUPID DEMS!" arguments that are completely ignoring that it's a handful of Democrats being obstinate versus the ENTIRETY of the GOP

Do you think those people are being intentionally disingenuous?

[Endus]

This in particular is why I haven't been paying much attention to this thread.

I've seen too many "GRR STUPID DEMS!" arguments that are completely ignoring that it's a handful of Democrats being obstinate versus the ENTIRETY of the GOP and while they can rant and rave all they want that the Democrats aren't trying to push through more progressive policy they're ignoring that, while Manchin and Sinema are responsible for much of the bargaining and concessions made, they're not completely blocking legislation the way the GOP continue to.

As others have pointed out, several Dem Senators are not the choices they would make if given the opportunity to Primary them. That said, they're the Dems that are in those seats and they are still heaps better than the GOP. I will once again make my case that the GOP needs to be completely eradicated from politics and then the Dems can split into Moderates and Progressives instead of trying to force them to kiss and make up in a single party.

There's also a lot of supposed Democratic supporters who're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, here. Shitting on a bill because their pet issue isn't front and center, or was reduced somewhat in how it was implemented, despite the bill still being a significant improvement over the status quo. Pass the bill, push further after.

It's like an advancing front in a war. You don't insist you push a charge all the way to the enemy's central headquarters or you're wasting time. If you wait on that kind of perfect strike, you lose the war. You advance where you find a weak point, and hold what ground you can, when you can. Not taking ground because it's "not enough to win yet" just means you never take any ground, and the enemy gets to nickel and dime you until you lose everything.

[Bodakane]

There's also a lot of supposed Democratic supporters who're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, here. Shitting on a bill because their pet issue isn't front and center, or was reduced somewhat in how it was implemented, despite the bill still being a significant improvement over the status quo. Pass the bill, push further after.

It's like an advancing front in a war. You don't insist you push a charge all the way to the enemy's central headquarters or you're wasting time. If you wait on that kind of perfect strike, you lose the war. You advance where you find a weak point, and hold what ground you can, when you can. Not taking ground because it's "not enough to win yet" just means you never take any ground, and the enemy gets to nickel and dime you until you lose everything.

I get the theory you're talking about, but the country has been moving further and further right and with repubs putting olympic effort towards continuing the ratfuck, it will likely get worse. I mean there is a pretty easy to see through line from W to Palin to Trump and how the american conservative has regressed along that line. Obama didn't stop it. Clinton didn't stop it. And there's no reason to think Biden will either. But each time they tried, conservatives roared back, bigger, dumber and more destructive.

Why does everyone keep thinking after Biden will be different, especially if we keep towing that line about "playing the long game"?

I'm also kinda tired of these Dems acting like we are pointing these things out because they think we're butt hurt, when we just are seeing a trend that others aren't.

[Kallisto]

I think people need to look beyond their immediate pet political issues they have and weigh that against the long-term political landscape. They need to ask themselves if those pet issues have any hope of being realized if the GOP continues to remain in power, and take a long-stock look at what's necessary to remove them from power. It's in opposing them at every turn, in every possible way you can. The primary way of doing that is for voting for the people who aren't them, because the GOP otherwise thrives off of apathy and people refusing to vote.

For some, I'm sure they're just far-right GOPers who want those on the fence to jump off towards their side by pointing out how "bad" the dems are. For others, I'm sure it's a stupid thought of "If the GOP comes in and fucks up, then surely everyone will suddenly vote for the most socialist leftists people and make it a left-wing utopia after just 4 years instead of 8 years of slow movement."

[Kaleredar]

I get the theory you're talking about, but the country has been moving further and further right and with repubs putting olympic effort towards continuing the ratfuck, it will likely get worse. I mean there is a pretty easy to see through line from W to Palin to Trump and how the american conservative has regressed along that line. Obama didn't stop it. Clinton didn't stop it. And there's no reason to think Biden will either. But each time they tried, conservatives roared back, bigger, dumber and more destructive.

Why does everyone keep thinking after Biden will be different, especially if we keep towing that line about "playing the long game"?

I'm also kinda tired of these Dems acting like we are pointing these things out because they think we're butt hurt, when we just are seeing a trend that others aren't.

The GOP has been moving further right, yes. But the country? No. Things like gay marriage that were a hot-button national issue back in even 2008 have become solidified in the national eye as acceptable and commonplace. The voices rebelling against them have grown quieter and weaker. Are those protesting bigots still there? Yes. But in the minds of most Americans and in the law? Things like gay marriage are settled. That is left-wing progress you can take to the bank.

The victories the GOP has won since 2008 have been fleeting. Hurtful to the nation? Most certainly. But fleeting nonetheless.

You can cite Palin and the Tea Party as being further bastardizations of Bush's form of republicanism. And you'd be right. But Palin and the Tea Party didn't win. Not in 2008, not in 2012. The eventual victory the then further bastardization of that bastardization, the Trumpkins, won in 2016 by the slimmest of margins. It was by no means a resounding Republican victory. Then they lost the house in 2018, lost reelection in 2020 and lost the senate to boot.

The democrats "not winning as big as they could have" does not mean the republicans won. That's critical to remember. To paraphrase Endus' sentiment, a victory is a victory, no matter how small.

You're not going to defeat a massive, embastioned political party like the GOP that operates with a rabid lockstep fanbase, hundreds of millions of corporate sponsorship dollars, and, most critically, zero moral compunction, with some big "gotcha" piece of legislation or flashy victory. Bernie would be facing the exact same opposition Biden and co. are facing right now. He could have come in swinging with medicare for all in one hand and free college in the other and the GOP would have shut him down all the same. I'd even wager that facing a victorious Bernie would have inflamed the GOP even more than Biden did, and I think Bernie would actually probably have lost against Trump, but that speculation is neither here nor there and my original point stands without it.

You defeat the GOP by chipping away at it and how they're able to retain such power despite them holding favor only with shrinking demographics the nation over. Defeating the GOP is climbing a mountain. You do it hand over hand and one step at a time, and you never let go. Just because the next handhold isn't the summit doesn't mean you let off your climb and let go in disgust, because then you just fucking die. It's the same with politics.

- - - Updated - - -

For some, I'm sure they're just far-right GOPers who want those on the fence to jump off towards their side by pointing out how "bad" the dems are. For others, I'm sure it's a stupid thought of "If the GOP comes in and fucks up, then surely everyone will suddenly vote for the most socialist leftists people and make it a left-wing utopia after just 4 years instead of 8 years of slow movement."

What really gets me is the notion that these people seem to think that, had Bernie won, that he'd be able to... I guess wow and dazzle the GOP, who are currently opposing things as simple as COVID relief and a minimum wage increase, into supporting things that they actively hate like medicare for all and free college, or that for some reason the numbers would have all magically worked out differently and Bernie would have this commanding charge of all the branches of the government needed to pass this legislation without hitch.

Their thought process of how things "should have gone" seems to be:

1. Bernie wins the presidency and his rhetoric and aplomb is so charming that:
2. People come to realize the nation over how great he is such that:
3. People the nation over turn out to the polls to unanimously vote in more left wing democrats in both houses of congress and at all state levels and:
4. Bernie is allowed to pass any and all legislation without having to face the GOP opposing him at literally any turn.

To which I say... that's a lot of pretty hopeful leaps of events to arrive at a place we're not more or less currently in.

[Benggaul]

Do you think those people are being intentionally disingenuous?

All of them? Nah. Some of them? Abso-fucking-lutely.

[JohnBrown1917]

And Manchin is firmly against doing so.

And he is a democrat.. so yeah. Its clearly just an excuse to prevent the policies the democrats could pass without having to go on record for voting against it.

[Benggaul]

There's also a lot of supposed Democratic supporters who're letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, here. Shitting on a bill because their pet issue isn't front and center, or was reduced somewhat in how it was implemented, despite the bill still being a significant improvement over the status quo. Pass the bill, push further after.

It's like an advancing front in a war. You don't insist you push a charge all the way to the enemy's central headquarters or you're wasting time. If you wait on that kind of perfect strike, you lose the war. You advance where you find a weak point, and hold what ground you can, when you can. Not taking ground because it's "not enough to win yet" just means you never take any ground, and the enemy gets to nickel and dime you until you lose everything.

And this has been my philosophy on it ever since the Dems won the "majority". I already knew Manchin was going to be a thorn in the side of the most progressive policies (and had inklings about Sinema but didn't know much about her). Hell, I even said on here many pages ago that he wasn't going to support the 15$ minimum wage increase and doom that particular part of it but I was poo-pooed for it. But the relief bill on it's own is a GOOD bill. Does it include everything I wanted to help those in need? Not by a long shot. But it's going to help a shit-ton of people who are in a lot of trouble and that is more than what the GOP were doing the past year.

[beanman12345]

And this has been my philosophy on it ever since the Dems won the "majority". I already knew Manchin was going to be a thorn in the side of the most progressive policies (and had inklings about Sinema but didn't know much about her). Hell, I even said on here many pages ago that he wasn't going to support the 15$ minimum wage increase and doom that particular part of it but I was poo-pooed for it. But the relief bill on it's own is a GOOD bill. Does it include everything I wanted to help those in need? Not by a long shot. But it's going to help a shit-ton of people who are in a lot of trouble and that is more than what the GOP were doing the past year.

Manchin didn't doom $15. He doomed any increase to unemployment. Very different part of the bill.

[Benggaul]

Manchin didn't doom $15. He doomed any increase to unemployment. Very different part of the bill.

He doomed both. He said many times he was against the increase. Don't know what else to tell you, so I won't. Ta.

[beanman12345]

He doomed both. He said many times he was against the increase. Don't know what else to tell you, so I won't. Ta.

He didn't doom 15. it wasn't even in the bill. even if he voted yay on 15 it wouldn't have made it in. He didn't doom $15, that was Schumer and Biden and whoever else wrote the new bill.

[Benggaul]

He didn't doom 15. it wasn't even in the bill. even if he voted yay on 15 it wouldn't have made it in. He didn't doom $15, that was Schumer and Biden and whoever else wrote the new bill.

It wasn't included in the bill in large part due to his opposition. They used the parliamentarian's decision as an excuse, but the fact of the matter is they didn't have his vote with it included so it would have been a pointless delay to fight it. They did not want to tank the entire bill because of the one item. I don't know why you have such a hardon for giving this guy a pass on this when he's made it clear on numerous occasions he's not supporting it, but that's just how it is.

[beanman12345]

It wasn't included in the bill in large part due to his opposition. They used the parliamentarian's decision as an excuse, but the fact of the matter is they didn't have his vote with it included so it would have been a pointless delay to fight it. They did not want to tank the entire bill because of the one item. I don't know why you have such a hardon for giving this guy a pass on this when he's made it clear on numerous occasions he's not supporting it, but that's just how it is.

I'm not giving him a pass, literally telling what he did doom.

Unless you want to drastically alter your argument that he along with 57 other's doomed it, than I'd agree.

[Felya]

Unless you want to drastically alter your argument that he along with 57 other's doomed it, than I'd agree.

Do you know what a “whip” is in congress?
https://history.house.gov/People/Off...ocratic-Whips/

What happens to parts of the bill, that a whip determines will not pass?

[beanman12345]

Do you know what a “whip” is in congress?
https://history.house.gov/People/Off...ocratic-Whips/

What happens to parts of the bill, that a whip determines will not pass?

Fine want to blame the whip, fine by me. Plenty of shit to smear around on this $15. Manchin deserves to be shit on, but not giving the rest a pass.

[Felya]

Fine want to blame the whip, fine by me. Plenty of shit to smear around on this $15. Manchin deserves to be shit on, but not giving the rest a pass.

I’m not blaming the whip, for returning that there are not enough votes... I am blaming those that made it clear to the whip, they won’t vote for it. This just seems like looking for a messenger to shoot...

[beanman12345]

I’m not blaming the whip, for returning that there are not enough votes... I am blaming those that made it clear to the whip, they won’t vote for it. This just seems like looking for a messenger to shoot...

Yeah, there were 58 against, meaning they were short, 18, or 8 since this was reconciliation, meaning Manchin didn't doom it. So thanks for helping make my point.

[eschatological]

Fine want to blame the whip, fine by me. Plenty of shit to smear around on this $15. Manchin deserves to be shit on, but not giving the rest a pass.

Manchin prevented $15 from being in COVID relief. If it was bundled in, no Democrat but him and Sinema would have been able to deny it, because COVID relief is a top priority of Dems.

Him getting it out of the bill, and as a Bernie Sanders amendment (king of the amendments) that people could just ignore because it didn't affect the main bill, was him tanking $15 an hour.

That's why the whip didn't bother, that's why Kamala didn't overrule the parlimentarian.

[Felya]

Yeah, there were 58 against, meaning they were short, 18, or 8 since this was reconciliation, meaning Manchin didn't doom it. So thanks for helping make my point.

Opinions and butt holes... All I can do is show what happened...

[beanman12345]

Manchin prevented $15 from being in COVID relief. If it was bundled in, no Democrat but him and Sinema would have been able to deny it, because COVID relief is a top priority of Dems.

Him getting it out of the bill, and as a Bernie Sanders amendment (king of the amendments) that people could just ignore because it didn't affect the main bill, was him tanking $15 an hour.

That's why the whip didn't bother, that's why Kamala didn't overrule the parlimentarian.

Again, if Manchin was the sole person then the increase in unemployement wouldn't have been in either, since he was ACTUALLY the sole person responsible for no increase in unemployement. No, REALITY is that 8 dems voted against 15 not just manchin. 8>1. include sinema 8>2. I mean, there was a vote on it ffs.