Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Elegiac]

Sure, and if they are paying ANY attention they’ll know it’s not the progressives holding back stimulus payments. Every compromise has been to appease the conservative members of congress(including some dems).

"If they're paying any attention" - If.

The last four to eight years has demonstrated that they aren't, when are y'all going to wake up to this fact and stop pretending it's 2005? People don't give a shit about process, they give a shit about results.

[Felya]

"If they're paying any attention" - If.

The last four to eight years has demonstrated that they aren't, when are y'all going to wake up to this fact and stop pretending it's 2005? People don't give a shit about process, they give a shit about results.

Does this look like results based reasoning?

So can anyone explain to me why, upon seeing marines, Biden said "salute the marines" instead of actually saluting them? Is it like when you want to /emote something in WoW but /say it instead?

- - - Updated - - -

Really? I could have sworn we went from full GOP control to full Dem control in those 4 years. Are you sure people haven’t been paying attention?

It’s like saying Trump is good for progressives, because fox viewers now know who Omar and AOC are...

[Elegiac]

Really? I could have sworn we went from full GOP control to full Dem control in those 4 years. Are you sure people haven’t been paying attention?

Yep, because you're ignoring the razor-thin margins of victory (plus the fact we lost seats in the House and failed to oust some Senators that should have been easy wins), and what's been happening at the state level.

[Elegiac]

Gerrymandering at the state level doesn’t disprove that people are paying attention. It just reinforces that we need a new VRA.

Cool, exactly how do you plan to get a new VRA with the filibuster in place while poo-pooing the votes you'd need to get a cloture threshold?

[Elegiac]

By pushing hard in 2022 to expand the majority enough to get rid of the racist as fuck filibuster. Obviously.

Which ties back into my point about how needlessly nickel and diming the public with this stimulus bill is bad optics for 2022 that will cost votes.

[Draco-Onis]

Okay. Cool. That's still Senate Rule XX, and therefore a Senate rule. It was the rules, being applied. The parliamentarian did not object to either use of Rule XX, nor did Biden/Pence specifically step in.

No such rule exists for just ignoring shoving a non-budget item into a budget bill. Unless Harris overrules the parliamentarian, which didn't happen, Schumer can't say "well the parliamenterian said we can't do it, but we're going to do it anyhow because we really want to". Which is the current context. It's why this discussion has gone on for nine pages or whatever.

Okay since you are being obtuse, who can law enforcement use within their own ranks to overrule a federal judge? It also seems you have learned nothing from decades of McConnell kicking our collective asses. Most of these things are procedure, there's no penalty to ignoring them no one is going to jail.

Republicans are playing in 3D while democrats are stuck in 1D.

[unfilteredJW]

Sure, and if they are paying ANY attention they’ll know it’s not the progressives holding back stimulus payments. Every compromise has been to appease the conservative members of congress(including some dems).

This is giving a selfish populace too much credit.

The takeaway will be "I didn't get any money from the Democrats while the Republicans took care of me."

[beanman12345]

Okay since you are being obtuse, who can law enforcement use within their own ranks to overrule a federal judge? It also seems you have learned nothing from decades of McConnell kicking our collective asses. Most of these things are procedure, there's no penalty to ignoring them no one is going to jail.

Republicans are playing in 3D while democrats are stuck in 1D.

some people just can't accept they are wrong, even when they acknowledge senators have all the power, not the parlimentarian.

[DarkTZeratul]

This isn't to please Republicans, it's to please particular Democrats.

I mean, that doesn't really change my answer at all? Democrats have the slimmest possible margin in the Senate. Compromises will have to happen, either to get Republicans on board or to get their more moderate members on board, if anything is to get done at all. Democrats aren't a single monolothic entity like the Republicans are; they're a big tent with lots of voices who don't always agree. As I remarked to my friend the other day, the Republicans are the party of the far right and the Democrats are the party of basically everyone else.

[Draco-Onis]

some people just can't accept they are wrong, even when they acknowledge senators have all the power, not the parlimentarian.

Trump and McConnell to a larger extent have shown that our democracy heavily depends on people acting in goodwill and following decorum. When you have people with no shame or conscience they can do a lot of damage (see supreme court nominations), democrats have to play the republicans game the way it is. This isn't a fight about principle it's about power all the principles in the world is useless without the power to affect change.

[beanman12345]

Trump and McConnell to a larger extent have shown that our democracy heavily depends on people acting in goodwill and following decorum. When you have people with no shame or conscience they can do a lot of damage (see supreme court nominations), democrats have to play the republicans game the way it is. This isn't a fight about principle it's about power all the principles in the world is useless without the power to affect change.

yup, I get dem's are a big tent party, it's harder to please them all, but this is still on them. They choose to handicap themselves by playing by some arbitrary rules, that republican's don't follow, and get away with as you said.

I mean, let's look at Manchin. A decade ago, he was all about getting rid of that filibuster. what happened? corruption happened. He's now head of energy committee, and who's in his pockets? fossil fuels. But that's on him. But even though that's on him, I still don't think this $15 is entirely on him, or even mostly on him. There is way more than enough political capital right now for 15$, to put the spins on his and a handful of others ass by the entire rest of the party, and he and they would roll over to that pressure and do it. And while a couple are trying, a couple is not enough. It is Biden, Harris and majority of senate democrats who is rolling over instead, this is on democrat senators as whole, who are choosing to throw that political capital away. Even with 100 pages, this "SCOTUS of the senate" would still not exist, it's just people not acknowledging they are trying to pass the buck.

And ironically, it's the people who are against ending the filibuster, who the filibuster is gonna bite them in the ass the most in the senate, since, HR-1 is about to land on their desks, won't pass cause filibuster, and who's elections will that effect and cause them to lose? Sinema, Manchin... I don't know if Biden will run again, but him too. they may not see it now, but in 2 years, when the house and senate is back in rep control, well, too late then.

[Breccia]

some people just can't accept they are wrong, even when they acknowledge senators have all the power, not the parlimentarian.

Hmm.

Why doesn't every Senate go nuclear all the time on everything?

Answer that, and we'll come back to "the Senate has all the power". Which neither you, nor @Draco-Onis for that matter, have sufficiently answered why this has gone on for ten pages, if the Senate can just ignore the parliamentarian whenever they want. As opposed to, just to use a random example, once per Congress per topic.

[beanman12345]

Hmm.

Why doesn't every Senate go nuclear all the time on everything?

Answer that, and we'll come back to "the Senate has all the power". Which neither you, nor @Draco-Onis for that matter, have sufficiently answered why this has gone on for ten pages, if the Senate can just ignore the parliamentarian whenever they want. As opposed to, just to use a random example, once per Congress per topic.

I just did, it's really not complicated bro, and you get it, as you acknowledged yesterday. Your thing you think exists, doesn't.

I'll make it even easier, that thread you have nearly 8,000 posts in, was the "trumps shitshow" thread, not the "stephen miller shitshow" thread. This is the biden/harris thread, not whatever their advisor's opinion thread is.

[Breccia]

I just did, it's really not complicated bro, and you get it, as you acknowledged yesterday.

No you didn't. You also didn't answer my direct question: why doesn't the Senate go nuclear all the time on everything? Why doesn't the Senate just flat-out ignore the parliamentarian every single time? Why do the individual tax cuts expire? Why didn't churches get a 501(c)3 boost?

Why doesn't the Senate, go nuclear all the time, on everything? Direct question. Go.

[beanman12345]

No you didn't. You also didn't answer my direct question: why doesn't the Senate go nuclear all the time on everything? Why doesn't the Senate just flat-out ignore the parliamentarian every single time? Why do the individual tax cuts expire? Why didn't churches get a 501(c)3 boost?

Why doesn't the Senate, go nuclear all the time, on everything? Direct question. Go.

Citizen's united. BOOM.

[Breccia]

Citizen's united. BOOM.

Citizens United is your answer to "Why doesn't the Senate go nuclear all the time on everything?"

...I think youi're going to explain that.

[beanman12345]

Citizens United is your answer to "Why doesn't the Senate go nuclear all the time on everything?"

...I think youi're going to explain that.

Read my response above. I explained how in a 1 decade span, a senator went from anti-filibuster, to pro-filibuster, due to his bank account getting much larger, and letting that dictate his decision making.

[Elegiac]

Hmm.

Why doesn't every Senate go nuclear all the time on everything?

Because then they'd actually have to make difficult floor votes that they'd have to justify to their constituents rather than having the luxury of letting shit die quietly by procedure behind the scenes.

It's laziness and cowardice, nothing more.

[Breccia]

Read my response above. I explained how in a 1 decade span, a senator went from anti-filibuster, to pro-filibuster, due to his bank account getting much larger, and letting that dictate his decision making.

I really think you're missing the question. Maybe if I rephrase it, this will work better.

The "nuclear option" is the ability @Vegas82 pointed out that allows the Senate to bypass one of its parliamentarian rules. It was used in 2013 once, it was used in 2017 once, for example.

It is not, however, used on every single Senate vote. It was not used, for example, on the tax cut for the rich despite the parliamentarian taking multiple objections. McConnell didn't use the nuclear option seventy times last year. He used it no times last year.

Why doesn't the Senate go nuclear, all the time, on everything?

- - - Updated - - -

Because then they'd actually have to make difficult floor votes that they'd have to justify to their constituents rather than having the luxury of letting shit die quietly by procedure behind the scenes.

First of all, I appreciate an on-topic answer. Thank you.

[beanman12345]

I really think you're missing the question. Maybe if I rephrase it, this will work better.

The "nuclear option" is the ability @Vegas82 pointed out that allows the Senate to bypass one of its parliamentarian rules. It was used in 2013 once, it was used in 2017 once, for example.

It is not, however, used on every single Senate vote. It was not used, for example, on the tax cut for the rich despite the parliamentarian taking multiple objections. McConnell didn't use the nuclear option seventy times last year. He used it no times last year.

Why doesn't the Senate go nuclear, all the time, on everything?

Dude, this "SCOTUS of the Senate" only exists in your head. No matter how you phrase your question, that's still the answer.