Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Fugus]

@Breccia

Let’s say the filibuster stays intact and HR1 doesn’t make it through and then Georgia becomes the template for every GOP run state within the next 2 years in short order.

Then what becomes the odds of the DNC or the nation itself?

Because without HR1, I see that as their outcome.

[Breccia]

Georgia becomes the template for every GOP run state within the next 2 years in short order.

I'm not sure what your question actually is, but I assume it's "can the Democrats remain in power?" and yes, based on the assumption above, that would drop.

Of course, your assumption is hopefully incorrect. I'd love to see what happened in 2020 Georgia's election catch on and people continue to mobilize. I would love to see backlash against GOP state legislatures cause them to stop being GOP state legislatures. That will require motivation and effort -- but we've seen such exists.

Basically, you're asking "what if the KC Chiefs played the NY Jets, but the Jets completed every pass but the Chiefs missed every pass?" I would say "well yeah the Jets win". Then I'd point out the upcoming NFL draft and say "well the Chiefs have the perfect opportunity right here to make sure that never happens". If the Chiefs choose to take 2 defensive linemen, a running back and a Gatorade sponsorship instead of any QBs or receivers, then they're not making the effort to stop your hypothetical.

Can the people overturn existing laws directly or throw out existing elected officials without a valid reason? No.

Can they push forward, even under opposition, to play by the rules long enough to win and therefore change the rules? Yes.

Will they? I hope so. I live in NY and can't affect them.

[Edge-]

that proves my point. none of them actually wanted to repeal the bill because they knew it would hurt their base once the base figured out what it *really* meant. it was all just a bluff.

So...just blatantly bad-faith governance, then? Again, as I said, not a fundamentally serious party. 8 years of lying to their voters.

the "block dems at every turn and say they do nothing" schtick is getting pretty old, so it's more of a gamble for them. that's what bidens betting on. "are you sure third times the charm?"
not sure what good faith really has to do with it as its not something that relies on that.

If you're talking about the SCOTUS seats like...do I really need to explain in detail?

his job is to convince repubs its in their own best interest to support him

It's quite literally, in no way, shape, or form, his job. He's the chief executive of the country. He can make appeals to Republicans, but if they're not showing up to the bargaining table in good faith then he's better to not waste tons of time on "bipartisan" efforts with a political party that whines about the lack of bipartisanship but has hardly showed the slightest inclination towards working bipartisanly, especially when they were in power.

Remember all the times Trump reached out and worked closely with Democrats? Neither do I.

which looking at the meat and potatoes of his proposals shouldn't be that hard as it affects the repub base heavily, as well as the suburban cohort that swung to dems. could backfire very heavily on repubs if they oppose it.

They are literally opposing it now. They've literally been opposing this shit for decades. Remember the ACA that they almost universally voted against? I think only 1-2 House Republicans voted for it?

Guess what's wildly fuckin popular now and helps a large part of the Republican voter base, even as Republican states continue to reject additional federal dollars to cover more of their residents through Medicaid?

basically i'm just not getting all the doom & gloom thats being thrown around.

For Republicans, it is. They're irrelevant now, and Democrats should do everything they can to steamroll over them to deliver meaningful legislation that improves the effectiveness of the government, the lives of Americans, and places us on a stronger, more secure path for the future.

If Republicans want to jump on that train they're welcome to.

[Fugus]

@Breccia

If Georgia is allowed to stand with the law it passed, the will of the people in that state effectively becomes a moot point as they greatly control who is allowed to vote, who gets to count those votes, and can even throw them out when they dislike it. With that setup, the GOP could keep a state even with 70% of that state actively against them.

My question is that if HR1 is not passed and that becomes the standard for GOP states like they are trying to be, what future do you see there for us as a nation?

Because Georgia’s law will become the norm in short order without something outlawing it.

[Breccia]

The head of the SEC resigns within six days of taking the job, to avoid a conflict of interest with Exxon/Mobil.

"What's wrong with that?"

Nothing. I mean, it's inconvenient, they need someone else, but this is the opposite of corruption. Honestly, this will probably make a lot of Biden's more progressive voters happy.

I want everyone to think back to the members of Team Trump who resigned to avoid a conflict of interest, specifically business conflicts of interest. Good luck, I won't hold my breath -- it wouldn't be long before Boeing unconscious. Jeez, that was forced.

- - - Updated - - -

can even throw them out when they dislike it.

I would love to see SCOTUS view on that. Because I don't think the Constitution allows people to throw out votes they don't like.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1387610638369886208

Joe Biden is deliberately being boring, but the substance of what he is saying is radical. #BoringButRadical

Now I don't remotely agree with his reasoning etc., but like...holy shit yeah Ted Cruz, like, for once you're kinda fuckin right. And for once I actually kinda agree with you.

Biden is the boring centrist trojan horse for a progressive agenda and I'm enjoying it. Maybe this is the path forward for progressivism in the US, get a boring old dude in the White House and Democrats in the Legislature and just kinda like, quietly get a lot of shit done without be a loud shitgibbon about it.

[Fugus]

I would love to see SCOTUS view on that. Because I don't think the Constitution allows people to throw out votes they don't like.

They have a super majority in it with a potential rapist that committed perjury in his own hearings and a "Religious" handmaiden who desecrate the dying wish of her predecessor with glee.

And when they can replace the Secretary of State and replace them with someone who refuses to certify, this is the ideal court for them to try and push that. And is assuming it even gets that far when they make it near impossible to vote without waiting 11+ hours without food or water just to vote and then remove the local people with their own who will throw out as many as they can.

Or even go a bit further and use the Maricopa county bit where they do a recount with their own companies using pens that can literally change the votes during the recount.

My question still remains, with Georgia's new law is allowed to stand unopposed and becomes the standard for every GOP state like they are trying to. What do you think the outcome of that is for the nation as a whole?

[Endus]

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1387610638369886208



Now I don't remotely agree with his reasoning etc., but like...holy shit yeah Ted Cruz, like, for once you're kinda fuckin right. And for once I actually kinda agree with you.

Biden is the boring centrist trojan horse for a progressive agenda and I'm enjoying it. Maybe this is the path forward for progressivism in the US, get a boring old dude in the White House and Democrats in the Legislature and just kinda like, quietly get a lot of shit done without be a loud shitgibbon about it.

"How dare you present progressive views calmly and reasonably, showing how much sense they make! I am incredibly upset that calm reason is turning out to be more effective than my grandstanding and inflammatory rhetoric to push lies and abusive horseshit!"

Like, a lot of what's presented here is radical for the USA, but that's mostly because your country's already been radicalized in a lot of ways (gun culture, policing, for instance), and addressing that radicalism will, naturally, look "radical" to those who've internally normalized it.

[Breccia]

unopposed

This is my answer. The key word is "unopposed".

If people choose not to oppose it, then what you're describing will happen.

[starlord]

So...just blatantly bad-faith governance, then? Again, as I said, not a fundamentally serious party. 8 years of lying to their voters.



If you're talking about the SCOTUS seats like...do I really need to explain in detail?



It's quite literally, in no way, shape, or form, his job. He's the chief executive of the country. He can make appeals to Republicans, but if they're not showing up to the bargaining table in good faith then he's better to not waste tons of time on "bipartisan" efforts with a political party that whines about the lack of bipartisanship but has hardly showed the slightest inclination towards working bipartisanly, especially when they were in power.

Remember all the times Trump reached out and worked closely with Democrats? Neither do I.



They are literally opposing it now. They've literally been opposing this shit for decades. Remember the ACA that they almost universally voted against? I think only 1-2 House Republicans voted for it?

Guess what's wildly fuckin popular now and helps a large part of the Republican voter base, even as Republican states continue to reject additional federal dollars to cover more of their residents through Medicaid?



For Republicans, it is. They're irrelevant now, and Democrats should do everything they can to steamroll over them to deliver meaningful legislation that improves the effectiveness of the government, the lives of Americans, and places us on a stronger, more secure path for the future.

If Republicans want to jump on that train they're welcome to.

i am not talking about SCOTUS seats, I'm talking about Bidens proposal in his latest speech, which I think despite repub bluster has a high chance of them wanting to hitch their wagon to it once the sufficient bluffs and "vocal opposition" has been made to satisfy the peanut gallery. All politicians do that to some degree- someone pointed out how joe manchin does a similar dance.

[Fugus]

This is my answer. The key word is "unopposed".

If people choose not to oppose it, then what you're describing will happen.

So you are saying that if they pass it, it will be opposed? How effectively will that be opposed though.

Will it be enough to force it revert? Because they were pretty happy when they signed it into law and even arrested a politician for knocking on the door during the signing. Will it be enough for the Super Majority in the Supreme Court to actually do their jobs?

Because, to me, you are basically saying that if they attempt it, things get so violent that they can't allow it to happen and that the states can't even attempt to put them down for it. Because that is the level it would have to take given the overreach of these laws given the current court makeup.

Sorry, I just have less than zero faith in the current supreme court with their current lack of legitimacy given how the majority of it was appointed. And if they don't do their jobs, then what next? And it honestly feels the short answer your giving feels too much like a non-answer. No offense, just feels that way.

[Felya]

Now I don't remotely agree with his reasoning etc., but like...holy shit yeah Ted Cruz, like, for once you're kinda fuckin right. And for once I actually kinda agree with you.

How would he know? The dude dozed off during the speech yesterday...

[DarkTZeratul]

that proves my point. none of them actually wanted to repeal the bill because they knew it would hurt their base once the base figured out what it *really* meant. it was all just a bluff.

You remember how the repeal only failed by a single vote cast by a Republican known as a "maverick"?

[Fugus]

You remember how the repeal only failed by a single vote cast by a Republican known as a "maverick"?

And on his death bed knowing full well how he would be remembered in his dying act if he was the deciding vote that killed it.

That is a tall order to rely on readily for them doing the right thing unless someone managed to get ahold of the book from Death Note.

[draynay]

part of bidens "appeal" so to speak is that hes a card carrying member of the good ol boys club.
you know, backroom meetings, cigars, whiskey, handshakes. Some (which i cannot emphasize enough) of Obamas problems came from being considered an "upstart", & Biden put in a lot of work for what he did manage to get done.
So if anyone's likely to succeed in finagling, its Biden.

Is this dog whistling really necessary?

[Breccia]

White House spells out that their tax hike proposal is for couples making over $500,000 a year.

That's the top 1%, just so everyone's clear. Ma and Pa will be fine.

- - - Updated - - -

So you are saying that if they pass it, it will be opposed?

No.

I am saying, it should be opposed. There should be a strong, motivated movement against it. Just because it's difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. The next election, make an effort to throw out people who voted for this. Until then, try to bring what seems like an unConstitutional lawsuit to court. Just because Trump picked a SCOTUS seat doesn't mean they'll say "so let's throw out legal votes for no reason, the Constution says so" automatically.

You are asking "will this happen if nobody opposes it". I am saying "It should be opposed, so your hypothetical never comes to pass."

[Draco-Onis]

i think its a mistake to dismiss any and all repubs as rabid animals who cannot be reasoned with, especially the older ones who run the show. with exceptions. they put on a face & do a dance for the public eye but behind the scenes they do sort of make the attempt still. its a lot harder to rile up the base over "kindly old white man" as they have already admitted.

I disagree because at the end of the day they are all good Nazi soldiers. During the Trump years all they did was talk behind the scenes but they did jack shit to stop him or hold him into account. I am sure there were plenty of people horrified by Hitler behind the scenes too but at the end they were all culpable.

They are all cowards who fall in line behind the dear leader no matter what shit he pulled including trying to overthrow democracy. Look at Moscow Mitch he is back in line fully supporting Trump, they all sold their souls to the devil they don't get the benefit of the doubt.

- - - Updated - - -

No.

I am saying, it should be opposed. There should be a strong, motivated movement against it. Just because it's difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. The next election, make an effort to throw out people who voted for this. Until then, try to bring what seems like an unConstitutional lawsuit to court. Just because Trump picked a SCOTUS seat doesn't mean they'll say "so let's throw out legal votes for no reason, the Constution says so" automatically.

You are asking "will this happen if nobody opposes it". I am saying "It should be opposed, so your hypothetical never comes to pass."

Of course we should fight but the outcome is predisposed 5-4 in favor of stealing the election.

[starlord]

Is this dog whistling really necessary?

dog whistling what exactly?

[DarkTZeratul]

Just because Trump picked a SCOTUS seat doesn't mean they'll say "so let's throw out legal votes for no reason, the Constution says so" automatically.

Unfortunately, what the Constitution DOES say is that states are empowered to conduct elections in whatever manner they see fit. Loathsome as these bills are, they are unlikely to be unconstitutional.

[Fugus]

No.

I am saying, it should be opposed. There should be a strong, motivated movement against it. Just because it's difficult doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. The next election, make an effort to throw out people who voted for this. Until then, try to bring what seems like an unConstitutional lawsuit to court. Just because Trump picked a SCOTUS seat doesn't mean they'll say "so let's throw out legal votes for no reason, the Constution says so" automatically.

You are asking "will this happen if nobody opposes it". I am saying "It should be opposed, so your hypothetical never comes to pass."

I agree that it should be opposed but that wasn’t what I was asking.

I know it will be opposed by the voters but whether that matters or not really is debatable when the voters largely doesn’t matter anymore under that law.

With the law, even if 70% of the population were against them, they could retain power with the law as written.

My question is that if the law in Georgia is allowed to stand without HR1 making it illegal and with the GOP running with that in the other states.

What do you think will happen to the nation as a whole?

Do you think the packed Supreme Court will side with their party for power?

Do you think the voters get so violent that they can’t be ignored?

Do you think the Republicans will suddenly grow a sense of ethics they have never had in our lifetimes?

Do you think something else will happen?

What do you think the outcome of that will be?