Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Breccia]

that's not really supporting making higher education more affordable?

UTexas out-of-state tuition is about $40 grand a year.

There is not a single SUNY school that charges even half that.

It's not about the education, and it's not about making it affordable. Not in Texas, at least. College is too fucking expensive for how mandatory the job market has made it, it's a systemic problem with no easy answer, but Abbott isn't providing even a bad answer, and he can go Hook'em self.

- - - Updated - - -

Democratic Senate refuses to vote on same-sex marriage protection until after the election.

A tactical decision before a close election. Also, fuckin' cowards.

[Ripster42]

Democratic Senate refuses to vote on same-sex marriage protection until after the election.

A tactical decision before a close election. Also, fuckin' cowards.

How are they cowards? They're literally trying to get it passed and think more of the GOP will vote for it if the won't have to face their voters for a few years. If they were just interested in the politics of the thing, they'd bring it up for a vote now to make it an issue at the polls and decrease the likelihood of it passing. What's the aim here? Hurt your opponent or pass good legislation?

[Spectral]

UTexas out-of-state tuition is about $40 grand a year.

There is not a single SUNY school that charges even half that.

It's not about the education, and it's not about making it affordable. Not in Texas, at least. College is too fucking expensive for how mandatory the job market has made it, it's a systemic problem with no easy answer, but Abbott isn't providing even a bad answer, and he can go Hook'em self.

- - - Updated - - -

Democratic Senate refuses to vote on same-sex marriage protection until after the election.

A tactical decision before a close election. Also, fuckin' cowards.

UT-Austin is free for in state students from families below the median state income and is expanding that access and subsidies more broadly.

[Breccia]

How are they cowards?

Accommodating the GOP members who they know to be hypocrites and need to get elected is, like I said, a tactical move. As opposed to forcing them to take a stand on a major issue in front of their voters and the world at large. We'll see how it plays out when the Democrats lose the Senate and the bill is never voted on.

EDIT: You appear to be saying this is a move required to get it to pass. I agree. I just despise that's the situation that's required, for the same reason I despise that I have to go to a school shooter drill over the weekend. It can be both necessary and detestable at the same time.

- - - Updated - - -

UT-Austin is free for in state students from families below the median state income and is expanding that access and subsidies more broadly.

It's a good thing I wasn't talking about in-state then. Also, we have a similar setup in New York.

[Ivanstone]

UT-Austin is free for in state students from families below the median state income and is expanding that access and subsidies more broadly.

1. This action was by the UT-Austin Board of Regents not the state government.
2. Texas has an 18 billion dollar Permanent University Fund that was set up 150 years ago. Texas is able to afford this kind of spending because it’s a resource rich state and it’s predecessors showed some foresight. Most states don’t have that luxury. The UT system also has a separate $40 Billion Endowment.

[Spectral]

It's a good thing I wasn't talking about in-state then. Also, we have a similar setup in New York.

Seems pretty consistent with being opposed to student loan forgiveness - school's already free for people from working-class and many middle-class families, no need to subsidize poor decision making.

[Edge-]

no need to subsidize poor decision making.

Ah yes, everyone with student loan debt could clearly see the recessions coming up. And the pandemic. And other things they had zero control over that absolutely has fucked their ability to start careers in their chosen fields.

Weird that Republicans are always upset when regular people get bailed out, but we never see the same kind of vigor when it comes to criticizing the "poor decision making" of corporations when shit hits the fan and taxpayers are told they must bail them out...while watching the bailout money go towards executive compensation or stock buybacks rather than actually retaining employees and shit.

[Breccia]

Seems pretty consistent with being opposed to student loan forgiveness

It also seems pretty consistent with @Edge- 's original point. Abbott doesn't care about affordability. If you compare UT and SUNY's out-of-state upcharge, theirs is triple ours.

Also, the US has a long history of subsidizing poor decision makers. The South gets more in federal tax money than they send and have for some time. Living in a poor state that doesn't support its residents is a poor decision.

[Endus]

Seems pretty consistent with being opposed to student loan forgiveness - school's already free for people from working-class and many middle-class families, no need to subsidize poor decision making.

Why is it that the "poor decision making" of random teenagers desperately seeking opportunity is something to be punished and not subsidized, but the "poor decision making" of student loan providers to the same is not, I wonder.

It's almost like the intentional class warfare is directly visible in the rhetoric.

[Milchshake]

Online conservative subculture is so dominated by the children of doctors and lawyers, that its collective understanding of poverty is "has a family night out at olive garden instead of ruth's chris".

[Spectral]

Why is it that the "poor decision making" of random teenagers desperately seeking opportunity is something to be punished and not subsidized, but the "poor decision making" of student loan providers to the same is not, I wonder.

It's almost like the intentional class warfare is directly visible in the rhetoric.

I'm certainly in favor of punishing universities that scam people who are barely older than children into debts that (apparently) don't pay off.

[Ripster42]

Accommodating the GOP members who they know to be hypocrites and need to get elected is, like I said, a tactical move. As opposed to forcing them to take a stand on a major issue in front of their voters and the world at large. We'll see how it plays out when the Democrats lose the Senate and the bill is never voted on.

EDIT: You appear to be saying this is a move required to get it to pass. I agree. I just despise that's the situation that's required, for the same reason I despise that I have to go to a school shooter drill over the weekend. It can be both necessary and detestable at the same time.

There's 2 months between the election and when the new congress is sworn in. That's when they're saying the vote is being scheduled. Again, is the point to hurt your opponent or try to pass good legislation? It's not cowardly to try to get the best chance to protect people's rights. That was a bad take.

- - - Updated - - -

Seems pretty consistent with being opposed to student loan forgiveness - school's already free for people from working-class and many middle-class families, no need to subsidize poor decision making.

Citation needed.

[Spectral]

Citation needed.

See the previous post. UT-Austin is tuition free for students coming from families below the median income in Texas.

[Breccia]

It's not cowardly to try to get the best chance to protect people's rights.

It can be both.

Consider my ire the situation that we find ourselves in, that Democrats wait for Republicans on the edge of being defeated to lie to their supporters, get elected, and then betray their voters -- before asking these liars for help for something the Democrats say is important to them. I would submit that any Republican afraid to say they support this bill, says so because that would hurt their chances of re-election, and I further submit they're worried they'd lose to a Democrat. Aren't the primaries over? Maybe allowing these same Republicans a stronger chance to get re-elected and, of course, vote Republican in a bunch of other things is more likely to get this passed. It's certainly easier and cheaper than trying to chase enough of them down and replace them in the upcoming election. That doesn't mean I have to care for it, and I refuse to call that behavior "brave".

EDIT: See, this is the shit I'm talking about.

New Hampshire GOP candidate does 180 after primary, says election wasn’t stolen

- - - Updated - - -

See the previous post. UT-Austin is tuition free for students coming from families below the median income in Texas.

I believe he was speaking to your more generalized statement, which did not contain the word "Austin". Abbott is not the mayor of Austin.

[Edge-]

EDIT: See, this is the shit I'm talking about.

New Hampshire GOP candidate does 180 after primary, says election wasn’t stolen

It's actually dumber and more spinless -

“Was there fraud? Yes.” he continued. “Is that a concern of Granite Staters all over the state? Yes. Is there a responsibility for public servants in elected positions to ensure that our citizens have faith in their voting system? Yes.”

Technically he's correct. There's a level of fraud in every election, but it's largely beyond statistically irrelevant...and often perpetrated by Republican voters.

But this is him trying to have his cake - appealing to moderates for the general election by dropping the "STOLEN ELECTION" nonsense - and eating it too - continuing to try to appeal to the "STOLEN ELECTION" idiots with a wink and a nod.

Reminder: It's extremely difficult, nigh impossible, to find a principled Republican anymore.

[Ripster42]

See the previous post. UT-Austin is tuition free for students coming from families below the median income in Texas.

So one school in one state. Not exactly broadly applicable.

- - - Updated - - -

It can be both.

Consider my ire the situation that we find ourselves in, that Democrats wait for Republicans on the edge of being defeated to lie to their supporters, get elected, and then betray their voters -- before asking these liars for help for something the Democrats say is important to them. I would submit that any Republican afraid to say they support this bill, says so because that would hurt their chances of re-election, and I further submit they're worried they'd lose to a Democrat. Aren't the primaries over? Maybe allowing these same Republicans a stronger chance to get re-elected and, of course, vote Republican in a bunch of other things is more likely to get this passed. It's certainly easier and cheaper than trying to chase enough of them down and replace them in the upcoming election. That doesn't mean I have to care for it, and I refuse to call that behavior "brave".

EDIT: See, this is the shit I'm talking about.

New Hampshire GOP candidate does 180 after primary, says election wasn’t stolen

Dems don't have the votes to change senate rules. Within senate rules, they need GOP support. There's a vast amount of room between cowardly and brave. It's a bad take to shit talk politicians for trying to get positive legislation passed in the most effective manner. Who knows if it'll get passed, but calling them cowardly for trying the most effective way to get it passed is just self-defeating.

Wait for people to actually do something bad before condemning them for something they haven't done.

[Breccia]

calling them cowardly for trying the most effective way to get it passed is just self-defeating.

I'm not calling them cowardly for what they're trying to do. I am calling them cowardly for how they're going about doing it. You don't seem to get that, so I'm done discussing this topic.

[Ripster42]

I'm not calling them cowardly for what they're trying to do. I am calling them cowardly for how they're going about doing it. You don't seem to get that, so I'm done discussing this topic.

Yeah, I get exactly what you're saying, and I'm saying it's a bad take. Which is why I keep stressing, "Are you more concerned with hurting your opponent or passing good legislation?"

[Breccia]

Yeah, I get exactly what you're saying, and I'm saying it's a bad take. Which is why I keep stressing, "Are you more concerned with hurting your opponent or passing good legislation?"

Ah, the ends justifying the means. I don't have to like it. In fact, I don't.

[CastletonSnob]

https://apnews.com/article/biden-eco...a99fec9dde1b3e

This is a BIG win for Democrats.

Could you imagine how badly Trump would have botched the negotiations?