Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Edge-]

As much as I personally dont like Machin or Sinema. I dont think threats will work on them. Again, Justice Dems already tried to Primary Manchin, and failed. Life isnt a Liam Neeson movie. Dems dont respond to primary threats the same way the GOP does. The LEFT just doent mobilize primary voters like the NRA or evangelicals could.

Maybe Manchin willingness to "reform the filibuster" has some merit. But I just dont trust any from MTP or Axios.
Maybe attach it to another bill, like Infrastructure or the spending omnibus.

Justice Dems, yeah. They don't have that kind of muscle that the DNC proper does. And they may not respond well to threats, but I'm not sure what other route to go if they're being sticks in the mud.

I just know we're only gonna get those two to vote on a few more progressive bills this term, so I hope the ones they back (or are pressured into backing) are bigger structural ones. And an increased minimum wage.

[Felya]

Manchin on Fox News 3 months ago, reassuring Fox Viewers that he will stop democrats socialist policy, if democrats win run offs in GA:

[Themius]

??? $80 million is greater than $14 million or is there a typo or mistake here??

Average worthper Senator. Overall there's I think about 2 billion?

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, as sure as the campaign video of Munchin I linked on the previous page, literally shooting a cap and trade bill, with a rifle... do I need to link it again?

Here is another, he does it with a shot gun, but doesn’t mention preventing government spending, as he did in the previous:

Florida senators voted against $15 min wage after Florida itself passed it... their allegiance isn't to their constituents.

[Milchshake]

Justice Dems, yeah. They don't have that kind of muscle that the DNC proper does. And they may not respond well to threats, but I'm not sure what other route to go if they're being sticks in the mud.

I just know we're only gonna get those two to vote on a few more progressive bills this term, so I hope the ones they back (or are pressured into backing) are bigger structural ones. And an increased minimum wage.

The DNC is not involved in senate races, that's the DSCC. Neither is as omnipotent as people keep imaging them to be.

If they were ... the Democratic party would probably not be as big tent as they are.

[Felya]

Florida senators voted against $15 min wage after Florida itself passed it... their allegiance isn't to their constituents.

That’s fantastic... but... By doing what he is doing, Manchin is keeping the promise he was elected on. You can’t use national numbers or evidance from another state, to prove that Manchin is doing anything different than what he promised.

[Omega10]

I'm not spending much time on politics or current events these days, but I have been keeping up a bit with the news. Here are my takes.

This is a huge win for President Biden and for the democratic party. Senator Manchin went on some station and did an interview, and he did a really good job of praising and defending President Biden, and also praised and defended the bill. This basically told the US: the different parts of the democratic party have our differences, and we work them out like adults. And because of this, we just passed an AWESOME bill that will help America in a LOT of ways (and he talked about many of these ways).

The contrast between him and the whole republican party could not have been more stark.

The democratic debate over this bill was very noteworthy for the fact that republicans had absolutely no say in the matter. They had the right to air their opinions, but basically no one cared. Another way to say it is: President Biden is pertinent. Senator McConnell is just some guy. President Biden CRUSHED Senator McConnell.

Now that Senator Manchin has agreed publicly to change the filibuster to forcing republicans to actually talk for hours on end explaining exactly why their constituents should NOT get various forms of aid, President Biden and Senator Schumer are in a position to politically flat out rout republicans. As things stand, the democrats cannot pass any more bills until after the 2022 Congress is seated. At this point I have full faith that the President Biden / Speaker Pelosi / Senator Schumer team will do a very good job at advancing democratic ideals and putting republicans in very uncomfortable situations. Hopefully in 2 years there will be more democrats and fewer republicans and more will be able to be accomplished.

And, if I understand correctly, a lot of the "concessions" that were made in the Senate were additional items Speaker Pelosi inserted in the original bill. If I understand it correctly, Speaker Pelosi added some thing in the bill so that Senator Manchin could "stand up to liberals" before basically voting for the original bill. This sounds like first rate negotiating to me.

Democrats won a HUGE victory, and republicans got trounced. There will be a lot more obstacles until 2022.

[Themius]

That’s fantastic... but... By doing what he is doing, Manchin is keeping the promise he was elected on. You can’t use national numbers or evidance from another state, to prove that Manchin is doing anything different than what he promised.

Recent polling shows 63% support for $15/hr in WV.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not spending much time on politics or current events these days, but I have been keeping up a bit with the news. Here are my takes.

This is a huge win for President Biden and for the democratic party. Senator Manchin went on some station and did an interview, and he did a really good job of praising and defending President Biden, and also praised and defended the bill. This basically told the US: the different parts of the democratic party have our differences, and we work them out like adults. And because of this, we just passed an AWESOME bill that will help America in a LOT of ways (and he talked about many of these ways).

The contrast between him and the whole republican party could not have been more stark.

The democratic debate over this bill was very noteworthy for the fact that republicans had absolutely no say in the matter. They had the right to air their opinions, but basically no one cared. Another way to say it is: President Biden is pertinent. Senator McConnell is just some guy. President Biden CRUSHED Senator McConnell.

Now that Senator Manchin has agreed publicly to change the filibuster to forcing republicans to actually talk for hours on end explaining exactly why their constituents should NOT get various forms of aid, President Biden and Senator Schumer are in a position to politically flat out rout republicans. As things stand, the democrats cannot pass any more bills until after the 2022 Congress is seated. At this point I have full faith that the President Biden / Speaker Pelosi / Senator Schumer team will do a very good job at advancing democratic ideals and putting republicans in very uncomfortable situations. Hopefully in 2 years there will be more democrats and fewer republicans and more will be able to be accomplished.

And, if I understand correctly, a lot of the "concessions" that were made in the Senate were additional items Speaker Pelosi inserted in the original bill. If I understand it correctly, Speaker Pelosi added some thing in the bill so that Senator Manchin could "stand up to liberals" before basically voting for the original bill. This sounds like first rate negotiating to me.

Democrats won a HUGE victory, and republicans got trounced. There will be a lot more obstacles until 2022.

I don't have faith in them... I didn't have much faith under Obama either. I don't have much faith in long term serving politicians like Pelosi and Schumer. Maybe Schumer a little more, but that's only because he's in NY and NY moderates have been losing seats only to be replaced by progressives, so if he wants to keep his seat he has to at least pretend to support the policies.

I have admitted that Biden is more left than Obama was at least.

[Edge-]

I have admitted that Biden is more left than Obama was at least.

It's deeply amusing to me that Biden, the moderate white guy they paired with the radical Black guy Obama to ease moderate voters, ends up being the most progressive president we've had in our lifetimes.

At the end of the day, as pathetic as it is, getting this stimulus through even without the minimum wage increase is still big. It wouldn't happen if Democrats didn't take the Senate/WH and didn't maintain the House (barely). If they had more votes in the Senate I'm sure they would have gone a bit further since they could have lost someone like Manchin, but this is still a big step foward.

And in no small part because I don't think folks realize how important the state/local financial aide is. Seriously, these states/cities/counties have huge budget holes and provide extensive services to folks there and are also the ones rolling out the vaccination programs and desperately need funding for it.

Dems can eat their shit sammich on the $2K checks being $1,400. They can eat their shit sammich on not being able to get the minimum wage increase in there, hopefully they can bring it back up separately and if not $15/h they can get close to it and at least start on the path towards getting to a living wage.

But this is still a pretty big win and a huge help for a ton of folks right now, especially small businesses needing more PPP loans and folks who were about to lose expanded unemployment benefits. And we don't have any Republicans to thank for it. I'm not saying let's fawn over Democrats for getting 70% of the way there, but remember who the bigger problem in the equation is.

[Felya]

Recent polling shows 63% support for $15/hr in WV.

Yet, he was elected... how does that happen?

[Kaleredar]

Average worthper Senator. Overall there's I think about 2 billion?

- - - Updated - - -



Florida senators voted against $15 min wage after Florida itself passed it... their allegiance isn't to their constituents.

And we can surmise that they clearly weren’t worried about that being a factor that would prevent their re-election or being removed by democrats running against them.

[Felya]

I have admitted that Biden is more left than Obama was at least.

I disagree whole hardly... I have not seen enough to override me seeing him argue... ‘when they say democrats will take your guns... point to me... Joe won’t take your guns’... I still see him as the calming voice for the GOP...

[Bodakane]

I mean, good thing I didn't say that, then?

Feel free to quote where I said you did.

Don't forget you jumped into a conversation where I was talking about how I think its wrong people act like it cannot be done.

- - - Updated - - -

DINOs is as ridiculous term as RINO... their allegiance is to constituents and not the party. Despite the fact that it disagrees with us, it’s still a good thing.

Your argument for why we shouldn't use those terms, doesn't make sense.

There is nothing inherent in either acronym, that implies or states there should be fealty to their given party and not their constituents.

- - - Updated - - -

At least 80 million total for a senate race since you are talking about moving 40 points plus that would be a very conservative estimate.

It costs 80 million to change one person's mind?

- - - Updated - - -

Yet, he was elected... how does that happen?

Because the DNC has the same self defeated attitude that many of you have on here.

[Edge-]

Your argument for why we shouldn't use those terms, doesn't make sense.

Because it presumes some singular ideology within the party, with everyone sharing the same views and policy positions. It's absolute nonsense and doesn't make any sense to begin with.

There's a reason that Republicans jumped to using it when their own "Started stepping out of line", and there's a reason we have a nearly ideologically consistent and awful Republican party where there used to be a bit more diversity in the party. Because that kind of thinking weeds out anyone that isn't a hard-liner/extremist for the most part.

Like it or not, the Democratic tent remains a pretty damned broad one. It's why primaries are usually pretty messy, because there's more ideological diversity within the DNC than the RNC.

There is nothing inherent in either acronym, that implies or states there should be fealty to their given party and not their constituents.

"Democrat in name only" dude...it's inherently placing fealty to party above all else.

- - - Updated - - -

Because the DNC has the same self defeated attitude that many of you have on here.

Or, because a progressive candidate ain't gonna win that seat. They'd need "progressive" candidates a la GA, and even then they'd need a massive ground game akin to Fair Fight to have a chance.

Why does everyone think that every state/district is just waiting for some progressive darling to run because clearly no progressive has ever run for those seats before? >.>

[Bodakane]

Because it presumes some singular ideology within the party, with everyone sharing the same views and policy positions. It's absolute nonsense and doesn't make any sense to begin with.

There's a reason that Republicans jumped to using it when their own "Started stepping out of line", and there's a reason we have a nearly ideologically consistent and awful Republican party where there used to be a bit more diversity in the party. Because that kind of thinking weeds out anyone that isn't a hard-liner/extremist for the most part.

Like it or not, the Democratic tent remains a pretty damned broad one. It's why primaries are usually pretty messy, because there's more ideological diversity within the DNC than the RNC.



"Democrat in name only" dude...it's inherently placing fealty to party above all else.

Jesus fucking christ it is not. Not in any way.

It is saying they aren't actually a democrat/republican. That's it. Not that should be. Not that they owe anything to any party. There's nothing about who they should service at all.

Its like if someone put a coke label on a mountain dew, I'm allowed to say that's not really a coke, without you assuming I'm saying no one likes mountain dew.

- - - Updated - - -

Or, because a progressive candidate ain't gonna win that seat. They'd need "progressive" candidates a la GA, and even then they'd need a massive ground game akin to Fair Fight to have a chance.

Why does everyone think that every state/district is just waiting for some progressive darling to run because clearly no progressive has ever run for those seats before? >.>

Yes, by all means repeat the same mantra I'm saying is bullshit to counter me saying it is bullshit....makes lots of sense.

[Edge-]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bi...?mod=home-page

Some good news: The Senate version of the bill includes tax protection for student loan forgiveness. So if Biden does get around to canceling that (hopefully up to $50K, but if it's $10K that's still a huge load off of a ton of folks) then beneficiaries won't be staring at a big tax bill afterwards.

- - - Updated - - -

It is saying they aren't actually a democrat/republican. That's it.

And why aren't the actually a Democrat/Republican, though?

Because, as the pejorative implies, they're not sufficiently loyal to the party line. Because party goes above all.

There's nothing about who they should service at all.

Yes there, is, the party. Because it's used as an insult, meaning that the individual is not sufficiently loyal to the party line instead of say, their constituents who may largely like the party line but may differ on some issues.

Its like if someone put a coke label on a mountain dew, I'm allowed to say that's not really a coke, without you assuming I'm saying no one likes mountain dew.

Literally backing my point up dude.

Yes, by all means repeat the same mantra I'm saying is bullshit to counter me saying it is bullshit....makes lots of sense.

Because it's like...true? I mean, Justice Democrats tried the whole "primary a ton of conservative Democrats" thing a few elections ago and it blew up in their faces because it doesn't work like that. Want success? GA is success. Huge ground game, strategically pushing for "GA progressive" Senators that would be much more in line with progressive overall but not so progressive as to turn off voters.

Because you can't just assume national politics play out on local levels across the country.

[Bodakane]

And why aren't the actually a Democrat/Republican, though?

Because, as the pejorative implies, they're not sufficiently loyal to the party line. Because party goes above all.



Yes there, is, the party. Because it's used as an insult, meaning that the individual is not sufficiently loyal to the party line instead of say, their constituents who may largely like the party line but may differ on some issues.



Literally backing my point up dude.

Seriously what the fuck are you even talking about? You are literally inventing shit on the fly. The name does not imply they should be x or y, just that the label they choose to use isn't all that accurate. Serve your people, but the label you chose to define yourself is wrong. My analogy destroys your point. My god. Following your batshit logic, the Trump cultists that pretended to be antifa should be labled as antifa. "Look at the cat, we call it a dog, and if you say that's not actually a dog it means you hate cats!!!!!!" <------you and your logic

Because it's like...true? I mean, Justice Democrats tried the whole "primary a ton of conservative Democrats" thing a few elections ago and it blew up in their faces because it doesn't work like that. Want success? GA is success. Huge ground game, strategically pushing for "GA progressive" Senators that would be much more in line with progressive overall but not so progressive as to turn off voters.

Because you can't just assume national politics play out on local levels across the country.

Sigh...once again....I don't think conventional wisdom in how they even attack the problem is the right way. People's minds get changed all the time. Find the way to do it, instead of saying, "this single strategy we have for campaigning, won't work here, so don't do it."

[Edge-]

The name does not imply they should be x or y, just that the label they choose to use isn't all that accurate.

The label is inaccurate because...they're not actually Democrats because they don't believe the same things Democrats believe.

Following your batshit logic, the Trump cultists that pretended to be antifa should be tabled as antifa.

Actually, no! They're "AINA", antifa in name only. Which is an accurate term, because they don't believe the same shit antifa folks believe.

Find the way to do it, instead of saying, "this single strategy we have for campaigning, won't work here, so don't do it."

Which is why I'm saying to look to GA, now copy them. Why I said that national politics don't play out on the local level.

Also, I'll point out, amusingly, that Biden is the second Democratic president to come into office during an economic crisis where federal aide is desperately needed. It happened back in 2009 after the Great Recession and he pushed for the American Recovvery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

It was similarly majority popular in polling - https://news.gallup.com/poll/114202/...lus-fight.aspx

And when you look at the votes -

https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll046.xml

Party line in the House, all 177 Republicans and 11 of the 255 Democrats voted against it. Passed purely off the Democratic vote of 244 in favor.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/L...00061#position

Senate vote was 61:37, with all but three Republicans (Collins, Snowe, Specter) voting against it.

Republicans sure seem to really hate helping people out during economic crisis, and Democrats have a tougher time of it with a thinner majority than previously.

Thankfully this time Democrats didn't bother with as much effort for bipartisanship, knowing they would see none in return, and so we have a better stimulus bill compared to the 09 one.

[Fugus]

The Democrats have a bigger caucus with more ideological diversity, including "DINO"s (I can't believe people are unironically using that name). "DINO"'s that have often been key votes that, were there a Republican in that seat, would have made things harder on Democrats and easier on Republicans.

But it means living with those more moderate Democrats during times like this. This is why I spent much of late last year cautioning folks against thinking that the "DEMOCRATIC CONTROL OVER THE SENATE" (and House, for that matter), is more of an illusion since it's a literal razer thin margin (no room for error) and ignores the ideological diversity within the existing Senate.

Hopefully they can bring up a minimum wage increase separately and pass it clean, and if they don't then they've got Republicans and any Democrats who voted against it on record and can try to replace those folks. It helps that a number of Republicans are retiring so there maybe be a potential few seats opening up.

Edit: And yes, kill the damned filibuster threat. If they want to filibuster, make them go through the act of it.

For me, as far as I am concerned, HR1 is the most important bill I have seen them push for in living memory.

So long as they push HR1 though before the next redistriting, then they have done the most important legislation they are likely to do which will reshape the elections for generations to come in a positive way

[Themius]

It's deeply amusing to me that Biden, the moderate white guy they paired with the radical Black guy Obama to ease moderate voters, ends up being the most progressive president we've had in our lifetimes.

At the end of the day, as pathetic as it is, getting this stimulus through even without the minimum wage increase is still big. It wouldn't happen if Democrats didn't take the Senate/WH and didn't maintain the House (barely). If they had more votes in the Senate I'm sure they would have gone a bit further since they could have lost someone like Manchin, but this is still a big step foward.

And in no small part because I don't think folks realize how important the state/local financial aide is. Seriously, these states/cities/counties have huge budget holes and provide extensive services to folks there and are also the ones rolling out the vaccination programs and desperately need funding for it.

Dems can eat their shit sammich on the $2K checks being $1,400. They can eat their shit sammich on not being able to get the minimum wage increase in there, hopefully they can bring it back up separately and if not $15/h they can get close to it and at least start on the path towards getting to a living wage.

But this is still a pretty big win and a huge help for a ton of folks right now, especially small businesses needing more PPP loans and folks who were about to lose expanded unemployment benefits. And we don't have any Republicans to thank for it. I'm not saying let's fawn over Democrats for getting 70% of the way there, but remember who the bigger problem in the equation is.

I struggle to see the upside. I mean I can "see" it but I can't see how we go upwards and now downwards given history.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet, he was elected... how does that happen?

Felya don't be intellectually dishonest... you know how it happens. You know how people vote.

- - - Updated - - -

I disagree whole hardly... I have not seen enough to override me seeing him argue... ‘when they say democrats will take your guns... point to me... Joe won’t take your guns’... I still see him as the calming voice for the GOP...

You disagree that Biden is more left than Obama? Obama stayed silent on union issues... Obama refused to raise the minimum wage when congress was asking him to make it an issue. Obama during the economic recession made it a top priority to pay off businesses. Now he says he may have done differently...

[Edge-]

I struggle to see the upside. I mean I can "see" it but I can't see how we go upwards and now downwards given history.

Because the alternative would be that the last stimulus was the final stimulus. And that Democrats are getting a pretty big "win" right outta the gates that gives them some momentum to build on.