Master US Political Discussion Thread

[Zagadka]

2 minutes ago, Homer said:

Gee, I wonder why. He has such a formidable track record, being part of the Dronebama regime and all...

'94 Crime Bill Biden really isn't surprising me, but Democrats seem impressed.

[daveb]

I don't like it when the Democrats always seem to give ground for the sake of "bipartisanship" or whatever, while the Republicans have no intention of compromising or cooperating. Looking at the issue of the Jan 6 commission, for example, where the Republicans "negotiated" and got all of the concessions they wanted from the Democrats and yet the Republican leadership who pushed for all of that basically said "psych! we're still against it". I know the way things are set up the Democrats can't do everything they might want to do, but have some backbone and fight and stand up for your ideals and policies! McConnell and McCarthy aren't going to work with you! They are going to obstruct as much as they can. That's nothing new; it's not going to change.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

The way I see it, both sides have been unwilling to cooperate. For the most part.

[daveb]

5 minutes ago, Sarah-Sylvia said:

The way I see it, both sides have been unwilling to cooperate. For the most part.

It's not really a "both sides" thing. Certainly not with any degree of equivalency. I mean, when one side accepts all of the conditions the other side puts on something and then the other side still rejects it there's not much more cooperation you can do. Concede to all of their demands, but that's not enough?

[Sarah-Sylvia]

Nobody knows how to communicate, negotiate, find common ground, and compromise.
Something that should be a requirement for any politicians. In an ideal world..

[daveb]

It still takes 2 sides willing to do it.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

And it's to their advantage  because  being able to find mutual grounds and also compromises can benefit both.

[daveb]

Just now, Sarah-Sylvia said:

And it's to their advantage  because  being able to find mutual grounds and also compromises can benefit both.

At least get things done that will benefit more people/citizens, the country, etc.  

There are actually a number of things that have wide popular support.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

6 minutes ago, daveb said:

At least get things done that will benefit more people/citizens, the country, etc.  

There are actually a number of things that have wide popular support.

That could be a good start for sure.

In Canada I remember watching something once and it was so stupid, it felt like they were opposing everything the other political side wanted to do just like as a principle, it's so annoying to see.

For me, when I see a minority government, I'm happy and like oh yes! Now they have to learn to work together. Unfortunately, it just doesn't seem to work out like that most of the time XD.

[Homer]

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt Blames Biden for Chick-Fil-A Sauce Shortage in Re-Election Fundraising Appeal 

[Zagadka]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2021/05/21/biden-drops-student-loan-forgiveness-from-latest-budget/?sh=3d890fc3691e

 

Quote

According to the Washington Post, President Joe Biden will not include any student loan cancellation in his annual budget. While the annual budget, which is expected at the end of next week, only contains major policy plans that have already been released by the Biden administration, it’s another major setback for student loan cancellation. As a presidential candidate, Biden called for Congress to cancel up to $10,000 of student loans for student loan borrowers, but hasn’t enacted any policy for student loan cancellation through an executive order.

Have we given him enough days? are we allowed to criticize him yet?

 

 

On 5/22/2021 at 10:37 AM, Sarah-Sylvia said:

The way I see it, both sides have been unwilling to cooperate. For the most part.

I'm not sure which news sources you follow, but the Democrats have done nothing but capitulate and lower every measure they introduce to "reach across the aisle" and "not alienate conservatives" and follow all of the rules. Republicans, meanwhile, have done nothing but cram thought everything they can and pass every law restricting voting access they can think of. There is no "playing nice" and "cooperating" and "meeting in the middle." We're AT the middle now. The middle is not raising the minimum wage or taxing the rich or providing healthcare or lowering military spending, and that is what the Democrats have been doing for 40 years while Republicans ratchet everything to the right every second they get into office. This is why ACA sucked and this is why the infrastructure bill will suck.

 

There is no honor or respect in being nice when the people you are dealing with have no intention of doing anything outside of their specific (and horrible) interests.

 

F* the GOP, f* the DNC, eliminate the filibuster, expand the court.

[Sarah-Sylvia]

4 minutes ago, Zagadka said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2021/05/21/biden-drops-student-loan-forgiveness-from-latest-budget/?sh=3d890fc3691e

 

Have we given him enough days? are we allowed to criticize him yet?

 

 

I'm not sure which news sources you follow, but the Democrats have done nothing but capitulate and lower every measure they introduce to "reach across the aisle" and "not alienate conservatives" and follow all of the rules. Republicans, meanwhile, have done nothing but cram thought everything they can and pass every law restricting voting access they can think of. There is no "playing nice" and "cooperating" and "meeting in the middle." We're AT the middle now. The middle is not raising the minimum wage or taxing the rich or providing healthcare or lowering military spending, and that is what the Democrats have been doing for 40 years while Republicans ratchet everything to the right every second they get into office.

 

There is no honor or respect in being nice when the people you are dealing with have no intention of doing anything outside of their specific (and horrible) interests.

 

F* the GOP, f* the DNC, eliminate the filibuster, expand the court.

Most of what I'll say is I don't fully agree.
At least from what I've seen. Though I can't do much more than say that, and admit there's probably a lot that is swayed and stubborn on the conservative side, but I think the other side has been pretty tough to deal with as well.

Again I think the mentality of 'they aren't giving us anything so we shouldn't give them anything either' or seeing them as opposition instead of someone to work with is not going to improve things.

Also, besides those thoughts, I probably won't share more because I'm not in a political mood right now XD.

[Zagadka]

The GOP version of "not giving us anything" is billions in tax cuts for the top 10% of owners, privatization of every public service and utility, passing voter restriction laws, overturning civil rights, etc. I have no interest in "meeting their needs," I want my elected officials to represent the people. The Democrats are so concerned with offending anyone in the center while the Republicans literally talk about forming an executive dynasty. Democrats "meet them in the middle" and allow them to appoint Supreme Court judges with NO resistance then act surprised when an easy majority conservative court overturns everything. This isn't a game. There is no "center bloc."

[Zagadka]

Mitch McConnell literally says it is his job to block 100% of Biden's policies. The GOP votes to overturn the election and blocks an independent investigation into Jan 6. Republican states sweepingly vote to restrict voting access for minority communities and throw out ballets.

 

Democrats/centrists: We need to meet Republicans in the middle. It would be rude to not cater to their requests. Also, the progressive agenda is socialism and BLM and Antifa sure are extremists groups we need to disown.

 

Anyway, in other news, today is the anniversary of George Floyd's murder. And... Nothing. Passed billions in more funding for police, though.

 

https://theintercept.com/2021/05/25/police-reform-congress-george-floyd/

 

Quote

A year ago today, Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd by kneeling on his neck for over nine minutes. Since then, Democrats in Congress have spoken out forcefully about the need to change policing in the U.S., and President Joe Biden declared on April 28 that he wanted a police reform bill passed by the anniversary of Floyd’s death. But those efforts have largely fallen flat. 

That Congress missed today’s artificial deadline is not necessarily a surprise to organizers, who were frustrated that after so many overtures to the cause — including an embarrassing stunt in which members wearing traditional Ghanaian kente cloth kneeled on the floor of the Capitol — the House still passed a bill that gave millions of additional dollars to police. Biden, instead of signing a deal, will meet with Floyd’s family for the first time in-person since his death. And even if Congress does pass a bill in the weeks or months that follow, some advocates are skeptical that it would fundamentally change the way police operate.

In March, the Justice in Policing Act passed the House on a 220-212 vote. Though the bill was all but guaranteed to die in the Senate, Democrats celebrated its unlikely prospects for enforcement. “We’re proud of this legislation, which will fundamentally transform the culture with bold, unprecedented reforms,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said at a press conference on the bill’s passage. 

But to Scott Roberts, senior director of criminal justice campaigns at Color of Change, the pageantry was “troubling.” He told The Intercept that “it feels like an effort to make [JPA] the end-all-be-all.” After a jury convicted Chauvin of murder last month, congressional staffers told Axios there was a sense of relief in the Capitol that Chauvin’s conviction alleviated pressure to pass a police reform package. Meanwhile, organizers renewed a push to further policies that prevent violent interactions with law enforcement in the first place, rather than simply trying to hold police accountable after they’ve already caused harm to someone, as was the aim of most congressional negotiations, Roberts said. 

One such measure would be ending the transfer of military equipment to local law enforcement, one key provision of JPA that looks likely to survive in the Senate. Roberts stressed that activists might have more success pushing for similar changes in their local police departments, rather than waiting for change at the federal level.

“Part of our work is, frankly, trying to point people in other directions,” he said. “Where are those local interventions? Especially in places where Black communities have the power to move stuff. Where there’s not a Joe Manchin and a Tim Scott standing in our way.” 

Senate negotiations on police reform started breaking down on May 9, when House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-S.C., told CNN that Democrats should open their minds to passing a measure that did not end qualified immunity, the legal doctrine that protects police officers from civil suits. 

Over the past year, ending qualified immunity has often been framed as a marquee activist issue, but the concept has long had bipartisan support. Following backlash from some centrist members to protests against police brutality, Democrats have been skittish to support any measure that could be used to attack them later as anti-police, and many have leaned into the notion that the legal doctrine is untouchable. The likelihood that a measure to end or even limit the scope of qualified immunity will advance to the final package is growing smaller by the day as Congressional Black Caucus Chair Karen Bass, D-Calif., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., try to hammer out a deal with Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C. 

...

 

The Dems refuse to push through another reconciliation package, even though they absolutely can and the single thing they have accomplished and constantly remind everyone they accomplished was passed this way.

 

 

And Biden has almost reached the milestone of deporting 500,000 people only a fraction of the way through his first year, far surpassing Trump.

 

 

Can't afford student debt relief or healthcare or anything else, but here's another $10 billion bailout for a billionaire Bezos-owned private space company because they lost a contract, sure.

 

https://theintercept.com/2021/05/25/jeff-bezos-blue-origin-senate-bailout/

 

Quote

Now that Jeff Bezos’s space flight company Blue Origin has lost a multibillion contract to Elon Musk’s SpaceX, Congress is prepping the ground for Bezos to win a contract anyway, ordering NASA to make not one but two awards.

The order would come through the Endless Frontier Act, a bill to beef up resources for science and technology research that’s being debated on the Senate floor this week. An amendment was added to that legislation by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., to hand over $10 billion to NASA — money that most likely would go to Blue Origin, a company that’s headquartered in Cantwell’s home state.

Cantwell’s amendment is no sure bet though: Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., introduced a last-minute amendment Monday to eliminate the $10 billion. “It does not make a lot of sense to me that we would provide billions of dollars to a company owned by the wealthiest guy in America,” Sanders told The Intercept Tuesday.

The Bezos space company had been competing against SpaceX for a contract to put astronauts on the moon, the first such trips since 1972, but lost the bidding process with a price tag twice that of SpaceX. NASA announced the award to the Elon Musk-owned company last month.

...

 

Can't afford anything. Oh well. Need more nukes.

 

https://www.dailyposter.com/americas-nuclear-spending-spree/

 

Quote

The first report from the Congressional Budget Office finds that the federal government is on track to spend $634 billion over the next decade to maintain its nuclear forces, according to a new Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Almost two-thirds of those costs are for the Department of Defense, mostly to maintain ballistic missile submarines and intercontinental ballistic missiles. About one-third is for the Department of Energy.

For comparison that is:

• 1.5 times the cost of all of the $1,400 stimulus checks that were sent to people through the American Rescue Plan earlier this year
• Nearly 14 times the $47 billion that Congress has spent so far this year helping Americans who are behind on rent.
• Over one-third of the cost of cancelling the $1.7 trillion in student debt held by Americans, most of which is never going to be repaid.

The new CBO estimate represents a 28-percent increase over the last 10-year estimate that the CBO made on U.S. nuclear forces two years ago.

 

https://www.dailyposter.com/americas-nuclear-spending-spree/

 

And Biden Concerned Ambitious Agenda Could Be Stalled By Him Not Really Caring If It Happens Or Not

 

https://politics.theonion.com/biden-concerned-ambitious-agenda-could-be-stalled-by-hi-1846958173

 

Oh wait, that is The Onion. Well, still true.

 

Something something Russian interference.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/israel-us-elections-intervention-russia-noam-chomsky-donald-trump-a8470481.html

 

Quote

Veteran activist Noam Chomsky has accused Israel of “brazenly” interfering in US electoral politics in a way that vastly outweighs any efforts that may have been carried out by Russia.

In comments in which he accused much of the media of concentrating on stories he considered marginal and ignoring issues such as the “existential threat” of climate change, the 89-year-old linguist said in much of the world, the US media’s focus with Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 was "a joke".

 

“First of all, if you’re interested in foreign interference in our elections, whatever the Russians may have done barely counts or weighs in the balance as compared with what another state does, openly, brazenly and with enormous support,” he said.

...

 

https://magazine.whatfinger.com/story/biden-spokesperson-jen-psaki-worked-for-israeli-spy-firm/

[Sally]

20 minutes ago, Moonman said:

Forgive my temerity but considering the Democrats hold the majority in both the House and the Senate, why do they need Republican support? Couldn't they just pass anything they liked with impunity? Isn't that effectively what the electorate has voted them in to do? 

Their margins are so slim in both the Senate and the House, they need at least a few Republicans to vote with them, especially to overcome the fact that a few Dems do not always vote for what leadership is proposing.  And with the filibuster in effect, on most issues, they need 60% to pass legislation.

[Still]

9 hours ago, Moonman said:

Forgive my temerity but considering the Democrats hold the majority in both the House and the Senate, why do they need Republican support? Couldn't they just pass anything they liked with impunity? Isn't that effectively what the electorate has voted them in to do? 

When Obama was president, he had a supermajority and could've done anything he wanted. He tried to "compromise" with Republicans anyway like the spineless, worthless loser he quickly revealed himself to be 👍

[Sally]

38 minutes ago, Still said:

When Obama was president, he had a supermajority and could've done anything he wanted. He tried to "compromise" with Republicans anyway like the spineless, worthless loser he quickly revealed himself to be 👍

That "spineless, worthless loser" got through Congress a health insurance program that was a thousand times better than anything we'd had before, and he did it with strong Republican opposition.  I don't think you understand how Congress works.  

[Still]

6 minutes ago, Sally said:

That "spineless, worthless loser" got through Congress a health insurance program that was a thousand times better than anything we'd had before, and he did it with strong Republican opposition.  I don't think you understand how Congress works.  

I understand that when your party controls both chambers, that's a time to get stuff done, not a time to go "uhhh, let me be clear, I want to make concessions to Republicans for absolutely no reason". If Republicans had had a supermajority, they wouldn't have given the same courtesy. Obama failed spectacularly at playing the political game just because he wanted Republicans to like him, which worked so well that no Republican ever supported any of his "bipartisan" bills and instead spent eight years calling him a secret Kenyan Muslim Marxist.

[Zagadka]

On 5/26/2021 at 1:08 AM, Sally said:

That "spineless, worthless loser" got through Congress a health insurance program that was a thousand times better than anything we'd had before, and he did it with strong Republican opposition.  I don't think you understand how Congress works.  

Better than anything we had before because we basically had nothing before.

 

He faced "strong opposition," but he still had a majority to pass it and compromised the concept to them anyway.

 

ACA was nothing but weak compromises to please Republicans. One of Obama's biggest failures was not passing the healthcare package he originally wanted when he could have. Instead, he piddled away with Republicans until it was negotiated backwards into being pretty ineffectual. All it really does is prevent companies from denying coverage, and they just raised premiums to cover. We're still responsible for paying out of pocket at least around $450 per month for coverage, still having to pay deductibles etc.

 

It was a handout to the insurance industry. It changed nothing. Yes, more people are insured, and we're still paying more for that insurance. Oh goodie, we have more people paying more for shitty, overpriced coverage and insurers are making even more money. Now we will surely ever have an opportunity to pass actual reform instead of just extending the private healthcare industry, right? Absolutely not, because Democrats like Biden (and I'm presuming you) will just say "expand ACA" as a "solution" to healthcare.

[Zagadka]

Anyway, speaking of capitulating to Republicans who have no interest in ever caring...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/27/can-democrats-avoid-pitfalls-2020-new-analysis-offers-striking-answers/

 

Can Democrats avoid the pitfalls of 2020? A new analysis offers striking answers.

 

Quote

...

The analysis — which was done by the group Way to Win and was provided to me — suggests large TV-ad expenditures on emphasizing bipartisan outreach do not appear to have paid dividends for House Democrats in the 2020 elections.

 

The analysis also finds that Republicans spent a lot more money on casting Democrats as extremists than Democrats did in making the case against Republican extremism.

Democrats, of course, lost a net dozen House seats, underperforming victorious Joe Biden all over the place. The findings suggest Democrats need a rethink of their approach to those conundrums, the analysts conclude.

This is also more pressing now that Republicans are radicalizing in a way that poses a threat to future democratic stability, raising questions about how Democrats can highlight this to the public.

The study by Way to Win — a group distinguished by its big expenditures on turning out the Democratic base — attempts a comprehensive look at all the TV ads that ran in House races in the 2020 cycle. Some findings:

 

• Democrats spent three times more than Republicans on ads that touted bipartisan outreach. Democrats spent $21.8 million on ads about “bipartisanship” or “working across the aisle,” while Republicans spent $6.2 million on them.
• Democrats spent six times as much on positive ads than Republicans did. Democrats spent $18.6 million on positive ads that also happened to mention Republicans (say, by touting the ability to work with them), while Republicans spent $2.9 million on positive ads mentioning Democrats.
• Republicans spent more than 10 times more on ads with the words “extremist” and “radical” than Democrats did. Republicans spent $51 million on such ads, while Democrats spent $3.4 million.
• Overall, Republicans spent more than $87 million on ads with one or more of the following words in it: “AOC,” “Ocasio,” “Pelosi,” “socialism,” “socialist,” “defund,” “radical,” “extremist,” “extreme.”
• GOP ads were more likely to use words with “emotional punch,” such as “taxes,” “radical” and “jobs,” while Democratic ads featured words like “insurance,” “voted” and “work.”

Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, the vice president of Way to Win, said that, in sum, Democrats in 2020 sent mixed messages: They touted their willingness to work with Republicans, even as Republicans called them socialists and extremists.

 

...

 

The study has been shared with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. The study includes ads spent by the DCCC and by individual campaigns and other groups, so it’s difficult to vet. Asked for comment, the DCCC declined.

As it happens, the DCCC’s own internal analysis, reported on by Paul Kane, has similarly concluded that Democrats were caught off guard by the potency of GOP attacks.

...

Which is incredibly worrying, because Biden's entire schtick is "being president for ALL of the American people" and everything he's done has been to appeal to Republican voters.

[Still]

Not that long ago, it was considered a racist conspiracy theory to say that COVID was made in a lab in Wuhan. Now Biden wants to investigate it for some stupid reason and suddenly people start acting like there's some merit to this theory 🤨

[Gloomy]

Everything is a “conspiracy theory” until the government starts saying it’s true, then suddenly the sheeple believe it. 

[Still]

4 minutes ago, Gloomy said:

Everything is a “conspiracy theory” until the government starts saying it’s true, then suddenly the sheeple believe it. 

Yeah, my whole point, which you missed, was that the theory is bullshit and the only reason to give it any credibility is to inhale some raw copium over the US fucking up COVID by blaming it on ebil China (remember when there were articles saying China was the country that was least prepared for a pandemic? lmao).

 

Unironic use of the word "sheeple" is 😗👌, though.

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, Gloomy said:

Everything is a “conspiracy theory” until the government starts saying it’s true, then suddenly the sheeple believe it. 

Will this ever happen?   I gave up on believing what other  tell me (the news or what other informational  stuff) 

[Gloomy]

54 minutes ago, Still said:

Yeah, my whole point, which you missed,

What makes you think I missed your point?  

[Zagadka]

Republicans blocked a bipartisan investigation of the Jan 6 insurrection with a 54-35 vote.

 

To be clear for those not into how our government fails to work, that is 54 for, 35 against, but the 35 wins because of the filibuster.

 

In totally unrelated news, enough Democrats see absolutely no reason to remove the filibuster.

[ben8884]

Thinking its time we end the filibuster

[Nick2]

Republicans only blocked it because Trump really won the election.  They just discovered that chickens ate some of the ballots in Az.  How do we know these chickens did not do the same in other states?

[Zagadka]

Oh christ. I'm not even going to address that.

 

Anyway... as Biden's budget proposal is analyzed, we're seeing what his policies will look like. I'm less than surprised.

 

 

[Tetus]

10 minutes ago, Nick2 said:

Republicans only blocked it because Trump really won the election.  They just discovered that chickens ate some of the ballots in Az.  How do we know these chickens did not do the same in other states?

Chickens are known socialist sympathizers, doesn't surprise me in the least.