That was the game in 1796. Remains the game in 2021.
Also part of the game since about 1828 or so: do what you need to do in the senate to hold your seat for your party because having the senate majority is pretty damned valuable.
Sure, but I donât actually see many people who donât get that thatâs the game, or who think that Manchin isnât good at it, or who think heâs stupid. The criticism of his irrational rationales isnât that theyâre stupid or goofball or out of touch, itâs that theyâre lies, that his sole rationale is really getting re-elected by an anti-Democratic electorate.
Scroll up. And Iâll once again take leave of this thread for a bit.
Well, I have scrolled up, at least to posts from the last 5 days, and I donât really see anyone opining that Manchin is stupid or a goofball.
Sorry if my question / comment annoyed you. I just donât think there is that much mystery about the sort of triangulation that Manchin is attempting.
I think the issue is that many/most of us find most current Republicans despicable, and we want the guys on our side to be better than that. It is hard to accept that some of our guys are just as despicable, even if it is for different reasons.
Despicable? Really? Politics can be frustrating for sure but that seems like a hyperbolic âboth sidesâ read of the situation.
Personally, I donât think there is any question that the right has staked out despicable positions to an extent that the left would never dream of, and that despicableness has a partisan bias.
I wonder if there is any actual new spending in that proposal? I donât know, but previous R proposals have counted spending in existing law as spending in their proposal.
Banzai
3070
Well, it says they will not raise taxes, so the likely source is re-appropriation. We will know soon enough. We can hope that they will fund the IRS to go after the billionaires and hedge funds that have broken current laws, but hahahahahaha.
Alstein
3071
The progressives have largely moved on to Sinema. She pisses them off in a way Manchin canât really.
Also the fact that Arizona can do better than a loon.
Not sure what to say here. Draw your own conclusions I guess.
KevinC
3073
I mean, we all know this is how it all works but it doesnât make me any less pissed to see it.
Alstein
3074
Manchin has some awful ideas (though heâs not a horrible person as far as I know) , and No Labels is a horrible group.
Timex
3075
Someone want to explain why something Manchin did here was bad?
He wasnât soliciting bribes for himself. He wasnât bribing anyone.
He was trying to get people on board with stuff YOU guys support.
Aceris
3076
No one really knows how the game is played
The art of the trade
How the sausage gets made
We just assume that it happens
But no one else is in the room where it happens
I donât think he did anything bad , but that 55 vote filibuster would be really bad for Dems right now. Iâm not mad at Manchin for doing this, Iâm mad with his ideas for a solution.
I can easily see Republicans getting 55 Senators. You either abolish the filibuster entirely and pass laws to keep Republicans from rigging elections, or you keep the threshhold.
No Labels is a group trying to preserve the status quo that caused Trumpism in the first place with its failures.
Thatâs kind of interesting. Every Democrat in the house or senate now has cover to come on board.
Some of you need to be following more informed resistance grifters, or paying less attention to the resistance grifters youâre currently listening to.
I donât see a scenario right now where Dems get 55 Senators, let alone 57-58 which theyâd need to overcome the most conservative Dems.
Republicans could get 55 a lot more easily. They had I think 53 under Trump. One bad Dem cycle- and Republicans in lockstep could make elections a farce.
Manchinâs compromise on Voting rights is something I can live with- I think itâs fine for now.
This doesnât really make any sense, once you understand that when the Republicans have the majority and the White House, theyâll happily blow up the filibuster even if they donât have 55 votes.
